[Opinion] Private Recommendations Like Public Nominations

원본보기 아이콘

A current member of the National Assembly in the Seoul metropolitan area has been commuting to the subway station at 7 a.m. these days. Holding a placard at the entrance and greeting citizens for two hours is part of his daily routine. Although his constituency is considered relatively stable, his mind is not at ease. He said, "I cannot feel secure until the nomination is confirmed. I don't know what might happen. I have things I want to say to the party leadership, but I plan to hold back until the general election is over."

In Korean politics, nomination (公薦) is actually a private recommendation (私薦). On the surface, they talk about system nominations, objective nominations, data-driven nominations, and so on. But looking back, have political parties ever once disclosed any evidence or data related to nominations? Have they ever properly explained to competing candidates why a particular candidate was nominated?

Recently, both ruling and opposition parties have been conducting candidate interviews and opinion polls. However, only a few 'powerful figures' know the results. Because the process is not transparent, it is a reality that every election season people worry about the aftermath of nominations. This time will be no exception. It won't be long before we see protesters gathering in front of party offices condemning the decisions. Political parties only pretend to be fair on the surface. They form nomination management committees, but behind the scenes of formation, screening, and decision-making, there is an 'invisible hand.' It is a well-known secret.

Nomination is power and strength. That is why even incumbent lawmakers anxiously watch the powerful, fearing they might not receive the nomination. Since whether or not one is nominated often depends on the hands of the powerful, politicians are more conscious of power holders than the public. Even while diligently engaging in local activities, they are always on high alert for the moves of influential figures. City, county, and district council members watch the eyes of the National Assembly members and party branch chairs who hold nomination power, and National Assembly members and party branch chairs watch the president or party leader who holds the nomination power, forming a food chain-like structure. Political power holders wield power not based on the love and respect of the people but with the leash of nomination rights. This is a backward structure that does not fit the era of democratization and must be abolished.

The very appearance of terms like 'winning nomination' and 'assassin nomination' in politics shows the falseness of the nomination system. Putting forward someone who can beat the opposing candidate might be a strategic decision, but it is not a 'system.' Even in constituencies not designated as 'strategic nomination districts,' this happens, leaving nothing to say. Here, there is only the logic of the game to win against the opponent at all costs. Behaviors such as suddenly switching to the opposing party one criticized or abruptly changing constituencies come from this. It becomes the nourishment for conflict politics. Many run forward blindly because loyalty to the powerful guarantees nomination.

Watching the nomination movements of the ruling and opposition parties these days, I thought about the people's taxes. Last year, more than 45 billion won in government subsidies was paid to ruling and opposition parties. Since public funds were used, public oversight is necessary. There must be issues raised and monitoring of the nomination process. There is no political reform without nomination reform. The core of nomination reform is clear standards and transparency.

© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.