President Lee Jae-myung speaks during a meeting with senior secretaries at the Blue House on Nov. 13. Yonhap News
President Lee Jae-myung on the 14th opened a public debate on amending the Constitution to replace South Korea’s single five-year presidential term with a four-year term allowing re-election.
On his X account, Lee said the country should “adjust the balance of power between the president and the legislature — for example, by transferring some presidential authority to the National Assembly, such as jurisdiction over the Board of Audit and Inspection, the right to nominate the prime minister and part of the appointment power — change the presidential term to a four-year term with one re-election or a four-year consecutive term so that accountability can be tested through a midterm assessment, and amend the Constitution to strengthen local autonomy and citizens’ basic rights.” He added that “if shortening the presidential term is needed for the amendment, I can accept that.”
Lee had pledged a constitutional amendment for a four-year re-electable presidency during his presidential campaign, but at an April meeting of ruling and opposition party leaders he backed off, saying such an amendment was impossible because the opposition held enough seats to block it. His return to publicly raising not only a four-year re-electable term but also a four-year consecutive term is now fueling controversy. The confusion is compounded because it comes barely two weeks after National Assembly Speaker Cho Jung-sik publicly said that a re-election amendment for a sitting president was “a matter for the people to decide,” only to walk it back by stating that re-election of a sitting president was not a subject for amendment discussions.
A constitutional amendment to allow re-election of a sitting president runs directly against the text and intent of the Constitution. Article 128, Clause 2 states that a constitutional amendment to extend the presidential term or to change the term-limit rules “shall not take effect for the president in office at the time the amendment is proposed.” Unless this provision is revised, simply changing the presidential term to a four-year re-electable one cannot extend the power of the president serving at the time of the amendment. Yet amendment proposals that would invite controversy over Lee’s own re-election are emerging from the ruling camp, drawing criticism that this is a test of public opinion.
Before raising the amendment debate, Lee must first resolve the question of whether a change in the term rules would apply to the sitting president. He must not gloss over it with vague remarks such as “it is realistically impossible” or “how could it be possible when the opposition objects?” It is also inappropriate to convey his intentions indirectly through presidential aides or ruling-camp figures. If an imperial presidency must be turned into a decentralized system, Lee should step forward before the public himself and state a clear position on matters such as the presidential term.