[Viewpoint] What Matters More Than the President's Governance Philosophy

Choi Joon-sun, Honorary Professor at Sungkyunkwan University School of Law

Some people say, "Previous administrations each had their own governance plans," and express frustration that the Yoon Seok-yeol administration "has yet to present a clear vision to differentiate its governance or an agenda to prove its raison d'?tre," and that "the transition team has not yet provided a proper answer." They point to examples such as the privatization of personnel appointments, fiscal populism, and disconnected governance, criticizing the poverty of philosophy and lack of preparation that fixate only on trivial matters.

What if there is no philosophy, or no grand slogans? For example, the slogan "The state is responsible for the people's lives" sounds grand, but in reality, it is impossible for the government to take full responsibility for citizens' lives. Often, it is merely a provocative slogan aimed at expanding the government's role. This allows the state to place citizens under control, collect more taxes, distribute money, and use it as a means to secure votes for regime re-creation. Such governance philosophy is worse than having none at all.

For the people, resolving immediate inconveniences that affect their daily lives is more urgent. It is important to repair the damaged parts and restore normalcy. The construction of the complex resort with a hotel and golf course in Mount Kumgang took several years, but its dismantling was completed in just eight days. Restoring the nuclear power ecosystem, which was reduced to ruins over the past four years, is expected to take more than ten years. If efforts are focused on normalizing abnormalities within the next five years, it might be possible to recover a private-led free market economy and find new growth engines. What could be more important than this for the livelihood of the people?

That said, it is not that President-elect Yoon Seok-yeol’s governance philosophy has never been announced. Concepts such as "market freedom," "regulatory reform," and "small government" have been presented. If even these are properly implemented, they would be hundreds of times better than flawed economic theories like "income-led growth" or the sudden "Korean New Deal."

The Korean economy is facing a serious low-growth crisis. There are forecasts that after 2030, the potential GDP growth rate per capita will fall to an average of 0.8% annually, ranking last among the 38 OECD countries. After meeting with the heads of six economic organizations last month, President-elect Yoon promised to "remove unnecessary regulations like stones in shoes." Last week, he visited POSCO’s Gwangyang Steelworks and reportedly had a serious discussion for over an hour with POSCO Chairman Choi Jeong-woo about the development direction of Korean industry. He also visited the construction site of the Northeast Asia Oil and Gas Hub at Ulsan North Port. Since the answer to all problems lies in the field, it is very desirable to travel around major industrial sites nationwide before inauguration to assess the actual conditions.

The problem lies in implementation. Most regulations can only be removed by amending laws through breaking through the Democratic Party’s stronghold. However, what can be done immediately is to revise presidential decrees, ministerial enforcement rules, and notifications issued by government ministries. These can be swiftly handled at the Cabinet meeting without the consent of the National Assembly. Immediately after the new president’s inauguration, each ministry should conduct a comprehensive review of the enforcement decrees and rules related to their laws. By consulting with organizations such as the Federation of Korean Industries, the Korea Employers Federation, and the Korea Listed Companies Association, and swiftly preparing amendment proposals to be processed through the Cabinet meeting, immediate effects can be achieved. Even just swiftly removing the Gal?pagos-like and regressive orders scattered in enforcement decrees and rules that constrain entrepreneurs?such as those under the Commercial Act, Capital Market Act, Serious Accidents Punishment Act, and Specific Economic Crimes Act?would greatly empower businesses.

Choi Jun-seon, Professor Emeritus, School of Law, Sungkyunkwan University