Opposition parties ended a record-breaking filibuster intended to block a vote on a proposed anti-terrorism bill Wednesday, with a speech by Rep. Lee Jong-kul, floor leader of the largest opposition party.
The Minju Party of Korea’s decision to suspend the filibuster sparked vehement protests from within the party. But Kim Jong-in, the liberal party’s interim leader, pushed for the suspension, fearing a public backlash arising from the delay of implementing a deal on redrawing the electoral constituency map for the April 13 general election.
The marathon filibuster began on Feb. 23 and more than 30 opposition legislators spoke round the clock for nine straight days. It easily broke the previous world record of 57 hours set by a Canadian party in 2011.
There have been pros and cons about the filibuster, a parliamentary tactic by which lawmakers extend debate over a proposed bill in order to prevent a vote on the proposal.
Opposition lawmakers have claimed that their filibuster succeeded in exposing problems inherent in the anti-terrorism bill amid strong public support. Specifically, they argue that citizens have come to know that the proposed legislation would give the National Intelligence Service unconstrained power to spy on every detail of people’s lives.
The filibuster has also aroused interest in the upcoming elections by enabling the MPK to rally support behind it. Some watchers praised the filibuster for showing a true picture of our democracy by making it possible for the opposition to peacefully resist the majority party’s unilateral passage of bills.
Of course, there has been harsh criticism too.
More than anything else, it’s doubtful whether the opposition was right to hold the filibuster for such a long time merely to block the anti-terrorism bill at a time when concerns are mounting that Islamic extremists might target Koreans. Although arguments that the state spy agency can’t be trusted given its bad reputation sound plausible, it’s nonsensical to claim that the authority to prevent terror attacks must be given to a state organ overseeing public safety.
The ruling Saenuri Party also criticized opposition lawmakers for taking advantage of the filibuster to engage in a de facto campaign for the general election. All things considered, it’s fortunate that the filibuster ended, albeit belatedly.
All in all, inter-party clashes and conflicts are natural, but what’s certain is that the filibuster must be introduced exceptionally. We hope to see parliamentary procedures enabled by dialogue and compromise put in place as soon as possible.