1. Introduction.
Recently, news regarding constitutional amendments has been quietly released to the public.
In this context, I have organized my thoughts on several provisions that, in my view, require revision.
The key issues are as follows:
2. Detailed Analysis of Each Provision.
D. Abolition of Statutes of Limitations in Civil and Criminal Cases Involving State Power.
In cases where the rights of sovereign citizens have been violated due to the misuse, abuse, or intentional distortion of state authority, the statute of limitations in civil cases and the statute of limitations in criminal cases should be explicitly removed through constitutional amendment.
A. The Institution Authorized to Request Warrants.
Warrants—whether for seizure, search, or arrest—are indispensable procedural tools for investigative agencies to effectively carry out their duties.
It is therefore a matter of fundamental logic that the authority to request such warrants should rest exclusively with investigative bodies.
The outdated system, in which political prosecutors or other actors unrelated to investigation can exploit the warrant process as a tool of political predation or coercion, cannot be allowed to persist unchanged for another seventy years.
B. Removal of the Prohibition on Consecutive or Multiple Presidential Terms.
The constitutional ban on consecutive or multiple presidential terms was originally introduced to prevent the recurrence of authoritarian extensions of power— such as the four consecutive terms pursued through three constitutional amendments under former President Park Chung‑hee, and the subsequent three‑term structure under his successor Chun Doo‑hwan.
These provisions were designed to restrain authoritarian military regimes of the past.
However, more than seventy years have passed since that era. In today’s democratic environment, the conditions that once enabled military or prosecutorial authoritarianism to forcibly extend power have fundamentally changed.
If a political leader, acting as an instrument of the sovereign people, faithfully fulfills the duties entrusted to them and effectively advances national development, then the sovereign people should retain the option to re‑employ that capable instrument—whether through consecutive or multiple terms— in order to realize their collective will and fulfill the nation’s historical responsibilities.
C. Abolition of the Clause Excluding the Incumbent President from Revised Term‑Limit Provisions.
Regarding the current President Lee Jae‑myung:
He emerged from the marginalized communities formed by displaced families who, driven from the benefits of state‑led metropolitan development, settled on the outskirts of Seongnam.
Born into a family of urban poor who survived through harsh labor such as cleaning public toilets, he endured extreme poverty, malnutrition, and the constant threat of overwork.
With only an elementary‑school education and working as a child laborer, he spent his adolescence watching peers attend school in uniforms he could not afford, while he himself suffered a workplace injury that left lasting physical impairment.
Through these experiences, he came to understand firsthand the suffering of the urban poor.
Motivated by a desire to improve their living conditions, he entered politics as the most effective means to pursue social welfare and human dignity for those who shared his background.
If he continues to uphold his original convictions and faithfully serves as an instrument of the sovereign people— advancing their will, safeguarding peace on the Korean Peninsula, and contributing to global stability— then opening the path for consecutive or multiple terms would allow the sovereign people to re‑deploy a capable tool for the sake of the nation, the people, and world peace.
Such a decision would not be for personal benefit, but for the fulfillment of a historical mission essential to the future of the nation and to the broader currents of world history.
3. Conclusion.
A leader who has personally endured the harshest struggles of life— growing up in an impoverished urban‑poor family, working as a child laborer, and overcoming the most severe hardships— is, in many perspectives, an individual shaped by history and providence.
If such a person retains their original commitment to the people, then allowing their continued service is not merely a political choice but a matter of national and global utility.
Re‑employing such an instrument— one prepared by history, sent as a tool for the nation, and capable of carrying the burdens of the people and the world— constitutes a profoundly meaningful act for the future of the nation, the people, and humanity.
|
