[Insight & Opinion] Controversy Over the Primacy of Elected Power: Popular Sovereignty and Representative Democracy

Concerns Over the Collapse of Separation of Powers in the Name of Popular Sovereignty
Political Reform Must Come First According to Democratic Principles

The President's remarks prioritizing elected power and referencing a hierarchy of authority inevitably sparked controversy. Some within the ruling bloc attempted to downplay the comments, claiming they were intended to emphasize popular sovereignty. However, the ruling party continues to push special legislation and exert pressure on the judiciary in the name of popular sovereignty. This situation raises fundamental concerns about the principles of representative democracy and popular sovereignty.

Let us revisit the President's statement during the press conference marking his 100th day in office: "Those who best reflect the will of the people are the elected authorities directly chosen by the people. Appointed officials derive their authority secondarily from the elected authorities. Therefore, there is a clear hierarchy of power in the Republic of Korea. The highest power belongs to the people, right? Popular sovereignty. Then directly elected power, indirectly elected power. But sometimes we forget this." While this sequence may describe the order in which the constitutional system is established, it does not represent a hierarchy of power.

If we were in the process of forming a constituent assembly and establishing a new government, such a sequence might be relevant. However, in an already established democratic republic, elected power is representative power defined by the principles of the rule of law and democracy. The concept of popular sovereignty, if misapplied, risks being used as an arbitrary tool that exceeds constitutional order, which is highly dangerous.

Representative democracy is a system in which the people elect their representatives through democratic means, and the government operates according to democratic principles. The representative power chosen through elections is not entrusted with absolute authority like a monarch. Power must be exercised within the limits set by the constitutional order of the democratic republic. Even those holding representative power pledge and affirm this through their oath of office.

The first legal system is led by the legislature, but the legislature itself must also abide by the constitutional order and rule of law established through public consensus. The core of the rule of law lies not in the legal order that citizens must follow, but in the regulation of the exercise of power by law. This is why the executive and judiciary, which implement the rule of law, are separated from the legislature and serve as checks and balances to ensure the objective enforcement of the rule of law. This is the system of separation of powers.

While the separation of powers is often described as the division among the legislative, executive, and judiciary branches, in Korea, the system features an executive branch led by the President that is merged with the legislature. The legislature, which is supposed to be separate from presidential power, is in reality composed of the ruling party aligned with the President and the opposition party. Thus, the only real independence in Korea's separation of powers can be found in the judiciary. Yet now, those controlling legislative power are moving to reform the judiciary in the name of popular sovereignty. If the political sphere comes to dominate the judiciary, the core of the rule of law, it would effectively dismantle the separation of powers in Korea.

Advocating for the primacy of elected power does not mean that elected power automatically possesses democratic legitimacy. Elected power must also adhere to the principles of the rule of law and democracy. This is the essence of democratic control over elected power. Did we not applaud the constitutional order when a president elected by the people was removed from office by a Constitutional Court decision? We must be wary of the fact that appeals to popular sovereignty by those in power have often been used to justify populist dictatorships that transcend institutional boundaries. This is true not only of communist dictatorships that invoked the name of the people, but also of the everyday slogans of recent South American dictators, who used "El Pueblo" as their rallying cry. Popular sovereignty becomes a democratic foundation not when it is used to justify power, but when it is used as a slogan to criticize power.

There is no need to advocate the primacy of elected power. The standards should be democracy and the constitutional principles that underpin it. Our representative political power today lacks dignity and wields authority without responsibility. Before talking about judicial or media reform, it is time for the political sphere to reform itself.

Kim Manheum, Former Director of the National Assembly Legislative Research Office