[Insight & Opinion] Politics Before the Law... Lessons from Jixia and Warnings from Institutional Economics

Recently, concerns have been raised about judicial independence as the ruling party considers legislative measures targeting specific judges. In a democracy, it is natural for judicial decisions to be criticized when they diverge from public sentiment. However, when the will of the legislative majority functions in a way that effectively pressures the judiciary, it risks crossing the boundaries of constitutional checks and balances.

Thinkers at Jixia, the academic institution of Qi during China’s Warring States period, emphasized that “law must be an enduring norm for all, not a tool for temporary emotions or individual interests.” Although this is an ancient maxim, it remains a relevant warning against the temptation to use law as an instrument for particular political situations or factions.

The legalists of Jixia believed that when politics dominates the law, national order is shaken. For them, politics is the art of distributing authority and resolving conflicts on the public foundation of law. In other words, law must come first, and politics should operate upon it. However, the ruling party’s excessive intervention in the composition of the judiciary or the direction of rulings recently has fostered the perception that law can be swayed by political currents. This makes law appear less as a public norm and more as a byproduct of political choices, undermining trust in the entire system. In a society where trust in the law collapses, the foundations of liberal democracy are inevitably shaken.

In a society with diverse values and interests, conflict is intrinsic. The role of politics is not to eliminate such conflict, but to adjust it toward a sustainable balance. Compromise is not the abandonment of principle but responsible adjustment, and it is through restraining the power of the majority that a community can reach agreements it can collectively accept. When politics loses this function and begins to prioritize numerical superiority in the legislature, even the judiciary becomes an extension of political conflict, and the institutional foundation of trust is weakened.

This issue extends beyond political philosophy and connects with institutional theory in economics. Douglass C. North, founder of modern institutional economics and recipient of the 1993 Nobel Prize in Economics, saw the most important function of institutions as “reducing social and economic uncertainty.” He pointed out that the more easily laws and institutions are shaken by political interests, the greater the cost to society as a whole, leading to diminished long-term growth and innovation. When institutions provide predictability, individuals and businesses can form stable expectations and engage in economic activity; but in a society where institutions frequently change with political tides, it is difficult to escape instability. Each of his words resonates with the reality facing Korean politics today.

What is needed now is restraint-respecting the law at a certain distance from politics. Discussions on judicial reform or judicial appointments need not be taboo in themselves. The issue lies in the manner and context. If the practice of interpreting and changing the law according to interests is repeated, democracy will inevitably be exposed to unnecessary risks. In the long run, the institutional authority of the legislature itself is also likely to be damaged. This is why the legalists of Jixia warned, “Politics is stable when it follows the law, but the nation is endangered when law succumbs to politics.”

The questions that Korean politics must ask today are clear. Are we prepared to respect the law as a public norm that everyone can predict, rather than as a tool to be wielded whenever power requires it? Can we restore the basic truth that politics is a process of seeking balance beyond competition? We must recognize that the moment institutions lose trust, both politics and the economy are shaken together. What is required of our politics is not greater power, but the wisdom to exercise restraint.

Kim Kyuil, Professor at Michigan State University, USA