[Exclusive] Bipartisan Joint Sponsorship Hits Record Low at 3%... Even Similar Bills Face "Not With You" Divide

[The National Assembly Without Cooperation]
Even Gathering Lawmakers Raises Suspicions of Party Loyalty
Ruling Party Acts Alone, Opposition Resorts to Filibusters

Editor's NoteSince the 12·3 Martial Law, ongoing conflict between the ruling and opposition parties has left no room for a culture of cooperative politics. The number of bills jointly proposed by both parties-a key indicator of bipartisan cooperation-has dropped to an all-time low. Instead, a flood of similar bills is being introduced individually. In the absence of cooperation, standing committees without coordinators and endless filibusters (unlimited debates) have become the so-called "new normal." In this two-part series, we examine the current state of the National Assembly and explore possible alternatives.<Editor's Note>

In the year since the 12·3 Martial Law incident last year, only 3% of all bills proposed in the National Assembly were jointly sponsored by both ruling and opposition lawmakers. This is a direct result of the disappearance of bipartisan cooperation, with each side submitting their own versions of bills that could have been introduced together. Conflicts have arisen over both contentious and non-contentious bills during the legislative process. As a result, the focus on addressing issues affecting people's livelihoods has been pushed aside, and a filibuster-dominated political climate continues.

"Even gathering together raises suspicions of party disloyalty"... Individual battles instead of joint sponsorship

According to an analysis by The Asia Business Daily of bills jointly proposed by both ruling and opposition lawmakers in the 22nd National Assembly from December 4 last year to December 3 this year, only 222 such bills were recorded. This accounts for just 3.1% of the total 7,205 bills proposed by lawmakers. Both the number and proportion of jointly sponsored bills are at their lowest since the 17th National Assembly. Narrowing it down to bills jointly sponsored and led by both parties (107 cases), the proportion drops further to 1.5%. Joint sponsorship as lead authors not only signals political agreement but also symbolizes that lawmakers from both sides have substantively prepared the bill together.

The proportion of bipartisan bills among all proposed legislation has been steadily declining. While the total number of bills has reached a record high, the number of jointly sponsored bills has sharply decreased. The proportion of bipartisan bills, which was over half (55.8%) in the 17th National Assembly, fell to 39.0% in the 18th, and plummeted to 5.7% in the 21st National Assembly.

Observers note that the aftermath of the martial law incident has further narrowed the scope for bipartisan cooperation, such as joint sponsorship. After the early presidential election, the Democratic Party of Korea, which became the dominant ruling party, pushed through reform legislation using its majority. The People Power Party, reduced to a minority, found itself unable to exert influence beyond political offensives. An official from the National Assembly explained, "With the introduction of the fast-track system and the inclusion of bill sponsorship numbers in lawmakers' evaluations, there is little incentive to pursue joint sponsorship. Since the martial law incident, even gathering together raises suspicions about party loyalty among lawmakers from both sides."

Instead of joint sponsorship, both parties are introducing similar bills individually. A prime example is the 25 amendments to the Information and Communications Network Act proposed over the past year. Following a series of personal information leaks at major corporations such as SK Telecom, KT, and Coupang, numerous related bills were introduced. While the main content-such as strengthening the Information Security Management System (ISMS) or increasing fines for data breaches-was similar, there were no bipartisan bills. The practice of submitting similar bills separately is being criticized for undermining the efficiency of legislative review.

On the 9th, during the plenary session held at the National Assembly, Na Kyung-won, a member of the People Power Party, was giving an unlimited debate (filibuster) when Woo Won-shik, the Speaker of the National Assembly, turned off the microphone. Members of both ruling and opposition parties came to the podium to protest. December 9, 2025. Photo by Kim Hyun-min

Repeated solo passage by the ruling party in response to opposition filibusters... Even livelihood bills are no exception

The lack of cooperation from the bill proposal stage has led to further complications in passing legislation. When contentious bills reached the subcommittees of standing committees, opposition lawmakers repeatedly walked out in protest, and the ruling party pushed through the bills alone. In plenary sessions, a cycle of filibuster, forced termination of the filibuster, and bill passage has become the norm. Contentious bills such as the Yellow Envelope Act (amendments to Articles 2 and 3 of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act), the Commercial Act amendment, and the Broadcasting Act amendments have all followed this pattern.

Even so-called "livelihood bills" are no longer immune. In the past, both parties would reach agreements on non-contentious or livelihood bills despite ongoing standoffs, but since December 9-the start of the final regular session of the year-political strife has blocked such cooperation. When the Democratic Party of Korea announced plans to push through bills such as the establishment of a special court for insurrection cases, the People Power Party declared a filibuster on all bills. A key official from the People Power Party leadership stated, "We have tried to avoid blocking livelihood bills as much as possible, but with the dominant ruling party breaking the rules, we have no other choice but to use every means available."

What remains now are filibuster records. On September 9, Park Sumin, a lawmaker from the People Power Party, set a new record for the longest individual speech during a filibuster on the Government Organization Act amendment, speaking for a total of 17 hours and 12 minutes. Not only individual speaking records, but the overall duration of the current filibuster-dominated political climate is also expected to set a new record.

If the People Power Party carries out its announced plan to filibuster the remaining 58 livelihood bills during the December extraordinary session, the National Assembly could see the longest-ever "59 nights and 60 days" of continuous filibustering. The filibuster itself has now become a focal point of political strife.

As the Democratic Party of Korea pushed for amendments to the National Assembly Act to limit filibusters, the People Power Party labeled it as one of the "eight evil bills" and demanded an immediate halt. On December 9, Speaker Woo Won-shik forcibly ended a filibuster for the first time in 61 years, citing that opposition lawmakers' speeches had strayed from the agenda. In response, the People Power Party submitted a resolution calling for Speaker Woo's resignation, leaving the National Assembly mired in confrontation and conflict as the year draws to a close.