|
The Constitutional Court on Thursday ruled the government's plan to relocate the administrative capital as unconstitutional. Eight of the court's nine judges ruled the plan as unconstitutional. The panel said in its verdict that the New Administrative Capital Special Law would have changed the country's capital of Seoul, which is a self-evident and unwritten part of the constitution, by passing a bill without following the proper procedure in revising the constitution. The law therefore violated the people's basic rights to vote on the issue and was deemed unconstitutional.
The problem of locating a capital, playing a pivotal political and administrative role of a state, is practically a constitutional matter expressing the state's identity, the panel said. Although the constitution does not have a provision identifying Seoul as the capital, a dictionary meaning of Seoul is 'capital.' That Seoul is the capital is an ongoing convention formed by a 600-year tradition started in the Chosun Dynasty. The convention has continued long without change and is a fundamental part of the national life, with the approval and consensus of the people, the panel said. The Constitutional Court verdict says that if the government intends to push ahead with the capital relocation, the government should amend the Constitution first.
But as a revision of the Constitution requires approval by two-thirds of the National Assembly and a majority support in a referendum, the government can no longer keep pushing the capital relocation, unless it is consented to by the Grand National Party. It is fortunate that the national conflict and division over the capital relocation can now be settled, owing to the Constitutional Court verdict. Now we have to concentrate our wisdom on working out measures for easing concentration in the capital region and pushing a balanced development of the national land, which prompted the capital relocation in the first place.
What many people have been concerned about, in fact, was not if the capital relocation is constitutional or unconstitutional. It was if our deliberations on the capital relocation, estimated to cost between W46 trillion and W120 trillion, is a right choice for the nation's future. It was also a call for researching and discussing if there could be more rational and effective ways for a balanced development of the national land, other than the capital relocation. Now the government and political circles should offer answers to such agonies of the people.
The basic cause for our resorting even to a Constitutional Court decision over the issue of relocating the capital was the launching of the relocation under an election strategy targeting Chungcheong provincial votes during the latest presidential election, without a national consensus. Subsequently, even the opposition party sided with the ruling party's political scheme and passed the relevant bill. Accordingly, the political circles should first look at themselves for the mistake of handling a grave matter concerning the country's fate, based on their selfish partisan interests.
What is needed most under the circumstances is for President Roh Moo-hyun to exercise cool headedness. On the question of relocating the capital and an approach to a national development strategy, the chief executive attached a partisan definition by saying that we need a new capital for new forces to settle down in a new arena of ruling the state, moving away from the roots of old forces. This led us down a wayward path. It was not right for him to counter criticisms by saying they were simply a drive to show non-confidence in the president or staking the government's fate on the move.
The Constitutional Court verdict has confirmed that the capital relocation is not a matter for the government to stake its fate on and also not a matter for the opposition to try to remove the government. The president and Uri Party should make haste in emerging from the aftermath by listening to public criticism and holding a dialogue with opposition parties. In this respect, it is quite inappropriate for the Cheong Wa Dae spokesman to say that it is difficult to answer whether the government will respect the Constitutional Court's decision or not. As the Constitutional Court verdict on the impeachment of the president was final, so the verdict this time should be final and constitutional. The matter is not to question or consult with somebody, nor is it related to presidential discretionary power. The only righteous way is to follow the right path and reason.
|
