[The Editors' Verdict] The Harm of Electoral Alliances with Satellite Parties

Election System Principles and Trust Undermined
Results Deceiving Voter Sentiment

How many candidates can the Progressive Party get elected if it runs in the upcoming April general election solely under its own name? The results of the past two elections provide some indication. In the 2020 general election, the Progressive Party (then the Minjung Party) fielded candidates in both constituencies and proportional representation but failed to secure a single seat, remaining outside the National Assembly. In the 2022 presidential election, candidate Kim Jae-yeon ran under the Progressive Party banner but garnered only 0.11% of the vote, falling short even of Heo Kyung-young, leader of the National Revolutionary Party, who received 0.83%.

Although Kang Sung-hee was elected in the by-election for Jeonbuk Jeonju-eul held last April following the downfall of former Democratic Party lawmaker Lee Sang-jik, it is difficult to assign full significance to this result given the political circumstances, such as the Democratic Party’s decision not to field a candidate on the grounds that it caused the by-election. There is also little evidence to suggest that voters’ ideological landscape has dramatically changed in the four years since the 2020 general election or the two years since the 2022 presidential election.

The Progressive Party’s position has undergone a complete transformation. A party that previously struggled even to surpass the 3% threshold has, before the election, effectively secured three proportional seats through an electoral alliance satellite party with the Democratic Party. It also won the candidate spot in Ulsan Buk-gu constituency, potentially bringing its total seats to more than four.

Since the Progressive Party advocates for positions such as ▲dismantling the ROK-US alliance ▲implementing all inter-Korean joint declarations ▲breaking up the chaebol monopoly economy ▲abolishing anti-labor policies (all part of the Progressive Party’s platform), I do not argue that their entry into the National Assembly should be blocked outright. The Progressive Party is the successor to the Unified Progressive Party, which was dissolved following the ‘Lee Seok-ki treason conspiracy case,’ but I also find it difficult to agree with calls to permanently bar them from our political arena. The same applies to any ideology or party at the opposite end of the spectrum. The fundamental premise underlying this view is, of course, respect for freedom of thought and diversity.

Attendees including Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, are taking a commemorative photo at the Democratic United Party founding convention held on the 3rd at the National Assembly Members' Office Building. From the left, Jinbo Party leader Yoon Hee-sook, Lee Jae-myung, Democratic United Party co-leaders Yoon Young-duk and Baek Seung-ah, and Saejinbo United Party standing leader Yong Hye-in.
(Photo by Yonhap News)

However, a more practically important basis is the discernment of voters and the trust in the public election system that prevents inappropriate individuals or parties from entering the institutional framework if deemed unsuitable based on this discernment. Therefore, the crucial issue is not whether a particular individual or party enters the system but whether this occurs through a system we have agreed upon and trust. If the result is based on such a system, we must accept any force entering the National Assembly, whether it is the Progressive Party or another.

The trickery of proportional satellite parties led by Lee Jae-myung and the Democratic Party, with the People Power Party following suit, has shown that such a system, which must be secure, can be endangered and that if a major party turns a blind eye and pushes forward, the very essence of the system can be compromised. This is a serious issue.

The Democratic Reform Progressive Alliance, a proportional satellite party of the opposition including the Democratic Party, held its founding convention on the 3rd and decided to name itself ‘The Together Democratic Alliance.’ It is bizarre?and ultimately deceptive to voters?that a party (the Democratic Party) adopting a platform of ‘development of the ROK-US alliance and strategic cooperation with key countries and regions’ suddenly merges just before the election with a party that advocates ‘dismantling the ROK-US alliance’ as its platform.

Invoking electoral alliances in European parliamentary systems is a fallacy. These countries, which use party-list proportional representation, devised coalition governments based on historical experiences of political instability caused by excessive proportionality. Their power structures and party systems are entirely different from ours, so applying their model here is dangerous. Who will bear the burden and responsibility for this harm?

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