[Insight & Opinion] Familiar Yet Strange Election Systems

Kwangjae Lee, Secretary General of the Korea Manifesto Practice Headquarters

The eighth nationwide simultaneous local elections have concluded. There are criticisms that the election was a ‘three no’s (3無)’ election?lacking local issues, candidate qualification verification, and policies. The voter turnout was 50.9%, the second lowest in history. It was the lowest turnout since the 3rd local elections (48.9%), which coincided with the 2002 Korea-Japan World Cup and the 16th presidential election. The number of candidates elected without opposition was also the second highest ever, at 508. Yet, the two major parties show no sense of urgency and appear rather relaxed.

The election system, which is very familiar to us, is also very strange. Because the hostile symbiotic relationship between the two major parties is maintained based on this election system, the major parties have little reason to be surprised or desperate about the election results. This is why it is important to calmly examine which election system in local elections sustains the hostile symbiosis of the two major parties, and what is needed to end local elections without ‘local’.

First, there is the nationwide simultaneous local election system. In most countries, the timing of local elections varies by local government. In the UK, local councilors serve four-year terms, but election timings differ by region. Even in Japan’s unified local elections, many regions hold local elections, but not all regions hold them simultaneously. As a result, unlike in Korea, unique regional issues are put on the agenda, and different judgments and views are treated with equal weight.

The system of candidate number assignment maintains the privileges of the two major parties. Although the election methods for upper and lower houses differ by state, they either do not use candidate numbers or, if they do, the numbers are not uniform nationwide. In Japan’s elections, voters write the candidate’s name or party directly on the ballot. Some elections assign candidate numbers, but these are determined by lottery. This reflects a system designed to allow voters to deeply consider parties, candidates, and policies before voting.

The party registration system, which makes it impossible to establish regional parties, also plays a role. The current Political Parties Act prohibits the establishment of regional parties that are not centralized nationwide parties like the two major parties. The central party must have its address in the capital, and to establish a party, there must be 1,000 members in five metropolitan city parties including Seoul and each provincial party. However, it is rare to find countries abroad that implement party registration systems with establishment requirements like those in Korea.

You cannot entrust fish to a cat. Representative democracy is an imperfect system that requires constant reflection and frequent revision. Starting now, we must seriously question which strange local election systems severely distort public opinion and doubt all election systems familiar to us. To end local elections without ‘local’ and realize lifestyle politics based on pluralism, we must break away from the two-party-centered hostile politics. In a situation where political cynicism is deepening, social debate and consensus on the election system are more urgent than ever.