대안적 정부형태로서의 이원정부제

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This paper will suggest a form of government and an advisable improvement direction of constitutional amendment after reviewing the discussions of the amendment which have arisen since the 1987 constitution was ratified. It will also analyze current discussions regarding the introduction of a dual-executive system. The current discussions have aimed to overcome the problems and limitations of the constitution of 1987, and the essential part of these discussions is whether a dual-executive system could be introduced into Korea as an alternative to the current form of government.
The current discussions can be boiled down to one side wishing to ‘take selection of the new system’ by discarding the current system and the other side wanting to ‘improve the current system’ by compensating for some of its defects. The argument for a constitutional amendment creating a dual-executive system has mainly been that this system could better ensure dispersion of power compared to the current presidential system because the presidential system usually concentrates power in a winner-takes-all style of rule.
These types of arguments have mainly occurred in academia and in political circles, not among the general public. Ordinary people do not have a consensus regarding a constitutional amendment changing the form of government. Of course, the presidential system raises concerns that the president could become an imperial president, and past presidents of Korea have indeed done this, even though they were elected by the direct election system by the people. However, it is necessary to realize that those concerns come from operational problems, not institutional problems.
Meanwhile, the current presidential system prescribes a single term for the president because of Korea’s unique experiences and constitutional history, but the single-term system is meaningless now because of the political situation and because political awareness has improved a lot in Korea. Moreover, some elements of the parliamentary system in the current Korean Constitution, such as the right of the president to introduce a bill, as well as the concurrent position of the National assembly’s members, should be also reconsidered because these elements do not have significant meaning in the current governmental structure in Korea.
The dual-executive system is a model from the Fifth Republic of France. It is a mixed form of government, and the principle of the mixed form is based on the traditional parliamentary system. However, the traditional parliamentary system also has a dual structure of the executive branch, and this dual structure in name actually becomes dual in this model of government. The dual-executive system has some advantages in that it realizes responsible politics and it can help prevent abuse of power by dispersing power. However, this system also may cause conflict between the separate authorities. France has overcome these problems and found success in this system because France has a tradition of political tolerance and a culture of compromise. If the dual-executive system were introduced into a nation that did not have this kind of tradition, the system could have politically harmful effects.
A constitutional amendment changing the form or structure of government should be based on the people’s consensus based on the majority’s understanding about the necessity and justifiability of the amendment. A dual-executive system has been suggested as a possible alternative to Korea’s current system for the past several years, although not enough people support it yet. Thus, it is necessary to open debates for the constitutional amendment to determine people’s opinions.
Regardless of the future of this constitutional amendment, it is advisable to develop a partial improvement plan while maintaining the current system in the short term. In the long term, it is necessary to begin discussions about a form of government for the unified Korea.