[Reporter’s Notebook] 100 Plenary Agenda Items, Rushed Through Like Overdue Homework

"I'm going to finish quickly..."

On April 23, during the plenary session of the National Assembly, Moon Geumju, a lawmaker from the Democratic Party of Korea, who was presenting explanations for 10 bills on behalf of the National Assembly’s Agriculture, Food, Rural Affairs, Oceans and Fisheries Committee, made this remark as he watched his colleagues leaving their seats. The lawmakers, seemingly expecting the explanations of the bills to take considerable time, began attending to personal matters such as phone calls. Lawmaker Moon tried to keep them from leaving, emphasizing that it would be brief and urging them not to miss the voting opportunity.

In reality, Moon's bill presentation was surprisingly concise. After listing the names of the 10 bills, he simply stated, "Please refer to the meeting records on your terminals for detailed information." He spent only about 1 minute and 30 seconds on the proposal explanation. This practice was the same during other lawmakers' bill presentations as well.

There was a palpable sense of "let's get this over with quickly" regarding the bill reviews. Remarks such as "There's not much left now" and "This is really the last one" were heard repeatedly. For example, Yeom Taeyoung, a Democratic Party lawmaker, provided a detailed introduction and explanation of the contents and significance of the Special Act on Jeonse Fraud in the Land, Infrastructure and Transport Committee. However, for the remaining six bills, he merely called out the names of the sponsoring lawmakers and said, "They're displayed on the electronic board," before moving on.

Article 93 of the National Assembly Act stipulates that, during plenary sessions, the chair of the committee should present a review report when deliberating agenda items. The intention is to explain the contents of the bills to lawmakers from other standing committees before the plenary vote, based on the principle of committee-centered deliberation. With over 100 items on the agenda, especially when they are non-controversial issues, it is impossible to fully grasp the contents of the bills without separate study time. For this reason, procedures for questions and debates regarding the review report have been established.

During the bill review process in the Agriculture, Food, Rural Affairs, Oceans and Fisheries Committee, there were requests for debate. Cha Kyugeun, a lawmaker from the Innovation of the Fatherland Party, questioned the effectiveness of forest roads in responding to large-scale wildfires while discussing the Act on the Installation and Management of Forest Roads. As a member of the National Assembly's Special Committee on Wildfire Damage Support, he introduced the ongoing expert debate surrounding forest roads and expressed doubt, saying, "Is it appropriate to promote forest roads by enacting a law without thorough public discussion?" Such points would not have been raised if the bill explanations had ended with just listing the bill names.

Legislation is about establishing the discipline and foundation of society. It is a process of setting standards amid various interpretations and interests. However, the plenary session process is often treated as a mere formality. On the assumption that sufficient discussion has already taken place in the standing committees, the plenary vote is regarded as skipping in-depth debate by default. Lawmakers behave as if they are students waiting for class to end. If legislation proceeds in this way, the very meaning of electing 300 representatives is bound to be diminished.

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