A victory for new way of gauging public opinion

Authorities visit a stalled nuclear power plant construction site in Ulsan, Friday. Earlier that day, a commission recommended the government resume its construction. /Korea Times photo by Jeon Hye-won

Jury of 471 citizens sets example for conflict resolution

By Kim Se-jeong

A commission’s decision to resume the stalled construction of the Shin-Kori 5 and 6 nuclear reactors set an important precedent for resolution of controversial issues by the people, analysts said.

Kim Ji-hyung, the head of a commission set up to measure public opinion on the nuclear energy issue, announced the majority of a jury comprising 471 citizens voted to resume the construction of the two reactors, after 100 days of deliberation.

Of the jury, 59.5 percent voted for resumption, and 40.5 percent opposed it.

Han Sang-hee, a law professor at Konkuk University in Seoul, called it a positive move for Korea’s young democracy.

“Although it is not written in the Constitution, it was totally a constitutional process which allowed citizens to make a decision on their own at a discussion table,” Han said.

On the question of maintaining the nuclear energy policy, 53.2 percent of the jury responded they believe nuclear power should be reduced gradually, 35.5 percent answered “yes” and 9.7 percent replied it should be expanded.

Analysts said the decision by a group of citizens marked a new method of public opinion measurement.

President Moon Jae-in, who promised to phase out nuclear reactors during his campaign trail, ordered setting up the commission to collect public opinion on the controversial issue. The Moon government has said it will accept the jury’s decision.

Han denounced critics who attempted to undermine the legitimacy of the commission by citing a lack of expertise among the 471 members.

“The decision has a great impact on the lives of the people, not of the experts. So, it’s clear they should be able to convince people about the policy. I think criticism came from the critics’ lack of understanding about democracy and the citizen jury system,” the professor said.

Delivering the committee’s policy recommendations at the nationally televised news conference, Kim, the head of the state commission, also stated a couple of points of significance.

“This process contributes greatly to creating social consensus over a controversial, conflicting issue. In other words, it helps crisis management in society,” Kim said. “This also showed the people implemented power given to them democratically.”

But what he gave the highest credit to was the fact people learned to speak their minds and listen to others.

“Through this process, people learned to speak their minds on an issue and listen to others carefully. What’s good about this is that people learn to respect other people’s opinions and accept the results, even to their disliking, with openness. During the 100 days, I’ve seen people truly experiencing this, and I think it is the biggest achievement.”

While delivering the recommendations, he stressed he was speaking on behalf of all 471 jury members, not just those who were in favor of the nuclear reactor construction.

The commission’s decision apparently dealt a temporary setback to the Moon Jae-in administration which has pledged to phase out nuclear energy.

However, Shin Yul, who teaches political science at Myongji University, said Moon still has enough support behind his anti-nuke policy.

“Despite the vote on building two reactors, the commission clearly said it supports anti-nuclear policy,” Shin said. “Moon has no problem pushing ahead with its own policy agenda.”

The debate over resuming the Shin-Kori reactor construction boiled down to affordability versus safety.

Supporters of nuke power said it is indispensible to Korea which has no affordable alternative to nuclear energy which accounts for almost 30 percent in the energy mix.

They also said the price hike, a huge one, will be inevitable, if nuclear power plants are phased out.

However, opponents based their argument on safety. Citing the 2011 Fukushima incident, opponents said nuclear power plants can be devastating in case of accidents and Korea should find a safer alternative before it’s too late.