The leaders of the two main political parties have revived the idea of selecting candidates for elected posts through the open primary system.
In the lead-up to most previous presidential and parliamentary elections, calls mounted for allowing more rank-and-file party members and ordinary voters to participate in the process of nominating candidates. These demands reflected the criticism that the opaque selection process was heavily influenced by a handful of party executives, went against democratic principles and barred a wide field of fresh figures from entering politics.
The open primary system was tried in a limited and modified fashion in some previous elections, failing to become established as a stable framework to ensure a transparent and democratic process for choosing candidates.
Setting their sights on the next parliamentary elections scheduled for April 2016, both of the main party leaders ― Rep. Kim Moo-sung of the ruling Saenuri Party and Rep. Moon Jae-in of the main opposition New Politics Alliance for Democracy ― recently proposed adopting the system on a full scale. Their initiatives have drawn pros and cons from members of the two parties.
Supporters indicate the measure would enable the selection process to reflect a broader voter sentiment and help ease feuds between intraparty factions. They emphasize the full-fledged implementation of the system would particularly highlight their respective party’s will toward political reform.
But opponents express concern that the measure might only serve to protect the vested interests of incumbent lawmakers and other elected officials. They also worry about the possibility of the open primary system allowing one party’s members and supporters to vote for weaker contenders from another party, who could be more easily defeated by their candidates.
Blocking the introduction of the scheme due to these worries may not be justified. But addressing them seriously is necessary for its successful implementation. It is all the more so, given the partisan and undemocratic practices permeating our political structure.
It may be somewhat inevitable for incumbent legislators or other elected officials to enjoy some advantages over newcomers. They are in a more favorable position to collect campaign funds and build a network with residents in their constituencies. First-term lawmakers usually get higher support from voters in their bid for reelection in what is known as the “sophomore surge” phenomenon.
Nevertheless, it is deplorable that some incumbent lawmakers ― both from the Saenuri Party and the NPAD ― are trying to block possible contenders and their supporters from joining their party. This brazen attempt not only undermines the principle of fair competition but also threatens the foundation of party politics.
If the blanket primary system, which allows any registered voter to vote in the primaries of all parties, is introduced as envisioned by the Saenuri and NPAD leaders, the tactic of party raid might become so rampant that the nomination process will be distorted severely.
Both parties need to work on more specific and substantial measures if they are truly committed to improving the process of selecting candidates to ensure that more qualified figures will replace those who have lost voter confidence.
Consideration may be given to excluding a certain proportion of underperforming lawmakers and other elected officials from candidacy. The main parties should try to increase their membership numbers. Their leaders need to reconsider introducing the blanket primary system to prevent adverse effects.
