The President Who Realizes Popular Sovereignty

Since launching the project "Conditions for Presidential Success" in 2002, the East Asia Institute (EAI) has explored institutionalization measures for the desirable roles, powers, and responsibilities of presidents in a post-democratization era through projects such as "Conditions for Successful Presidential Transition" (2007) and "Conditions for Presidential Success in 2013" (2012). On June 23, 2016, coinciding with the presidential election year of 2017, EAI invited Ahn Hee-jung, Governor of Chungcheongnam-do, to hold the 9th roundtable of "Conditions for Presidential Success in 2018."

A New Era Where the People Are Sovereign

The key to how state leadership is formed within a democratic system lies in the electoral process. The electoral space is where the manner in which candidates establish a contractual relationship with the sovereign citizens is determined. Historically, elections in all democratic nations have selected leaders in response to the challenges of their respective eras, but it is now time to move into a new era. We must enter an era of democracy that focuses on the intrinsic values of democracy, rather than discussing democracy solely from the perspective of how ruling elites govern the masses and the nature of the system. The firm promise of the democratic era is that the sovereign is the master. We are accustomed to viewing situations from the perspective of the leader. In the electoral process, efforts should be made to establish a higher level of contractual relationship with the sovereign whenever possible. Rather than promising specific uses and functions, we should strive to be entrusted with values and directions. This is because uses and functions are subject to compromise in the concrete policy arena, and individual policies do not inherently distinguish between good and evil. In this regard, elected public officials must contemplate the type of trust contract they will forge with the sovereign in the electoral space and embrace the spirit of popular sovereignty, the fundamental philosophy of democracy, to enable a great trust. The electoral space should not be viewed as a relationship between ruling elites and the masses, as presented in comparative politics or existing political theories. Politicians must adopt an attitude of seeking to establish a trust relationship with the people, accepting the fact that the people are the masters of this history and the field of life.

A Nation of Autonomous Decentralization

Local autonomy must be developed in a way that more faithfully practices the principle of popular sovereignty. To date, we have maintained a centralized system, and thus local autonomy has largely been implemented by delegating some public administrative tasks within the centralized system to the local level. The central government retains all authority over tasks, planning, and finances, delegating a portion to local governments as if subcontracting. However, this approach treats local governments as entities performing tasks originating from the absolute entity of the state. We must reconsider this from the perspective of why citizens pay taxes. Why should everyone work hard and pay taxes to the state? Primarily, taxes are paid to prevent invasion and the loss of voice, or to protect life and property from violence and crime. Taxes are paid and public officials are employed because there are public administrative demands that cannot be met by market principles or individual responsibilities alone. An appropriate level of administrative services is needed, along with a form of government that allows for the participation of democratic sovereigns. Constitutional amendments should be made from the perspective of how the sovereigns, who are the true masters of the state, can advance democracy and how they can act as masters in state administration.

Ministers: Guests at One Remove

The position of the President of the Republic of Korea is quite complex, encompassing elements of a constitutional monarchy, the representative function of the U.S. President, and the legislative role of a Member of Parliament. This complexity contributes to the ambiguous structure of the Blue House. The core of this structure lies in the means to maximize the President's governing power. This refers to the power to advance national agendas beyond laws, institutions, parliament, and public opinion politics. Many people hope the President will effectively lead the nation, which is the reason for the current presidential system. The structure of the Blue House secretariat changes depending on the leadership style the President employs. The most reliable approach is to form a competent cabinet and foster a strong partnership between the President and the ministers to reduce the burden on the Blue House. However, in reality, the inability to form such an ideal partnership often leads to the current situation where secretaries act as watchdogs. Considering the issues with the Blue House secretariat, the President's leadership style and their chosen position within the current constitution absolutely determine the nature of the Blue House secretariat. In many cases, forming a partnership requires the cabinet to be constituted as a result of political power games.

Furthermore, the President must establish sufficient relationships with ministers regarding how to engage with each ministry on national agendas. Relying on ad-hoc policy advisory groups formed during the presidential campaign for a few consultations is insufficient. There needs to be a shared understanding of values and directions over a long period, guided by a consistent orientation. Political parties serve as this framework for sharing. Through these shared frameworks, parties must communicate and be compatible with think tanks and experts in Washington to foster mutual trust and delegation. The absence of such networking processes makes every presidential administration inherently weak. At times, aides may struggle to grasp the President's intentions, leading to frustration. When individuals who accurately understand the President's intentions gain prominence, the power of the Blue House secretariat increases. Consequently, ministers become guests at one remove, and the cabinet's capacity for execution and planning diminishes.

The Higher Civil Service Examination System: An Unfair Society

There is no future for Korea if the structure persists where its most intelligent and talented elites are concentrated in the single path of the civil service examination. People believe there are many opportunities within that narrow space, and indeed there are, which drives everyone to try and enter it. This is because our society is unfair. As people are not treated fairly based on factors like education, regional ties, or wealth, they repeatedly engage in behaviors such as seeking higher academic credentials after earning money and sending their children to prestigious universities. Rather than contemplating the meaning and pride of their own lives, individuals prioritize career advancement to avoid perceived injustices stemming from unfairness. It is crucial to break this structure. We must create a social safety net that guarantees and assures individuals that they can engage in a fair competition based on their abilities and talents as human beings, regardless of wealth, class, or background. Only then will people cease to flock to that narrow gate to become civil servants. We must provide paths to a fair society that offer more choices.

Strengthening Political Parties

The capabilities of the National Assembly Secretariat and its staff must be accumulated. In political parties, cabinet members change every time there is a competition for party leadership during party conventions, and the relationship between lawmakers and staff is almost one of master and subordinate. Nothing can be achieved with such a structure. Presidential candidates should not seek to dominate the party or the nation to build their own organizations. It is necessary to distinguish between creating a campaign organization and dominating the party and the nation to build one's own organization. Until now, the reality of Korean political parties has been that presidential hopefuls have had to mobilize all their private funds and political capital to form a party to achieve their ambition of governing. Presidential candidates view the party as a base camp for their election campaign. A party candidate should not think of taking over the party by forming their own staff organization, but rather of joining the party as a member. The President must adopt the perspective of entering the existing framework of the state, rather than taking over the state with their own power. Only then can the bureaucracy maintain its professionalism and independence, and the party organization can establish its own roots. Because this is not done, political parties change with every change in presidential candidate.

Ahn Hee-jungGovernor of Chungcheongnam-do, Ahn Hee-jung, served as the administrative director for Roh Moo-hyun's presidential primary campaign, political team leader for the Roh Moo-hyun presidential campaign secretariat, Supreme Council member of the Democratic Party, and Governor of Chungcheongnam-do.

Moderator

Lee Sook-jong, President of EAI, Professor at Sungkyunkwan University

Discussion

Kang Won-taek, Professor at Seoul National University

Kim Seok-ho, Professor at Seoul National University

Kim Jae-il, Professor at Dankook University

Kim Tae-young, Professor at Kyung Hee University

Na Tae-jun, Professor at Yonsei University

Park Won-ho, Professor at Seoul National University

Park Hyung-joon, Director of EAI Governance Center, Professor at Sungkyunkwan University

Lee Nae-young, Director of EAI Public Opinion Analysis Center, Professor at Korea University

Han Gyu-seop, Professor at Seoul National University

Han Seung-joon, Professor at Seoul Women's University

Han Jeong-hoon, Professor at Seoul National University

Bae Jin-seok, Senior Researcher at EAI

Kim Bo-mi, Research Fellow at EAI