[Politics, That Day...] 'Uriga Namiga' Bulletproof Voting, the Spark of the Uri Party's Fall

Aftermath of the 2004 Rejection of Arrest Motion for Park Chang-dal of the Grand National Party... Political Blow to Uri Party More Than Grand National Party

[Asia Economy Reporter Ryu Jeong-min]

Editor's Note‘Politics, That Day...’ is a series planning corner that looks back on Korean politics through the ‘recollection of memories’ related to notable scenes, events, and figures.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

Why did the Uri Party, which claimed to be a ‘100-year party,’ disappear? The Uri Party left several ‘records’ in Korean politics before vanishing. In the 2004 17th general election, it achieved 152 seats, the highest score at the time for a Democratic Party-affiliated party.

How many would have predicted that the Uri Party would contest only one (the 17th general election) parliamentary election and then have its name removed from the ballot in the next election?

There are various reasons why public expectations for the Uri Party surged through the 17th general election but then rapidly cooled, ultimately leading to its disappearance. However, many believe that an incident that occurred on June 29, 2004, in the National Assembly plenary session ignited the spark of its downfall.

What kind of incident was it that caused the Uri Party, once regarded as a symbol of reform, to be shunned by the public and eventually disappear? First, it is necessary to examine why the Uri Party performed well in the 17th general election. The April 2004 general election was a choice for political forces that raised the banner of change, renewal, and reform against the existing political order.

Public outrage erupted over the National Assembly’s impeachment approval of then-President Roh Moo-hyun, and the Uri Party, which advocated political change, received support regardless of region, generation, or gender. Although traditional conservative supporters united toward the end of the election, the Uri Party secured 152 seats, somewhat lower than expected, but there were even forecasts that it might win close to 200 seats.

The National Assembly building, reflected upside down in raindrops, as typhoon-level rain and wind swept across the country, bringing heavy rainfall nationwide on June 7, 2019. Photo by Yoon Dong-joo doso7@

When Uri Party lawmakers officially began their term in the 17th National Assembly at the end of May 2004, public expectations were high. But just a month later, those expectations cooled sharply. The issue was the vote on the arrest motion for Park Chang-dal, a lawmaker from the Grand National Party. Park Chang-dal, a member of the National Assembly representing Daegu Dong-gu, was under investigation for election law violations.

Even if a lawmaker is under investigation for criminal charges, law enforcement agencies cannot arrest them at will during the session. Arrest requires the consent of the National Assembly. When a motion for arrest consent is put to a vote, it has been customary to reject it. This ‘protecting one’s own’ practice, the ‘Uri-ga namiga’ (We are one) mentality, is one of the reasons the public views politicians negatively.

Since the Uri Party, which advocated reform politics, held a majority in the Assembly, there was an expectation that it would not repeat the evils of ‘old-fashioned politics.’ The Grand National Party worked hard to protect Park Chang-dal. However, the Grand National Party alone could not succeed in saving Park Chang-dal and needed an ally. The Uri Party had to respond to the ‘Uri-ga namiga’ slogan to block the arrest motion for Park Chang-dal.

When the vote on the arrest motion is imminent, the subject typically uses every possible method to plead for support. It is standard to explain their innocence to fellow lawmakers and campaign for their rescue.

They appeal based on their home region, alma mater, and various social connections, asking for ‘just one chance.’ Lawmakers’ hearts are often swayed by such pleas from college classmates or hometown friends in crisis, and the arrest motion is usually rejected.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

What was the result of the vote on the arrest motion for Park Chang-dal? With 121 in favor, 156 opposed, 5 abstentions, and 4 invalid votes, the motion was rejected. Park Chang-dal was given a chance to survive.

After the rejection of the arrest motion for Park Chang-dal, criticism was directed not at the Grand National Party, which led the rescue efforts, but at the Uri Party. This was because it was estimated that about 30 Uri Party lawmakers were among the 156 who voted against the motion.

Since the vote was by secret ballot, it is impossible to know exactly who voted how, but controversy intensified as some Uri Party lawmakers were reported to have exhibited the ‘Uri-ga namiga’ behavior. Although Uri Party lawmakers issued messages of self-reflection one after another, it was insufficient to soothe public disappointment. Criticism continued that nothing had changed despite electing them as lawmakers expecting something different.

At the time, the Uri Party floor leader issued an apology statement and proposed various measures, but public sentiment had already turned away. The Uri Party pledged four reform bills during the 2004 regular National Assembly session, but these also failed. From the first year of the 17th National Assembly’s term in 2004, the momentum for reform rapidly weakened, and the Uri Party eventually faded from public interest.