[Book Review] "A Nation Ruled by Elites"

Jung Byungsul's "Democracy Without Citizens"
Decision-making power held by privileged elites in Korea
No legal safeguards to prevent presidential overreach
Impeachment of Yoon led by the judiciary, not the people
The dilemma and limitations of representative democracy revealed

The global spotlight was cast on the crisis of Korean democracy when martial law was declared on December 3, 2025, in South Korea, a society that had achieved democratization through struggle and sacrifice in the 21st century. No one in Korean society had anticipated that a declaration of martial law by the president would trigger such extreme turmoil.

On the 4th of last month, the impeachment trial verdict for President Yoon Seokyeol was held at the Grand Bench of the Constitutional Court in Jongno-gu, Seoul. Photo by Yonhap News

The author, Jung Byungsul, a professor in the Department of Korean Language and Literature at Seoul National University who has long studied modern and contemporary Korean history, points out, "While the separation of powers is considered fundamental to modern democracy, Korean law does not specifically define ways to prevent the president from acting unilaterally." He expresses concern that the presidency has been granted excessive power, to the extent that the term "imperial presidency" has emerged.

President Yoon Seokyeol was impeached by the Constitutional Court following the declaration of the 12·3 martial law. In its impeachment decision, the Constitutional Court judged that this "clearly violates the principles of representative democracy and separation of powers, and infringes upon the constitutional rights of National Assembly members, such as their right to deliberate and vote as representatives of the people." While it is positive that the Constitutional Court fulfilled its role as a check on power, Professor Jung argues that the fact that the judiciary, not the people, was the agent of impeachment reveals the backwardness of Korean democracy. He also criticizes the situation during the impeachment of former President Park Geunhye, when citizens had to take to the streets with candles, as "a reality in which, despite being the true owners of the state, the people had to petition and appeal as if in the Joseon Dynasty."

He defines Korean society as "a country ruled by elites." Although democracy exists in form, in substance, it is privileged elites?not ordinary citizens?who hold decision-making authority. He diagnoses, "Although we have adopted a representative system, due to problems with the electoral system and party structure, the voices of citizens are not properly reflected in major issues."

However, he does not deny democracy itself. He emphasizes, "Democracy is a political system in which citizens are the rulers of the community. Although it is not perfect, it is the best system we can aspire to." He explains that despite its limitations?such as complex decision-making processes, the tyranny of the majority, and a lack of expertise?there is no better system to replace the ideals of democracy.

Professor Jung does not completely reject representative democracy, but believes a transition is needed to a structure that guarantees direct participation and reflection of citizens' will. Citing the example of ancient Athens, where administrators and judges were selected by lot, he points out that a system in which a small number of experts monopolize key powers is dangerous. "The Athenians feared that granting all authority to talented individuals would ultimately serve private interests, and that judgment remains valid today," he says.

He particularly stresses the importance of citizen participation in trials. Agreeing with Alexis de Tocqueville, who studied democracy 200 years ago and argued that "the real rulers of a society are those who judge criminals," he evaluates that the higher the level of ordinary citizens' participation in the final decision-making process, the more mature the democracy. However, he points out that the constitution drafted in just 20 days under the Syngman Rhee administration did not properly include provisions for public participation.

Foreign examples are also worth noting. According to the book, the United States does not specify qualifications for judges. While in practice judges are usually licensed attorneys, the intention was to prevent the judiciary from being composed solely of the privileged class. In addition, over 90% of high-ranking judicial positions in the United States are elected. In cases of serious crimes, juries are required to participate and determine guilt or innocence. The appointment and disciplinary procedures for prosecutors are also led by citizens.

Japan also operates a system of citizen participation. Since 2009, decisions by the Prosecution Review Commission, in which citizens participate in indictments, have been given binding force. In fact, in the year after its implementation, the commission directly indicted Ichiro Ozawa, the former secretary-general of the Democratic Party of Japan, who had not been indicted by prosecutors. The system is now recognized in Japan as a useful tool for addressing bribery and abuse of power. Furthermore, the nine-member panel for serious criminal cases is required to include six citizen judges. This system is well-regarded; one citizen who participated in a trial commented, "For the first time, I truly felt what it means to be a citizen. I realized that being a citizen is not just a given, but something that is created."

Professor Jung also mentions other domestic examples, such as the crime of defamation by stating facts and the Assisted Dying Act, which was supported by over 80% of the public but has been blocked by "undemocratic decisions of a small group of experts." He emphasizes, "We must listen to and fully consider the opinions of experts, but we must not allow experts to monopolize decision-making."

Some have expressed concerns that the participation of non-experts undermines expertise and efficiency. In response, he asks, "Which is more harmful to the community?an incorrect judgment by an inexperienced citizen judge, or a deliberate misjudgment by a professional judge?" He adds, "Excluding citizens from the judicial sphere under the pretext of expertise is like a company insisting on hiring only experienced employees even though it has none, while refusing to hire and train new employees."

Professor Jung clearly identifies the limitations of both representative and direct democracy, but persuasively presents realistic alternatives and directions for institutional improvement through international examples. His discussion, which focuses on the essence and potential of the democratic system without leaning toward any particular ideology, provides timely insight amid the current political turmoil.

Democracy Without Citizens | Written by Jung Byungsul | Munhakdongne | 264 pages | 17,000 won