[Asia Democracy Issue Briefing] The Role of Korea’s Election Commission and the Quality of Elections
Commentary·Issue Briefing | 2021-10-29
Woo Chang Kang
According to the Varieties of Democracy Institute, the freedom and fairness of South Korea’s elections have improved dramatically since the country first democratized. Figure 1 below shows how the quality of South Korea’s elections has changed between 1948 and 2020 (“election was free and fair” is indicated in blue) and the country’s rating on the Electoral Democracy Index (indicated in red). There was little change in election quality and the democracy index in the 40 years that followed the constitutional election of 1948. With the change to a direct election system implemented in 1987, the freedom and fairness of South Korea’s elections shot up, and the country’s rating on the democracy index increased greatly as well.
The primary factors that affect election quality can generally be categorized into structures, systems, and actors. Structural factors include economic development, political and social divisions, and geopolitical positions. The institutional factors of an independent judiciary and supervising body also play an important role in the oversight and control of the constitutional and legal basis and election processes supporting the separation of powers. At the actor level, the capacity and strategic choices of the government and members of the opposition forces including political elites, civil society, and the media, affect the quality of elections. In addition, voter perceptions of election quality may depend on whether the party or candidate they supported won or lost the election. Korea’s economic development was achieved during a time when social inequality was relatively low.
Although political conflicts based on regionalism existed, there were no violent confrontations or conflicts between members of society, or civil-war level religious, ethnic, or cultural conflicts. Further, following democratization, the peaceful transfer of power between Kim Young Sam (conservative) and Kim Dae-jung (liberal), Roh Moo-hyun (liberal) and Lee Myung-bak (conservative), and Park Geun-hye (conservative) and Moon Jae-in (liberal) increased the ability of the opposition to check the government and made it difficult to mobilize administrative control, further improving the quality of elections. A broad social consensus on regime change through elections was formed through this process. Finally, we cannot leave out the growth of the country’s capacity for election management. Figure 2 shows Korea’s ability to manage elections. This figure illustrates that the improvements in the freedom and fairness of elections go hand in hand with the changes in the autonomy and capacity of the National Election Commission (NEC).
Korea has a fundamentally high state capacity, and its bureaucratic capacity is also the best in the world. The resident registration system in particular has been the basis for effective and efficient election management by facilitating easy identification of voters compared to other countries where eligible voters have to be identified and registered. This article will focus on the capacity of the NEC in terms of the constitutional and legal status, organizational capacity, and the capacity and motives of its members.
I. The Neutrality and Independence of the NEC
The electoral process includes "the establishment of election laws, planning of electoral districts, confirmation of election schedules, voter confirmation, party registration, candidate registration, election campaign management, provision of election information to voters, management of election costs and political funds, oversight of ballot casting, vote counting and tallying, confirmation of election results, and dispute resolution" (Eum Sun Pil, 2015). Therefore, election management means executing and supervising the election process to ensure that free and fair competitive elections take place. However, different countries place different parts of the election process under the management of election commissions. In Korea, the role of the NEC includes the creation and oversight of the electoral register, registration of political parties and candidates, election campaigns, voting, ballot counting and tallying, and certification of election results. Election laws and the drawing of electoral districts fall under the authority of the National Assembly, and election-related disputes, in principle, fall into the jurisdiction of the courts.
Elections are the process of reorganizing the administration and legislature according to the will of the people. Election management can affect the election process and results. If election management is affected by political interests, then trust in the fairness of elections is weakened. Therefore, election management must be carried out by an independent organization free from political interests, including the interests of the administration, and the organization must have the administrative capacity to efficiently handle the entirety of the vast electoral process, from keeping track of eligible voters to calculating election results.
The Korean Constitution guarantees neutrality and independence of the election commission members. Following the establishment of the Korean government, the administration established an "election commission" within the executive that controlled elections. Historical reflection on the fraudulent 3/15 election of 1960 led to the establishment of the National Election Commission, a constitutional body independent of the executive, judiciary, and the National Assembly, in the third revised Constitution. Since then, the independence and neutrality of the NEC has been strengthened with each revision of the Constitution, with an exception to the revision made in 1972. The third revised Constitution in 1960 only stipulated how the NEC was to be composed, delegating matters related to organization, authority, etc. to the purview of the law. However, since then, rights, term lengths, political neutrality, status guarantee, rule-making authority, and details regarding the relationship between the NEC and various levels of administrative agencies have also been included in the Constitution. The Constitution goes beyond symbolically and declaratively defining the NEC as neutral and independent. It also attempts to lay the foundation for practical independence by providing the NEC with a basis for its activities. This is because even if the NEC's authority is mandated at the constitutional level, if its composition and operations are left to be decided at the legal level, the independence and neutrality of the NEC may be affected by changing political forces as determined by election results. The current Constitution gives the NEC the following powers and duties.
Article 114
(1) Election commissions shall be established for the purpose of fair management of elections and national referenda, and dealing with administrative affairs concerning political parties.
(2) The National Election Commission shall be composed of three members appointed by the President, three members selected by the National Assembly, and three members designated by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The Chairperson of the Commission shall be elected from among the members.
(3) The term of office of the members of the Commission shall be six years.
(4) The members of the Commission shall not join political parties, nor shall they participate in political activities.
(5) No member of the Commission shall be expelled from office except by impeachment or a sentence of imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment.
(6) The National Election Commission may establish, within the limit of Acts and decrees, regulations relating to the management of elections, national referenda, and administrative affairs concerning political parties and may also establish regulations relating to internal discipline that are compatible with Act.
(7) The organization, function and other necessary matters of the election commissions at each level shall be determined by Act.
Article 115
(1) Election commissions at each level may issue necessary instructions to administrative agencies concerned with respect to administrative affairs pertaining to elections and national referenda such as the preparation of the poll books.
(2) Administrative agencies concerned, upon receipt of such instructions, shall comply.
Article 116
(1) Election campaigns shall be carried out within the scope prescribed by law under the management of the election commissions, but equal opportunity shall be guaranteed.
(2) Except as otherwise prescribed by law, expenditures for elections shall not be imposed on political parties or candidates.
II. The Capacity of the Election Commission
Korea’s NEC maintains the independence of its personnel by independently managing the recruitment, promotion, appointment, and transfer of its employees. According to the 2020 Ministry of Personnel Management statistics yearbook, the number of official positions at the NEC is 2,867, while the current number of actual staff employed is 3,085. Compared to the executive (1,078,516) and the judiciary (17,751) branches, the number of people is small, but these figures only reflect permanent employees. Table 1 uses data from the Electronic Learning and Capacity Training conducted by the Electoral Integrity Project in 2016 to compare the size of election management organizations in different countries. According to Table 1, Mexico has the largest number of permanent employees among the countries surveyed, with a staff of about 15,000. It is followed by Iraq (4,000), Panama (3,000), and Korea. Looking at the number of temporary hires employed during the election, Korea has one of the highest employment rates with about 200,000 people during elections followed by to Afghanistan and Thailand, which hire more than one million people, Indonesia (550,000 people), Kenya (300,000 people), and Tanzania (250,000 people). In addition, it was found that Korea rarely relies on unpaid volunteers.
The Organizational Capacity of Election Commissions by Country
Country |
Permanent staff |
Additional staff |
Additional staff |
Does EMB use unpaid volunteers during elections |
Afghanistan |
455 |
1155859 |
0 |
Never |
Argentina |
80 |
100 |
35 |
Never |
Bahamas |
18 |
10 |
75 |
Never |
Bhutan |
171 |
126 |
126 |
Never |
Cambodia |
300 |
7000 |
200 |
Rarely |
Canada |
328 |
231 |
1 |
Never |
Costa Rica |
900 |
300 |
0 |
On a regular basis |
Cote d'Ivoire |
301 |
537 |
60000 |
Rarely |
Dominica |
5 |
800 |
4 |
Occasionally |
Ghana |
2000 |
1000 |
|
On a regular basis |
Guam |
14 |
330 |
30 |
On a regular basis |
Guinea |
25 |
2442 |
684 |
Occasionally |
Indonesia |
40 |
547073 |
0 |
Rarely |
Iraq |
4000 |
300 |
100 |
On a regular basis |
Kenya |
868 |
300000 |
0 |
Never |
Rep. of Korea |
2800 |
200000 |
0 |
Rarely |
Kyrgyzstan |
164 |
30 |
7000 |
Rarely |
Malawi |
280 |
90000 |
30 |
Never |
Maldives |
60 |
4800 |
3900 |
Never |
Mexico |
15000 |
65000 |
0 |
Never |
Mongolia |
30 |
20000 |
10000 |
Never |
Mozambique |
500 |
48000 |
170 |
Rarely |
New Zealand |
106 |
18018 |
11 |
Never |
Palestine |
100 |
200 |
0 |
Rarely |
Panama |
3000 |
1000 |
200 |
On a regular basis |
Peru |
150 |
100 |
50 |
Never |
Rwanda |
50 |
75000 |
0 |
On a regular basis |
Samoa |
45 |
10 |
1500 |
Never |
Sao Tome and Principe |
32 |
54 |
|
Occasionally |
Senegal |
14 |
18163 |
11972 |
Never |
Sierra Leone |
200 |
40000 |
0 |
Never |
Suriname |
19 |
700 |
10 |
Never |
Tanzania |
143 |
250000 |
43 |
Never |
Thailand |
2000 |
1000000 |
2000000 |
Never |
Zimbabwe |
490 |
100 |
100000 |
Rarely |
Interestingly, except for Korea, the countries that employ a large number of permanent or temporary staff differ. Mexico, which employs the largest number of permanent employees, employs only about 65,000 temporary workers, and Afghanistan, which has an overwhelming number of temporary workers, has only 455 permanent employees. In contrast, Korea hires relatively more permanent workers as well as temporary workers to perform regular administrative and legislative election management tasks.
Such institutional and organizational capabilities of the NEC help the organization perform both its regular work and election management tasks effectively. Korea’s NEC has been entrusted with a variety of election tasks since 2005, including the oversight and operation of union leader elections for the National Forestry Cooperative Federation, the National Agricultural and Livestock Industry Cooperative Federations, and the National Federation of Fishery Cooperatives; following the legal institutionalization of corporate restructuring, general shareholders' meetings of private corporations; elections for national university chancellors; selections of executives for the Korean Federation of Community Credit Cooperatives; and union leader elections for apartment cooperatives. The consistent oversight and management of peacetime elections has helped further strengthen the capacity of the NEC. The NEC also introduced early voting in 2014, making it possible for voters to cast their ballot no matter what city or region they happen to reside in and greatly increasing the convenience of elections. The Commission additionally instituted electronic counting, reducing the potential for post-election by counting and announcing ballot counts in a prompt, public manner. An example of this is Korea’s presidential and legislative elections. The voting and ballot counting are broadcast in real time on election day, and election results are announced within 10 hours.
Next, Table 2 shows the degree of recognition that employees of the NEC have of the Commission’s independence and expertise. In terms of independence, Korea’s NEC scored 100 points along with Afghanistan and Costa Rica, but in terms of expertise, it scored 80 points after Bhutan, Malawi, Mexico and Peru. The results show that Korea’s NEC has a relatively positive assessment of its capacity compared to that of other election commissions. Of course, it is worth keeping in mind that Canada and the Netherlands, which are known to have high quality elections, were scored relatively low with regard to independence and expertise, while Mexico and Bhutan, which were rated highly for independence and expertise, received relatively low scores on the quality of their elections. This difference may simply be reflecting the stricter standards applied by New Zealand and Canadian election officials in their self-evaluations as compared to the standards applied by Mexican and Bhutan employees in evaluating their independence and expertise (Jaedong Choi and Jinman Cho, 2020).
The Independence and Professional Capacity of Election Commissions by Country
Country |
INDEPENDENT |
PROFESSIONAL |
Afghanistan |
100 |
60 |
Argentina |
20 |
60 |
Bahamas |
0 |
60 |
Bhutan |
80 |
100 |
Cambodia |
40 |
0 |
Canada |
20 |
40 |
Costa Rica |
100 |
80 |
Cote d'Ivoire |
20 |
80 |
Dominica |
80 |
40 |
Ghana |
60 |
60 |
Guam |
20 |
20 |
Guinea |
20 |
40 |
Indonesia |
60 |
60 |
Iraq |
60 |
60 |
Kenya |
60 |
80 |
Rep. of Korea |
100 |
80 |
Kyrgyzstan |
20 |
60 |
Malawi |
80 |
100 |
Maldives |
80 |
40 |
Mexico |
80 |
100 |
Mongolia |
20 |
80 |
Mozambique |
40 |
60 |
New Zealand |
40 |
80 |
Palestine |
20 |
60 |
Panama |
80 |
60 |
Peru |
80 |
100 |
Rwanda |
20 |
40 |
Samoa |
40 |
60 |
Sao Tome and Principe |
40 |
20 |
Senegal |
80 |
40 |
Sierra Leone |
60 |
80 |
Suriname |
0 |
40 |
Tanzania |
60 |
80 |
Thailand |
40 |
60 |
Zimbabwe |
60 |
60 |
The positive self-evaluation of the independence of Korea’s NEC reflects the historical experience of the Commission members. For example, in 1964, the year after the NEC was created, President Park Chung-hee went to inspect the NEC during his annual new year’s inspection of government departments, but President of the NEC, Sa Kwang-wook, refused to allow the visit, saying it was not appropriate for the executive to visit agencies that were designated as independent under the Constitution. In addition, during the National Assembly by-elections in Donghae City in 1988, Lee Hee-Chang, President of the NEC, filed a simultaneous complaint with the prosecutor's office regarding all five candidates and the election manager in a show of his strong will to have fair elections. This was the first case in the history of the NEC wherein the Commission charged a candidate, and later served as an opportunity to raise public interest in the NEC’s work through the media and engender positive public opinion on the importance of fair election management. These experiences are good examples of the importance of not only the legal and institutional foundation of the NEC but also the active will of the Commission’s members in maintaining the organization’s independence.
III. Fair Elections
The public's trust in political organizations reflects whether or not these political organizations are living up to the public’s expectations. The trustworthiness of the NEC is assessed subjectively by voters on the basis of the NEC's activities. Therefore, when the public recognizes that the NEC contributes to improving election quality, public trust in the organization will increase. This trust in turn creates a basis for the National Election Commission to effectively carry out its management and oversight tasks during future elections.
Center for Democracy Cooperation
South Korea Democracy Storytelling
Commentary·Issue Briefing
[ADRN Issue Briefing] Prospects for Democracy Amidst Two National Elections in Sri Lanka
Bhavani Fonseka | 2021-10-29