개헌을 통한 권력구조 개편의 기본방향 - 분권형 대통령제의 가능성을 중심으로 -

Abstract

The current version of the constitution is the most long-lived, as it has not undergone any constitutional amendments for 25 years. Such longevity implies the stability and endurance of the current constitution. It can also be argued, however, that to the same degree, a new constitutional amendment is required in order to reflect the social and political changes that have occurred with the passage of time. The current situation for constitutional amendment is quite exceptional when compared to previous experiences. Past constitutional amendments were typically initiated by powerful political necessities and motivations, and the process was completed hastily within only several months. In contrast, the current discussion concerning constitutional amendments has been introduced by academia. Moreover, academics are the source of the following research reports. In addition, the National Assembly actively dealt with this issue by establishing an advisory committee for constitutional amendment, which provided a report after two-years of research. As seen above, many scholars and lawyers have reached a general consensus about the necessity of a constitutional amendment. Furthermore, today, a majority of people agree with the necessity of a constitutional amendment. However, a detailed consensus has not been reached in terms of thoughts on time, methods and content. As many people propose different views in assessing the cost and benefits of a constitutional amendment, politicians are reluctant to take on the risks of initiating the amendment process. It really is the right time to start on more detailed discussions and to elaborate on what is necessary for a constitutional amendment, such as direction, methods, content and limitations. Actually, the people have experienced the negative effects of an imperial presidency, whereas they have a strong desire to choose a president through a direct election. Given such an ambivalent attitude, a decentralized presidential system could be more persuasive to the public than a parliamentary government system or other systems such as a dualist government system or a slightly-modified presidential system. The arguments for a decentralized presidential system require more discussion to elaborate on what this would specifically entail. In any case, it is clear that the will of the people as sovereign and as the owners of the constitution should be considered as the most important factor in securing the justification of a constitutional amendment. Moreover, it needs to be stressed that when the people are demanding a constitutional amendment, the justification can be assumed to be established. All things considered, a future constitutional amendment cannot proceed as it did in the past. In fact, previous constitutional amendments suffered from a lack of the public consensus due to the urgency of political situations (or the intention of a man in power). In the future, a successful constitutional amendment requires ample time, effort and endurance. When such conditions enable enough discussion to delve deeply into issues and formation of a public consensus, the constitutional amendments can serve as a constitutional foundation toward long-term national development.