1,309,931 invalid votes for proportional representation were counted in South Korea’s general election on Apr. 10. This record-high number accounted for 4.4% of the total votes for proportional representation. The New Reform Party won two proportional representation seats and became the fourth party with 3.6% of the votes. It was the “Invalid Vote Party,” which might have been the fourth party. While there’s a common perception that invalid votes stem from ballot marking mistakes, they can also serve as a means for voters to express their intention of “not supporting any candidate.”
The percentage of invalid votes for proportional representation jumped from 1.6%, 2.2%, and 2.7% in the 18th, 19th, and 20th general elections, respectively, to 4.2% in the 21st election following the implementation of the current election law. The key to the latest election law lies in “the semi-mixed-member proportional representation system,” a messy term that even legislators struggle to grasp fully. Only a handful of people in the country are probably fully aware of the system. The biggest problem with this system is that it encourages the proliferation of “faddish” satellite parties. These satellite parties opted for names similar to the Democratic Party (DP) or the People Power Party (PPP) since they couldn’t use the same names. This may lead to voters’ confusion and frustration at the polls, and that really did. In the previous general election, there were 35 proportional parties, resulting in a lengthy 48-centimeter ballot. This time, with 38 parties, it extended to 51.7 centimeters. Only seven parties managed to garner more than 1% of the vote, and twenty-one parties received less than 0.1%.
Before the 21st parliamentary elections, the main opposition Democratic Party pushed the passage of the controversial electoral law with minor parties excluding South Korea’s ruling People Power Party (PPP). This is unprecedented in democracies around the world for one political party to unilaterally change the rules of the elections. They went too far to establish the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials. In other words, they revised a well-established electoral law and introduced the semi-mixed-member proportional representation system in exchange for the cooperation of minor parties. However, the investigation office became a squandering-taxes, and ineffective organization, and the Progressive Party, an advocate for “that election law,” ceased to exist. Satellite parties increasing their candidate numbers by recruiting incumbents from other parties to secure a favorable ballot order has also become a typical practice.
Many controversial lawmakers in the 21st National Assembly, including Yoon Mee-hyang, Choi Kang-wook, Kim Eui-kyeom, Yang YiWon-young, and Kim Hong-geol, are from proportional satellite parties. Furthermore, at least five of the 12 proportional representation candidates from the Rebuilding Korea Party who secured seats in the 22nd general election have backgrounds as ex-convicts, suspects, or defendants. Two Progressive Party members, embroiled in anti-American and anti-North Korean controversies, were also elected as members of the Democratic Party’s proportional satellite party. The 22nd general election should mark the end of the absurd election law.
