• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.13 no.10
• /
• pp.278-289
• /
• 2013

In the democratic country, it is the very natural principle that political party makes the candidate. In spite of that the nomination of political party abolition issue is not in the local election the problem of is being easily solved. Therefore, the recent argument about the nomination of political party of the basic local election and overseas case were organized and the reasonable alternative was sought for. As to the argument related to the nomination of political party, the discussion in which the groping of the waste paper or new alternative is needed stops so that the existing politicians can overcome the nomination of political party evil in spite of the opposition position. In the positive investigation, the populations which are many in the waste paper of the system of public nomination by party agree. However, the bad effect that can be shown up according to the waste paper of the nomination of political party is the woman allocation door. Therefore, some alternatives were presented in the bad effect that can be shown up according to the waste paper of the nomination of political party. This alternative is the participation subject expansion, the introduction of political party claim to support, the introduction of local political party system, the application of upward official nomination procedure, and etc. The participation subject expansion presented logically as the optimum alternative among this method, the decision of the alternative should be confirmed through the social agreement procedure.

• Korea and Global Affairs
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.31-70
• /
• 2017

On December 9, 2016, the decision of impeachment of the National Assembly decided against Park Geun-hye came from the nomination conflicts of the 20th general election between Pro-Park group and Anti-Park group at the ruling Saenuri Party. Therefore, this study focused on the nomination conflicts of the ruling party and the opposition party on the election results in the 20th general election on the public sentiment of the people. The nomination conflicts of the ruling and opposite parties were a prelude to the victory of the 19th presidential election, and it was serious faction conflict. Firstly, the study examined how the nomination conflicts of each party were centered on President Park Geun-hye as well as the leaders of each party and the chairman of the nomination committee. Secondly, the study examined what kind of changes would be made to the composition of presidential candidates for each party at the time of the presidential election. Thirdly, the study examined the opposition parties' separation between the Minjoo Party of Korea and the People's Party of Korea before and after the election and the issue of initiative in Honam. As a result of the analysis, the 20th general election failed to obtain a majority seat of the ruling Saenuri Party, and the opposition won and formed the majority. The reason why President Park and Saenuri were greatly defeated in the contest even in the situation where the opposition parties were divided is the root cause in the attitude of Pro-Park group and Anti-Park group who assumed their victory. Therefore, it is highly possible to render its responsibility to President Park Geun-hye, who has become a 'past power', and it has opened up the possibility that the emergence of future power by opposition parties. In the case of the opposition party, it is clear that the battle for Honam, which is a traditional opposition party's support group, is a matter of good fortune of the two major powers, Moon Jae In and Ahn Cheol Soo.

• Korean Journal of Comparative Education
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.103-132
• /
• 2016

This study aims to suggest ways of improving the quality of confirmation hearings for the Secretary of Education in South Korea by: 1) comparing the confirmation process by the presidents in South Korea and the United States; and 2) contrasting procedures and contents of hearings for Education Secretary nominee in South Korea and the United States. As the process of selecting a nominee to be the Secretary of Education started, the Blue House Office of Secretary conducted an investigation on the nominee's personal details, family matters, and etc within a week. The investigation, with very limited time frame, led the selection process to be a mere verification on the nominee's morality. On the other hand, the White House Office of Presidential Personnel carried out a thorough investigation on the nominee collectively with the White House Council, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and Internal Revenue Service, taking from two to three months. In terms of contents of the hearings, the members of the ruling party mainly asked the nominee for clarification, and his ideas on certain policies, whereas the opposition party focused mostly on verifying his morality. In addition, the committee members led the hearing whilst strongly expressing their own political ideologies. However, in the case of the hearings in the United States, the committee members did not ask any questions to verify the nominee's morality but questions that could help them to get an understanding of the nominee's experience, professionalism, and perspective on nation- wide issues regarding education and federal education policy. As for the procedural characteristics of South Korean hearings, the Committee on Education conducted the hearing with a week of advanced preparation. However, submission of required reports by the nominee, performing confirmation hearings, and reports on the hearing were not mandatory in order to appoint the nominee as the Secretary of Education. On the contrary, in the United States, the members of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pension spent about a month preparing for the confirmation hearing. For the nominee to be appointed, submission of reports and the committee's approval on the President's nomination were required. Based on the results, this research suggests that it is important to develop a policy that can strengthen the substantiality of the nomination process, to establish a professional agency for personnel investigation, to make a mandatory submission of personal reports before hearings, to extend the time frame for hearing preparation, to secure enough time slot for nominees to respond, and to increase the member's autonomy.