Opposition Lawmakers Backing Away from Constitutional Amendment Proposal on the 'Constitutional National Initiative System'

[Asia Economy Reporter Jeon Jin-young] The so-called conservative camp's "backing out" has begun, as members of the Future United Party who signed the constitutional amendment proposal for the 'Constitutional National Initiative System' have expressed their intention to withdraw. Due to the defection of Future United Party lawmakers, the passage of the amendment in the National Assembly is expected to face difficulties.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

This amendment proposal was initiated on the 6th with the intention that a constitutional amendment can be made if one million voters agree. According to political insiders, the Future United Party lawmakers who signed it have reportedly been unsettled several times. On the 9th, Floor Leader Shim Jae-cheol pointed out at the Supreme Council meeting, "One million voters can only be mobilized by organizations like the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions. It is obvious how it will be exploited." This appears to be in response to repeated protests from conservative groups. Conservative groups opposed it, saying, "There is a risk that left-wing organizations might abuse it."

Future United Party lawmaker Baek Seung-ju issued a withdrawal statement, saying, "The staff mistakenly signed and sealed it." In a phone interview with Asia Economy, Baek said, "I judged that signing was inappropriate, and I clearly express my intention to oppose it even if it is put to a vote in the 20th National Assembly."

Park Myung-jae, a member of the same party who also participated in the proposal, said, "I was greatly surprised by the amendment, which only regulates the amendment procedure rather than the original purpose of power decentralization, and inquired about withdrawing the joint proposal at the National Assembly's legislative affairs office," adding, "I will definitely oppose it during the National Assembly's approval process." Lawmaker Kim Moo-sung also posted a clarification on his Facebook on the 9th, saying, "I understand there is a misunderstanding that the left can amend the constitution as a group."

The problem lies in the momentum of the amendment proposal. For the amendment to pass, a plenary session must be held and approved by two-thirds or more of the total members, which is 196 members?49 more than the 148 lawmakers who participated in the proposal. In this situation, if Future United Party lawmakers back out, passage will inevitably become difficult.

There are 22 Future United Party lawmakers who signed the amendment proposal. It is difficult to convene a plenary session by calling lawmakers active in their constituencies ahead of the general election, and after obtaining the National Assembly's consent, a referendum will be held during the 4.15 general election, requiring a majority of voters' turnout and a majority of votes in favor, which are considered additional variables. Some argue that passage in the 20th National Assembly will be difficult.

Meanwhile, the amendment proposal has entered a 20-day public notice period after being approved by the Cabinet on the 10th, and withdrawal is impossible despite requests from Future United Party lawmakers.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.