Parties mostly agree on constitutional revision, divided over intentions
South Korea's political parties mostly agreed with President Park Geun-hye's plan Monday to push forward a constitutional revision, while the opposition maintained the stance that the announcement should not be used to hide the on-going allegations surrounding government irregularities.
While the ruling Saenuri Party cheered the remark, adding it came at the right moment, the opposition parties said although South Korea needs a revision, the government should not take this as an opportunity to dodge the public's attention from potential ethical lapses.
"Park has been listening to opinions on the revision through various routes, and the constitutional revision debate, already under way in parliament, is generating support from the people," the Saenuri Party said, adding the change can help South Korea make the next leap forward.
Targeting the opposition, Saenuri said lawmakers should join the discussion on the revision by concentrating on the country's future instead of engaging in political infighting.
"Park's remark on the revision came as the president believes the existing system established in 1987 cannot sustain the future of South Korea," said Rep. Chung Jin-suk, the Saenuri floor leader.
"Through the revision, we need to reorganize the overall system of constitutions, including the basic rights of the people, to suit the current era," Chung added.
The Democratic Party, formerly the Minjoo Party of Korea, claimed that the government should not move ahead with the constitutional revision if its aim is to dodge public scrutiny for alleged wrongdoings by acquaintances of the president.
The party and its lawmakers have generally favored a change in the Constitution.
"We cannot agree to have discussions on constitutional revisions that would help hide the unfolding corruption scandals," Rep. Youn Kwan-suk from the main opposition party said, adding the proposal lacks sincerity.
"Park's proposal on the revision came out of nowhere. Two years ago, Park clearly said she opposes the revision, citing negative impacts on the economy," he said.
"We point out that the existing political tension is derived from the president's lack of communication and stubbornness," the official from the Democratic Party said. He added Park should have commented on the on-going allegations involving Choi during the speech.
The main opposition parties have been urging an investigation of Choi Soon-sil, a figure who is presumed by the opposition bloc to be a secretive heavyweight that holds great influence over Park and her administration.
Choi, a daughter of a late pastor who is widely known to be Park's close confidant, has been in the spotlight amid allegations she was behind suspicious fundraising activities involving the K-Sports foundation.
According to the opposition parties, the government forced conglomerates to chip in for the establishment of the foundation while some of the money went to paper companies established by Choi. The presidential office has countered that such allegations are groundless and the 800 billion won (US$70.6 million) provided to the foundation has for the most part not been spent.
"The president should stay out of the constitutional revision," said Choo Mi-ae, the head of the Democratic Party.
Choo added Park's proposal may be understood by some as an intention to prolong her term, adding the president should leave the discussion to parliament, and just focus on improving the livelihood of the people.
The minor Justice Party echoed the view, adding that Park's proposed constitutional revision is a mere act of opportunism.
Political pundits, accordingly, said the National Assembly is set to face tough hurdles in pushing the revision ahead. Even if a committee is established, parties are still far from narrowing differences on details of any revision, they added.
Under the South Korean law, a constitutional revision must win the majority vote at the parliament. If the revision is proposed by the president, two-thirds of the lawmakers must concede. Accordingly, no single party can currently make a revision independently. (Yonhap)