South Korea's First Constitutional Reform Discussion in 38 Years: Responsible Cabinet System as Key Issue

In October 2025, South Korea's political sphere has revived serious constitutional amendment discussions for the first time in 38 years since the 1987 democratization. Following the impeachment of former President Yoon Suk-yeol, National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-sik's proposal for "simultaneous early presidential election and constitutional referendum" has emerged as a hot political issue, transforming constitutional reform from mere political rhetoric into a substantive agenda.

Responsible Cabinet System: Core of Power Structure Reform

The central focus of this constitutional reform discussion is maintaining the presidential system while introducing a responsible cabinet system to strengthen the power balance between the National Assembly and the executive branch. The current five-year single-term presidential system has repeatedly exposed problems of late-term lame duck phenomena and power concentration. The responsible cabinet system would give the National Assembly authority to appoint and dismiss the prime minister, substantially strengthening parliamentary oversight of the executive branch.

Some political circles call this a "semi-presidential system" or "dual executive system," proposing the French governmental model as a template. However, some opposition members advocate for a pure parliamentary cabinet system, suggesting that reaching political consensus on power structure reform will be challenging.

38 Years of Neglected Fundamental Rights Provisions: Modernization Imperative

Another crucial axis of constitutional reform discussion is modernizing fundamental rights provisions. The constitutional fundamental rights clauses, unchanged even once in the 38 years since the 1987 amendment, have been criticized for failing to reflect the rapidly changing social environment including the digital age, AI revolution, and climate crisis.

Major amendment discussion points include: △establishing information rights and digital fundamental rights △strengthening environmental rights and codifying climate crisis response △expanding the three labor rights and protecting platform workers △specifying rights to life and safety △amending local autonomy clauses to strengthen decentralization.

Particularly, voices from academia and civil society are growing louder calling for constitutional codification of new digital-age rights such as personal information protection, algorithmic transparency, and AI ethics. Strong arguments are also being made for elevating carbon neutrality and climate justice to constitutional values.

Political Calculations: Is Constitutional Reform Again a Tool for Political Strife?

However, as constitutional reform discussions intensify, issues of "strategic political exploitation" by the political sphere are also surfacing. Since the 2016 Park Geun-hye administration's corruption scandal, constitutional reform has emerged as a political issue four times - in the 2018 Moon Jae-in government, the 20th presidential election in 2022, and the 2025 Yoon Suk-yeol impeachment - yet has failed repeatedly.

Critics argue that history is repeating itself as ruling and opposition parties change positions based on immediate advantage, using constitutional reform as a tool for political strife. The opposition party currently holds political initiative and pushes for constitutional reform, while the ruling party counters with arguments of premature timing and suspected political motives.

Constitutional amendment requires approval by more than two-thirds of National Assembly members and majority approval in a national referendum - high hurdles to overcome. The public is watching with cold scrutiny whether politicians will genuinely pursue constitutional reform for protecting fundamental rights and advancing democracy, or whether it will again degrade into a means for political gain.

Conditions for Successful Amendment: Bipartisan Consensus and Public Trust

Experts emphasize that for constitutional reform to succeed, establishing a bipartisan consensus body and securing sufficient period for social discussion are essential. They also point out that transparent and open discussion processes must be guaranteed so that citizens can fully understand and participate in the necessity and content of constitutional reform.

Thirty-eight years after the 1987 Constitution was enacted, South Korean society has changed beyond comparison. New challenges including digital revolution, globalization, low birth rates and aging population, and climate crisis are piled up. There is no disagreement that constitutional reform reflecting these epochal changes is truly a national task.

The question is whether the political sphere has the will and capability to realize this. The public is watching the sincerity of politicians, hoping that constitutional reform will not end as another political show. Whether the 2025 constitutional reform discussion will become a historic turning point after 38 years or be recorded as yet another failure depends on the political sphere's future conduct.

---

Read the original Korean article: 38년 만의 헌법 개정 논의 본격화, 책임총리제 도입 쟁점으로