Why foreigners can vote in Korea’s local elections — and why it’s controversial
Yoon Jong-bin, president of the Korean Political Science Association and professor of political science at Myongji University, speaks during an interview with the Hankook Ilbo at his office in Seodaemun-gu, Seoul. Korea Times photo by Kang Ye-jin
'South Korea should retain voting rights for foreign residents despite calls to bar Chinese nationals'
South Korea’s local elections are set for June, and foreign residents will once again be eligible to vote. Since 2006, the country has been the only one in Asia to grant foreign residents suffrage in local elections.
Nearly two decades have passed since. During that time, the number of ethnic Koreans from China residing in the country has increased, and as relations between Seoul and Beijing have cooled, anti-Chinese sentiment has grown.
With that came growing criticism toward voting rights for foreign residents.
Political actors began calculating the electoral advantages and disadvantages of the issue. Voices arguing that granting voting rights unilaterally violates the principle of reciprocity have grown louder.
"It's nothing more than an election strategy aimed at stirring public votes, when foreign nationals constitute only a very small fraction of the electorate," Yoon Jong-bin, president of the Korean Political Science Association and a professor of political science at Myongji University said in an interview with Hankook Ilbo.
“Voting rights for foreign residents is a symbol of the level and openness of Korean democracy,” he stressed. “It is also an institutional bridge connecting foreign residents to their communities, strengthening their sense of belonging and reinforcing social cohesion.”
He disagrees with criticisms from conservative critics that the principle of reciporcity should be applied when it comes to handing out voting rights to foreign nationals, especially regarding China.
“Abolishing foreign voting rights simply because China operates under a different political system would amount to a retreat from the democratic progress Korean society has invested in for decades,” Yoon said, before adding a warning.
“Attempting to link Chinese voting rights to allegations of electoral fraud runs counter to the common sense of moderate voters and will be ignored.”
Are foreign voters deciding district races? Evidence is scarce
The conversation begins with a fundamental question: Why does voting rights for noncitizens matter at all?
“It demonstrates South Korea’s inclusiveness by proactively putting the universality of democracy into practice, thereby enhancing the country’s international standing. By recognizing foreign nationals who have settled here and pay taxes as members of the community and giving them a sense of belonging, it plays a pivotal role in building integrated local societies rather than ones defined by exclusion," explained Yoon.
Voting rights for foreign residents also serves as catalyst for developing policies in education, welfare and the economy that are tailored to foreign residents, helping local regions respond to the worsening problem of population decline. Diplomatically, it serves as a basis for demanding political rights for Korean citizens living abroad.
But whether foreign voters are numerous enough to influence election outcomes remains an open question.
“So far, there is little evidence that they constitute a decisive variable in local races,” Yoon said.
“In the 2022 local elections, more than 127,000 foreign nationals were eligible to vote, about 78.9 percent of them Chinese citizens. The number is projected to exceed 150,000 this year, with most residing in the greater Seoul metropolitan area. Yet voter turnout remains low.”
Seoul’s Gwangjin District offers one example. Although its mayor was elected by a narrow margin of 3,747 votes in 2022 election, there is no verified evidence that foreign voters altered the outcome, according to Yoon.
Statistics also show that while the number of foreign eligible voters is steadily rising, they still account for just 0.29 percent of the total electorate. Turnout among foreign voters stood at 13.3 percent, well below the overall turnout rate of 50.9 percent, and has continued to decline from 32.5 percent in 2010 and 17.6 percent in 2014.
But on whether this means voting rights can be expanded to presidential and parliamentary elections, Yoon disagrees.
“Korea is already ahead of many global standards. Expanding voting rights to national elections, however, could risk affecting policies directly tied to national interests, particularly foreign policy.”
Presidential races, in particular, carry greater sensitivity, he said. Voting blocs could potentially mobilize around specific issues, and although foreign residents are heavily concentrated in the greater Seoul metropolitan area, they are also dispersed nationwide — making national elections fundamentally different from local contests, where voting patterns tend to reflect more fragmented, region-specific dynamics.
Voters, including Chinese nationals, wait in line to cast their ballots at a polling station in Daerim-dong, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, Oct. 7, 2021, the day of the special mayoral election. Newsis
What South Korea risks losing in pursuing reciprocity with China
Critics that problematize voting right for foreigners frequently question fariness, and the principle of reciprocity. While the overwhelming majority of eligible foreign voters in Korea are Chinese, Korean nationalities don’t get to vote in China.
However, Yoon rejects the notion of simple equivalence.
“China operates under a Communist Party-led system fundamentally different from our own in terms of ideology and political structure. While it has embraced elements of a capitalist market economy, the openness of political participation and the meaning attached to voting rights cannot be compared with those of a democratic system."
“If strict reciprocity were applied, we would be required to abolish foreign suffrage unless China first guarantees voting rights to Koreans residing there. Considering the potential damage to South Korea’s international standing, that would not be a realistic or appropriate choice,” he added.
Still, some argue that reciprocity is a fundamental principle of diplomacy. For Yoon, that argument alone is not sufficient to justify abandoning what South Korea has built.
“If reciprocity were to be insisted upon, it should have been enforced from the outset. Instead, as a leading democracy, we chose to move first and permit foreign residents to participate in local elections. We anticipated reciprocal measures, but they did not follow.”
Revoking those voting rights now, he argues, would be neither viable nor wise.
“It would undermine not only the national prestige we have built but also the government’s long-standing commitment to social integration. We should not retreat at this point. Why weaken the very foundation from which we can continue pressing other countries for reciprocal rights? This is a matter that requires patience and persistence.”
Admittedly, however, Yoon acknowledges that foreign voting rights in South Korea were originally introduced in a different diplomatic context.
The measure, implemented through a 2005 revision of the Public Official Election Act under the Roh Moo-hyun administration, was initially aimed at supporting voting rights for ethnic Koreans residing in Japan. Policymakers expected reciprocal action from Tokyo under the principle of reciprocity, but that response never materialized.
As the number of ethnic Koreans from China increased over time, the issue gradually shifted from a Korea–Japan question to a Korea–China one.
“Policymakers did not foresee the scale of Chinese residents living in Korea when they introduced local voting rights for foreign residents in 2006. Nor did they anticipate the severity of population decline now confronting many provincial regions.”
Now, the circumstances have changed. In some rural elementary schools, eight in ten students come from multicultural families.
“Although the government has introduced a range of policies aimed at revitalizing regional areas, failing to embrace and integrate these residents as full members of the community will only increase social strain over time.”
Yoon Jong-bin, president of the Korean Political Science Association, speaks about foreign residents’ participation in local elections during an interview. Korea Times photo by Kang Ye-jin
'Voting rights should not be weaponized in elections '
Internationally, South Korea remains an outlier. Only 22 countries worldwide grant local voting rights to foreign residents regardless of nationality, most of them are European Union member states such as Sweden, Denmark and Finland.
Outside Europe, the list is short, including South Korea, Israel and Venezuela. A handful of countries, including New Zealand, Chile, Uruguay and Malawi, go further by allowing non-citizens to vote in national as well as local elections.
But Yoon worries that voting rights could become a campaign issue in the June local elections.
“I am concerned that some may attempt to frame allegations of election fraud, Chinese nationals, and the principle of reciprocity as a single narrative, creating the impression that these three issues are somehow connected.”
There are no clear signs that this is happening yet. But as campaigning intensifies and attacks between candidates grow sharper, the possibility cannot be ruled out entirely.
“Such claims are excessive and one-sided, particularly in the absence of verified evidence linking foreign voters’ choices to election outcomes. They also risk aggravating diplomatic sensitivities and deepening social divisions.”
But if voting rights for Chinese nationals were to emerge as a central issue in the election, would it materially affect the outcome? Yoon remains doubtful.
“Even if some attempt to appeal to lingering resentments in Korea–China relations, I do not believe it will become a decisive factor in the local elections,” he said. “Given the overall pragmatism and common sense of our electorate, it is unlikely to significantly alter the results.”
There is little evidence that foreign voters from a particular country act as a cohesive bloc or consistently favor a specific party, Yoon went on. Even if political actors attempt to leverage the issue, its electoral impact would likely prove limited.
Survey data, however, suggest that public sentiment is more skeptical than Yoon’s assessment.
A survery conducted December by Korea Research at the request of Seoul National University’s Institute for Future Strategy, along with two major newspapers, shows 69 percent of respondents opposing granting voting rights to foreigners from countries that do not extend similar rights to Koreans. Only 12 percent expressed support.
When asked about the survey findings, Yoon acknowledged that such responses are to be expected.
“If you simply ask, ‘Should we grant voting rights to foreigners from countries that do not grant the same rights to us?’ it is natural that many people would respond negatively.”
But when the issue is presented within a broader context, for example encompassing social integration, South Korea’s status as a leading democracy, and the demographic challenges facing provincial regions, the results will be different, said Yoon.
“One further consideration is the possibility that the public may overestimate the influence of foreign voters, given their low turnout and small share of the overall electorate,” he added.
Even if opinions within Korean society differ, the divide must ultimately be narrowed. For Yoon, voting rights for foreign residents symbolize a forward-looking vision of the country’s future.
“Debate over revising the Constitution and moving beyond the framework established in 1987 is actively underway,” Yoon said. “Among the major issues under discussion are balanced regional development and the strengthening of minority rights. In that context, the decision to grant local voting rights to foreign residents in 2006 was ahead of its time.”
As regional depopulation becomes an increasingly urgent concern, he believes the issue carries even greater significance. Incorporating long-term residents who fulfill tax and educational obligations, he argues, is a crucial mechanism for sustaining local communities.
“The government plans to attract 300,000 international students by next year, positioning the country among the world’s top ten destinations for foreign students,” he said. “But helping them find employment, settle and participate as members of our society requires more than economic opportunity.”
“At the core of that process is the recognition of political rights.”
This article from the Hankook Ilbo, the sister publication of The Korea Times, was translated by a generative AI system and edited by The Korea Times.