Constitutional reform requires clarity on Lee's re-election

President Lee Jae Myung wrote on X on Friday that his campaign pledge was to change the presidency to a four-year system allowing either consecutive re-election or two nonconsecutive terms, enabling greater political accountability through a midterm evaluation. He was clarifying his position after reports that constitutional revision came up during a golf gathering with senior People Power Party lawmakers last month. Lee added that he could accept shortening his current term if necessary.

Yet the controversy has shifted toward suspicions that Lee himself could seek another term. Rather than focusing on the need for constitutional reform, debate is becoming consumed by questions over whether the incumbent president could run again.

A similar controversy erupted after National Assembly Speaker Cho Jeong-sik said whether a constitutional amendment could allow presidential re-election “depends on the will of the people.” The presidential office responded that under the current Constitution, an amendment permitting the incumbent president to serve another term is “realistically impossible.”

Still, suspicions persist because Lee has not stated unequivocally that he would not seek re-election or another term even if the Constitution were amended.

The Constitution stipulates that the president serves a single five-year term and cannot be re-elected. It also states that an amendment extending a president’s term or permitting re-election does not apply to the president in office when the amendment is proposed. These provisions were designed to prevent a return to authoritarian-era attempts to prolong presidential rule.

Despite those constitutional barriers and public expectations, ambiguity remains. Lee has said he could shorten his term, but critics suspect the ruling Democratic Party ultimately wants a system that could permit him either one consecutive re-election under a four-year renewable term or another term later under a two-term system.

The result is that controversy over Lee’s future is undermining momentum for constitutional revision, one of his administration’s major policy goals.

Many Koreans agree that constitutional reform is needed to address problems associated with the powerful presidency created by the 1987 Constitution. Precisely because presidents have wielded such extensive authority, however, the public remains particularly sensitive to proposals affecting presidential tenure.

That is why opposition politicians say they could participate in constitutional reform if Lee simply promises that he will never seek another term. Without such a clear commitment, the current reform drive risks being viewed not as an effort to improve Korea’s political system but as a political tool intended to reverse the president’s slide to his lowest approval ratings.