Voting in the dark

By David Nicoll

In what could turn out to be an embarrassing sideshow to the upcoming Dec. 19 Korean presidential election, the National Election Commission (NEC) has issued strict regulations on how campaigning is to be conducted among the Korean electorate living in the United States.

This year’s election is the first in which Koreans overseas will be allowed to participate. This fact is trumpeted in the domestic media here as a demonstration of progressive inclusion, a badge of democratic progress allowing the enfranchisement of around 2 million eligible people.

But the reality is starkly different. Koreans in the United States who wish to back their favored parties and candidates are denied the opportunity to do so by regulations issued by the NEC. No mention of candidate names, their party affiliations or even banners or flyers are on a prohibition list, a fact that understandably prompted bewildered comments from those on the front line of electioneering, or perhaps that should be electoral engineering.

“I don’t know if we should even call it a real campaign. It is impossible to carry out a legitimate campaign without putting forward the candidate’s name. I mean really,” said Kang Jun-hwa, head of a group supporting the Democratic United Party. “We need to hold rallies, town hall meetings and other gatherings to go face to face with voters. But at this point we’re not even allowed to state outright which party we stand behind,” said an advocate of the Saenuri Party in Southern California. Something is clearly wrong with such restrictions.

First among these is the trampling over freedom of expression guaranteed under the South Korean Constitution, moreover the right to association and assembly, the basic mechanics of political meetings and debate, is hobbled by denying people the right to support their favored parties and candidates using the necessary material.

Certainly, the electorate is being kept in the dark, or at least in a highly dubious, misty dusk. Then, there are the rights of the candidates themselves. According to such regulations, they are denied the right to have people on the ground present to clarify all that they wish to achieve if elected.

In essence, the NEC is denying both the freedom of expression of party advocates and the right of candidates to present and defend their ideas. Article 114, point one of the South Korean Constitution, concerning election management states, “Election commissions shall be established for the purpose of fair management of elections.” Now, even according to the most weasel-worded legal interpretation of this clause, no-one could accuse the regulations issued by the NEC as in the interest of “fair management of elections.”

It’s quite clear that the interest is directed to achieve the very opposite effect: unfair management of elections. Why should part of the electorate eligible to vote in December be less informed and therefore offered diminished judgment in their ballot choice? Certainly, the NEC should explain, in full, their reason for the imposition of such murky regulations.

Most sinister of all are the intimidating threats that the NEC is prepared to impose on people who offend their regulations. According to a report from Korea Times correspondent Jane Han in Tuesday’s edition of this paper, “Those who break the law are subject to a temporary ban from entering Korea, along with other restrictions.”

On what constitutional and otherwise legal basis is the NEC operating under? Certainly, whatever the NEC is up to, they are achieving their desired effect on members of the electorate whose interest they are constitutionally bound to protect and uphold. “We’ve finally been given the right to cast a ballot in our home country’s election.

“The last thing we want is to have the NEC cancel the privilege due to reckless campaigning,” said Min Byung-ho, an advocate for the overseas election living in New York. Fear is in place; people have the illusion of opportunity without the enabling factor of choice. The NEC must be congratulating themselves all over their buccaneering office for the successful hijacking of the overseas vote.

Additionally difficult to understand is why the NEC believes that people motivated to find out more about parties and candidates won’t simply go online, to read this newspaper or others. And why are they pushing overseas voter registration at Incheon Airport, as NEC representatives were photographed Tuesday by the media, if once people have registered, they find themselves voting in the dark regarding party policies?

A democratic election is either defined by access to information, freedom of expression and choice or it is something else. Whether it is to be something else for 2 million voters overseas could well depend on if people, including the three main presidential candidates, are prepared to publicly challenge the NEC regulations and allow Korean citizens abroad to participate wholly in the 2012 presidential election.

The writer is a resident of Seoul.