[Public Opinion Briefing Vol. 55-3] Basic Analysis 2_Hoping for Constitutional Amendment that Achieves Balance and Stability Over National Governance Efficiency

[Public Opinion Briefing Vol. 55] Survey on the Credibility and Influence of Powerful Political Leaders and Public Opinion on Constitutional Amendment

1. Summary_South Korean Political Leadership in Crisis: Survey on Credibility and Influence

2. Basic Analysis 1_Analysis of the 2009 South Korean Leadership Landscape

3. Basic Analysis 2_Hoping for Constitutional Amendment that Achieves Balance and Stability Over National Governance Efficiency

59.5% are interested in constitutional amendment, 38.5% are not.



Recently, arguments for amending the Constitution have been consistently raised. The Speaker of the National Assembly has even proposed setting a deadline to formally initiate discussions on constitutional amendment. However, most discussions related to constitutional amendment have been abrupt, focusing solely on the timing of the amendment or proposals for the power structure. There has been insufficient effort to understand how keenly the public actually feels the issue of constitutional amendment or what values and interests they seek to realize through it.

The process of amending the Constitution is completed through a national referendum. As it is finalized through a national referendum, public support is essential. It also requires the adjustment of various differing opinions and a lengthy consensus-building process. If discussions on constitutional amendment are raised in the public sphere without these prerequisites being met, it could potentially lead to immense social costs in the form of national division and conflict. For discussions on whether and how to pursue constitutional amendment to gain momentum, it appears necessary to first garner widespread public interest and meticulously examine measures that can improve individual lives, enhance national competitiveness, and foster social maturity.

First, we examined the extent of public interest in the issue of constitutional amendment through a survey. Six out of ten Koreans (59.8%) responded that they are 'interested in constitutional amendment (very interested 17.1% + generally interested 42.8%)'. Those who responded 'not interested (not very interested 33.4% + not at all interested 4.9%)' accounted for 38.5%. The rate of 'don't know/no response' was 1.7%. Considering the current period of escalating political and social conflicts, such as the non-regular worker bill, the Ssangyong Motor incident, and the forceful passage of the media bill, this result indicates that a considerable number of citizens are interested in the issue of constitutional amendment. However, since four out of ten still responded that they are not interested, efforts to build nationwide consensus on the discussion of constitutional amendment need to precede.

Preferred Power Structure: Decentralized System Leads, Support for Presidential System Declines, Support for Cabinet System Increases

Decentralized System 45.2% > Parliamentary Cabinet System 26.4% > Presidential System 17.3%

In a survey on constitutional amendment conducted jointly by the East Asia Institute and the JoongAng Ilbo in July 2005, the decentralized system also received the highest proportion of responses (50.8%). This was followed by the pure presidential system (26.9%) and the parliamentary cabinet system (20.0%).



However, the results of this survey indicate a continued decline in public support for the current presidential system. Only 17.3% of citizens chose the pure presidential system, where the president handles both domestic and foreign affairs. The proportion of responses favoring the parliamentary cabinet system, where the National Assembly leads both domestic and foreign affairs, was 26.4%, an increase of 6.4 percentage points compared to four years ago, and received more support than the pure presidential system. However, the decentralized system, where the president handles foreign affairs and the National Assembly handles domestic affairs, garnered 45.2% support. Although slightly decreased compared to four years ago, the necessity of balance and role-sharing through power distribution between the parliament and the president, rather than excessive concentration of power in the president, still forms the majority opinion.

Don't know/no response was 11.1%.

[Figure 1] Level of Interest in Constitutional Amendment (%)

[Figure 2] Preferred Power Structure (%) [Figure 3] Comparison of Preferred Power Structure Results: 2005 vs. 2009 (%)

If the presidential system is maintained, a term limit system is preferred over the current single term.

The proportion favoring a presidential-cabinet system is relatively low.

The decentralized system, preferred by a majority of citizens, also involves the division of power between the president and the parliament, thus maintaining the presidential system. Therefore, unless a pure parliamentary cabinet system is adopted through constitutional amendment, the presidential system is likely to be maintained in some form. Citizens strongly voiced the need for change from the current five-year single term, even if the presidential system is maintained. Support for a vice presidential system was relatively low. Regarding the specific format of the presidential system, 35.5% of our citizens preferred a four-year term limit presidential system. The opinion that the current five-year single term is desirable followed with 30.2%. The proportions favoring a four-year term limit presidential-cabinet system or a five-year single term presidential-cabinet system were 19.2% and 9.0%, respectively. Don't know/no response was 6.2%.

Comparing with the 2005 survey results, regardless of whether a presidential-cabinet system is introduced, support for the single term has decreased, and the proportion favoring a term limit system has increased, reversing the ranking of preference in this survey. In the 2005 survey, support for the five-year single term was highest at 38.0%, followed by the four-year term limit at 34.1%. However, in this survey, conversely, the opinion favoring the four-year term limit was the highest at 34.5%. Support for the five-year single term decreased to 30.2%. This indicates a growing voice for change regarding the current presidential system.

[Figure 4] Preferred Presidential System (%)

[Figure 5] Comparison of Presidential System Models: 2005-2009 (%)

Factors of Conflict in Constitutional Amendment Discussions - Differences in Stance on Constitutional Amendment Based on Political Interests

The more supporters of the ruling party (conservatives, Grand National Party supporters, Lee Myung-bak supporters) there are, the higher the relative preference for a presidential system.

The higher the support for opposition parties, the higher the support for a decentralized system.

Examining the strata-specific stances on constitutional amendment proposals reveals several factors of conflict. Above all, preferences for the power structure differ between strata favorable to the current ruling power and those unfavorable to it. Strata forming the base of the current ruling power, which holds the majority of presidential and parliamentary power, showed relatively higher preference for the presidential system.

By ideological orientation, conservative strata, which form the support base of the current government, showed twice as much support for the presidential system (27.4%) compared to progressive (12.3%) or moderate strata (13.4%). In terms of national governance evaluation, those who gave positive evaluations were more likely to choose the presidential system (29.6%), significantly exceeding the proportion favoring the cabinet system among those who gave negative evaluations (11.6%). Conversely, groups critical of the president's national governance tended to prefer the decentralized system. Differences were also relatively clear in terms of party affiliation. Among supporters of the ruling Grand National Party, the proportion choosing the presidential system was 26.1%, the highest not only compared to the overall average but also to supporters of other parties. Support for the cabinet system was also relatively high at 32.4%. In contrast, for the Democratic Party, the proportion choosing the decentralized system reached 50.1%, while support for the presidential system was only 10.7%. These results contrast with those of Grand National Party supporters.

Partial differences in preferred power structures were observed according to gender, age group, education level, and region of residence. Firstly, regarding gender, the proportion of men choosing the presidential system was higher (21.0%) than that of women (13.6%). In terms of age groups, the decentralized system was highly favored by those in their 20s, 30s, and 40s, while those aged 50 and above showed higher preference for the parliamentary cabinet system and the presidential system compared to younger generations. Regions of residence also revealed differences. The presidential system showed relatively high response rates in Incheon/Gyeonggi, Daegu/Gyeongbuk, and Seoul. The parliamentary cabinet system received strong support in Gwangju/Jeolla. The decentralized system showed a difference, receiving higher support in Daejeon/Chungcheong and Gangwon/Jeju compared to other regions.

While the decentralized system is indeed the majority opinion across all strata, it is crucial not to overlook the existence of differing opinions on constitutional amendment proposals based on political interests and socio-class differences. This is because if discussions surrounding constitutional amendment intensify and political interests clash in the pursuit of future power, these partial differences could escalate into national division and social conflict.

[Table 1] Preferred Power Structure by Gender/Age/Education/Region (%) [Table 2] Preferred Power Structure by Ideology/National Governance Evaluation/Party Affiliation (%)

* Results for Don't Know/No Response are not shown.

Constitutional Amendment Desired by the Public: 'National Governance Stability' and 'Reflection of Public Will' Rather Than 'Efficiency'

For discussions on constitutional amendment to contribute to social development and national maturity, they must align with the public's aspirations and values. If discussions on constitutional amendment proceed detached from these public demands and aspirations, they are likely to end up as mere theoretical exercises or remain confined to debates within the political sphere. When asked about the reasons for choosing their preferred power structure, the survey revealed that the goals and values the public seeks to achieve through constitutional amendment ultimately lie in stable national governance and the reflection of public will.

First, among those who preferred the decentralized system, which received the largest number of responses, as high as 50.5% cited stable national governance as the reason for their support. 23.5% responded that it is because it is a system that well reflects public will. Support for the decentralized system due to its advantage in national integration accounted for 8.0%, while support for efficient national governance through strong leadership was only 3.3%. Among supporters of the parliamentary cabinet system, 36.2% cited stable national governance as the reason for their support, and the response that it is a system that well represents public will reached 35.0%. In contrast, support for national integration accounted for 17.7%, and support for enabling strong leadership was only 7.3%. Even among supporters of the presidential system, 42.0% responded that they wanted strong leadership, while a considerable proportion, 37.5%, stated that they preferred the presidential system for stable national governance.

[Figure 6] Reasons for Preferring a Specific Power Structure (%)

* Response rates for Don't Know/No Response are not included: 138 respondents for Presidential System, 211 for Cabinet System, 362 for Decentralized System, totaling 800 respondents.