By Bernard Rowan
President Moon Jae-in has said Korea must do more to develop local governments. By that I hope he means more than just tourism and economic development, and he will further the basis for and culture of local autonomy in South Korea. What is local autonomy? Do Koreans need it today?
There are three basic forms of national government: unitary, confederal and federal. Most countries have a unitary form of government. The central or national government exercises all powers except those delegated by the central government to states, provinces, cities, and other units of more local authority. Confederations are the opposite. Local governments keep all powers of government except those delegated to the central or national government. Some countries such as the United States and Germany have federal constitutions. Central and local governments exercise powers according to written constitutional terms; the federal constitution is a mixed constitution about governmental powers.
Local autonomy means self-government by the people of a locality. Uber Digest defines local autonomy as "the exercise of certain basic powers, i.e. police power, power of eminent domain, and taxing power, by local government units to best serve the interest and promote the general well-being of their inhabitants." South Korea's constitution provides for local autonomy. Consecutive national governments have further set up the powers of local autonomy to allow cities, rural towns and other local forms of government to exercise certain powers.
The Korean Constitution, Articles 96 and 97, speak to local autonomy. At first (and perhaps arguably still until now), the tendency of Korean government to executive-led administration has muted carrying out these articles. The first presidents and national assemblies appointed the mayor of Seoul and provincial heads and allowed for only indirect election of mayors by local councils. Many elections didn't occur, in particular during the Korean War.
South Korea's polity has changed in many ways that reflect the taming of executive power. In her young history, the gradual, if slight, decentralization of unitary political power slowly admits of greater local responsibility and control. At first, local autonomy meant only that local legislative bodies existed, and that local councils should select local executive leaders (mayors, town leaders). Provinces ran cities and towns. The central government ran provinces. Over time, this changed to allow direct elections. Today, local self-control occurs more, with legislative bodies for not only cities and towns but also for city districts.
President Moon has pledged to move power away from South Korea's nationalist or centralist tendency, characteristic of unitary governments. The national police authority may decentralize to allow local police forces. Moon speaks about creating a "secondary Cabinet" for meeting periodically with local government leaders. Moon also has shown interest in a referendum on a constitutional amendment to redistribute power to the local level.
Moon has suggested he wants South Korea to devise more federalist characteristics. To do this, more needs to occur than a meeting of the central government chief executive with provincial and municipal chief executives and county heads.
My reading is Moon's strategy or use of this purpose as a means to policy and political gains may unfound the goal of greater local autonomy. Moon's support isn't monolithic. The maelstrom of Korean politics may lead him to accept policy gains while sacrificing the reform of further federalism. I hope Moon doesn't just want a jobs bill or wins in local by-elections. At worst, the entire effort could amount to using the symbol of local government to enlarge the central and national government head's mandate and support base. The same goes for efforts to increase local taxes as a means of financing the growth of cities.
Federalism in democratic government places the powers closer to the people. This allows local assemblies and local heads of government to assume responsibility for local matters. Koreans need to develop more than just Seoul and wide cities. Spread local powers to include education, police, matters of health and morals, local business rules and local enterprises. Twenty-first century advancement likely needs more local power. Let's hope the Korean people and their elected representatives hold Moon to his promises.
Bernard Rowan is associate provost for contract administration and professor of political science at Chicago State University. He is a past fellow of the Korea Foundation and former visiting professor at Hanyang University. Reach him at browan10@yahoo.com
.jpg/dims/resize/740/optimize) |
There are three basic forms of national government: unitary, confederal and federal. Most countries have a unitary form of government. The central or national government exercises all powers except those delegated by the central government to states, provinces, cities, and other units of more local authority. Confederations are the opposite. Local governments keep all powers of government except those delegated to the central or national government. Some countries such as the United States and Germany have federal constitutions. Central and local governments exercise powers according to written constitutional terms; the federal constitution is a mixed constitution about governmental powers.
Local autonomy means self-government by the people of a locality. Uber Digest defines local autonomy as "the exercise of certain basic powers, i.e. police power, power of eminent domain, and taxing power, by local government units to best serve the interest and promote the general well-being of their inhabitants." South Korea's constitution provides for local autonomy. Consecutive national governments have further set up the powers of local autonomy to allow cities, rural towns and other local forms of government to exercise certain powers.
The Korean Constitution, Articles 96 and 97, speak to local autonomy. At first (and perhaps arguably still until now), the tendency of Korean government to executive-led administration has muted carrying out these articles. The first presidents and national assemblies appointed the mayor of Seoul and provincial heads and allowed for only indirect election of mayors by local councils. Many elections didn't occur, in particular during the Korean War.
South Korea's polity has changed in many ways that reflect the taming of executive power. In her young history, the gradual, if slight, decentralization of unitary political power slowly admits of greater local responsibility and control. At first, local autonomy meant only that local legislative bodies existed, and that local councils should select local executive leaders (mayors, town leaders). Provinces ran cities and towns. The central government ran provinces. Over time, this changed to allow direct elections. Today, local self-control occurs more, with legislative bodies for not only cities and towns but also for city districts.
President Moon has pledged to move power away from South Korea's nationalist or centralist tendency, characteristic of unitary governments. The national police authority may decentralize to allow local police forces. Moon speaks about creating a "secondary Cabinet" for meeting periodically with local government leaders. Moon also has shown interest in a referendum on a constitutional amendment to redistribute power to the local level.
Moon has suggested he wants South Korea to devise more federalist characteristics. To do this, more needs to occur than a meeting of the central government chief executive with provincial and municipal chief executives and county heads.
My reading is Moon's strategy or use of this purpose as a means to policy and political gains may unfound the goal of greater local autonomy. Moon's support isn't monolithic. The maelstrom of Korean politics may lead him to accept policy gains while sacrificing the reform of further federalism. I hope Moon doesn't just want a jobs bill or wins in local by-elections. At worst, the entire effort could amount to using the symbol of local government to enlarge the central and national government head's mandate and support base. The same goes for efforts to increase local taxes as a means of financing the growth of cities.
Federalism in democratic government places the powers closer to the people. This allows local assemblies and local heads of government to assume responsibility for local matters. Koreans need to develop more than just Seoul and wide cities. Spread local powers to include education, police, matters of health and morals, local business rules and local enterprises. Twenty-first century advancement likely needs more local power. Let's hope the Korean people and their elected representatives hold Moon to his promises.
Bernard Rowan is associate provost for contract administration and professor of political science at Chicago State University. He is a past fellow of the Korea Foundation and former visiting professor at Hanyang University. Reach him at browan10@yahoo.com
