🚨 Filibuster

Today Korean Social News for Beginners | 2025.12.07

0️⃣ A Tool to Protect Minorities or a Way to Block Laws?

📌 Year-End National Assembly Sees Heated Filibuster Battle Over Judicial Reform Bills

💬 As the Democratic Party announced plans to pass judicial reform bills by year-end, the National Assembly has entered a new phase of conflict. The People Power Party plans to respond with a filibuster, but the Democratic Party says it will first pass a National Assembly Act amendment that allows the Speaker to stop debates if fewer than 60 members are present. With both parties facing internal conflicts, the year-end National Assembly session is expected to see even fiercer confrontations. The People Power Party announced it will continue its full-force blocking strategy through filibusters on the 9th and in following special sessions, regardless of whether items are placed on the plenary agenda. While filibusters have been seen as a tool for minorities to check the majority's unilateral proceedings, they have also been consistently criticized for potentially paralyzing the entire National Assembly.

💡 Summary

• A filibuster is an unlimited debate procedure to delay the passage of specific bills in parliament.
• The Democratic Party's National Assembly Act amendment would require at least 60 members present to continue debate.
• The balance between protecting minority rights and legislative efficiency is the key issue.

1️⃣ Definition

A filibuster is an unlimited debate procedure in which lawmakers speak for extended periods to delay or block the passage of specific bills. The English word 'filibuster' originally meant 'pirate', but it became a term metaphorically describing actions that obstruct parliamentary proceedings.

In Korea, according to Article 106-2 of the National Assembly Act, unlimited debate can begin if requested by one-third or more of all members. Once a filibuster starts, it continues until either a motion to end debate passes by vote, or speakers voluntarily end their remarks. This is a systematic device for minorities to check the majority's unilateral proceedings and ensure sufficient debate.

💡 Why is this important?

• Parliamentary democracy values not only majority rule but also protecting minority opinions.
• Filibusters play a role in systematically guaranteeing the voices of minorities.
• They also function to reconsider problems in bills through debate.
• When abused, they can delay legislative functions and only intensify extreme political confrontations.

2️⃣ Current Status and Issues of Filibusters

📕 History of Filibusters in Korea's National Assembly

• It was formally established through a 2012 National Assembly Act amendment. Key developments include:

  • The filibuster was first introduced into Korean law through a May 2012 National Assembly Act amendment.
  • It stipulated that unlimited debate could begin if requested by one-third or more of all members.
  • To end debate, a motion to conclude must pass with three-fifths or more of all members' approval.
  • Initially it was not used often, but gradually began to be utilized in major bill processes.

• The 2016 filibuster to block the Anti-Terrorism Act became a major topic. Key details include:

  • Opposition lawmakers conducted a 192-hour (8-day) filibuster to stop the Anti-Terrorism Act.
  • 38 lawmakers participated in relay speeches, with debates continuing for an extended period.
  • This incident made filibusters widely known to the general public.
  • While it contributed to expanding minority speaking rights, it began to be frequently used as a political weapon thereafter.

📕 Current National Assembly Situation and Issues

• The Democratic Party announced plans to process judicial reform bills. Background includes:

  • The Democratic Party stated it would process judicial reform-related bills by year-end.
  • In response, the People Power Party expressed its position to block this with a filibuster.
  • With sharp confrontation expected between the two parties, the year-end National Assembly situation is becoming tense.
  • With both parties experiencing internal conflicts, the need for external issue conversion is also growing.

• The Democratic Party is pushing a National Assembly Act amendment. Key contents include:

  • It would establish a requirement that at least 60 members must be present in the plenary chamber for unlimited debate to continue.
  • If fewer than 60 members are present, the Speaker can stop the debate.
  • This could work unfavorably for minority parties that find it difficult to maintain personnel for continued debate.
  • The opposition strongly criticizes this as a deterioration that reduces minority rights.

• The balance between minority rights and legislative efficiency is the issue. Main debates include:

  • Filibusters have positive aspects of protecting minority opinions.
  • However, there is also criticism that they paralyze the National Assembly and delay legislative functions.
  • Concerns are raised that they degenerate into political shows or time-wasting.
  • Reasonable operation methods that fit democratic principles are needed.

💡 Key Issues with Filibusters

1. Protecting minorities: A democratic device to check the majority party's unilateral processing
2. Legislative delays: Side effects of paralyzing the entire National Assembly and blocking necessary bills
3. Political weaponization: Risk of degenerating into time-wasting and shows rather than substantive debate
4. Requirement strengthening controversy: Is establishing a 60-member attendance requirement reducing minority rights?
5. Democratic principles: Finding balance between majority rule and protecting minority opinions

3️⃣ Plans for Reasonable Filibuster Operation

✅ Directions for System Improvement

• Devices are needed to prevent reckless abuse. Main measures include:

  • Filibusters should be used only for truly important bills.
  • To ensure substantive debate, measures can be considered to limit remarks unrelated to the agenda.
  • Rules can also be considered that automatically bring matters to a vote after debate continues for a certain time.
  • However, careful design is needed to avoid excessively restricting minority rights.

• A culture of substantive debate must be established. Main tasks include:

  • Filibusters should be made into venues for serious debate, not just time-wasting.
  • They should be used to specifically point out problems in bills and propose alternatives.
  • Their positive function of informing citizens about issues and raising public opinion should be strengthened.
  • They should be evaluated as substantive legislative activities, not political shows.

✅ U.S. Cases and Implications

• The U.S. Senate filibuster system can be referenced. Key features include:

  • The U.S. Senate has had filibusters established systematically for a long time.
  • Initially there was no time limit on debate, but in 1917 the 'cloture' rule was introduced.
  • Cloture is a system that ends debate with the consent of three-fifths of members (60 people).
  • Since then, cloture requirements have been adjusted several times to check filibuster abuse.

• The advantages and disadvantages of the system must be evaluated in a balanced way. Key implications include:

  • The U.S. experience shows that filibusters have been continuously adjusted between protecting minority opinions and parliamentary inefficiency.
  • If strengthened too much, parliament becomes paralyzed; if weakened too much, minorities are silenced.
  • Korea's National Assembly must also continuously improve the system to find this balance point.
  • Reasonable operation based on democratic principles, not factional interests, is important.

✅ Citizens' Roles and Tasks

• Citizens' interest and oversight are needed. Main roles include:
  • Citizens must judge whether filibusters are genuine debate or political shows.
  • They must critically evaluate the validity of problems and claims raised by lawmakers.
  • They should criticize reckless abuse and support legitimate use.
  • Interest and participation in legislative activities ensure healthy operation of the system.

4️⃣ Related Terms Explained

🔎 Unlimited Debate

• Unlimited debate is a parliamentary procedure allowing speech without time limits.
  • Unlimited debate refers to a system where lawmakers can speak freely about specific agenda items without time constraints. As a core element of filibusters, it is a means for minorities to prevent rushed processing by the majority and demand sufficient debate.
  • In Korea's National Assembly, unlimited debate can begin if requested by one-third or more of all members. To end debate, either a motion to conclude must pass with three-fifths or more of all members' approval, or speakers must voluntarily end their remarks. In this process, one lawmaker may speak continuously for several to dozens of hours.
  • While unlimited debate has positive functions of pointing out problems in bills and proposing alternatives, there is also a risk it could degenerate into simply wasting time or paralyzing parliament. Therefore, devices are needed to ensure substantive debate and prevent abuse.

🔎 Cloture

• Cloture is a procedure to end debate and move to voting.
  • Cloture refers to a procedure in the U.S. Senate to end unlimited debate (filibuster). Derived from the French word 'clôture' meaning 'closure', it allows debate to end and voting to begin if a certain number of lawmakers agree.
  • Cloture was first introduced in the U.S. Senate in 1917, when it required two-thirds of all members' consent. In 1975, the requirement was eased to three-fifths of all members (60 people). This established a realistic standard for ending filibusters.
  • In Korea's National Assembly, 'motion to end debate' functions similarly to cloture. Unlimited debate can be ended with three-fifths or more of all members' approval. This serves as a safety device that guarantees minorities' debate rights while preventing complete parliamentary paralysis.

🔎 National Assembly Act Article 106-2

• National Assembly Act Article 106-2 is the provision on unlimited debate.
  • National Assembly Act Article 106-2 was newly established through a May 2012 amendment and stipulates the requirements and procedures for unlimited debate (filibuster). This article introduced filibusters systematically into Korea's National Assembly.
  • Main contents include: First, unlimited debate can be conducted if requested by one-third or more of all members. Second, when a motion to end debate is proposed, voting occurs without debate. Third, the motion to end passes with three-fifths or more of all members' approval. Fourth, motions to change the agenda cannot be made during unlimited debate.
  • This article balances guaranteeing minorities' right to express opinions systematically while allowing the majority to end debate if certain requirements are met. The current amendment pushed by the Democratic Party aims to strengthen this article by adding a 60-member attendance requirement, causing controversy over reducing minority rights.

🔎 Minority Rights

• Minority rights are a core value of parliamentary democracy.
  • Minority rights refer to the systematic powers that minorities, who are numerically inferior to the majority in parliament, possess. While democracy is based on the principle of majority rule, respecting and protecting minority opinions is also an important value.
  • Main aspects of minority rights include: First, guaranteed sufficient debate and speaking opportunities. Second, having means to check the majority's unilateral proceedings. Third, opportunities to point out problems in bills and propose alternatives. Fourth, being able to inform citizens of their positions and raise public opinion.
  • Filibusters are a representative device protecting minority rights. Even with just one-third of all members, unlimited debate can begin, so even minority parties are guaranteed opportunities for expression. However, if these rights are abused, the entire parliament can be paralyzed, so finding balance between protecting minorities and legislative efficiency is the challenge.

5️⃣ Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q: Who can start a filibuster and how?

A: Unlimited debate can begin if requested by one-third or more of all members.

• To start a filibuster in Korea's National Assembly requires consent from one-third or more of all members. If there are 300 National Assembly members, at least 100 must sign. This ensures unlimited debate is only possible when a considerable number of lawmakers, even if a minority, agree. When a request is submitted, the National Assembly Speaker accepts it and unlimited debate begins.
• Once unlimited debate starts, lawmakers can speak freely about that agenda item without time limits. One lawmaker may speak continuously for several to dozens of hours, and multiple lawmakers may continue debate in relay fashion. To end debate, either a motion to conclude must pass with three-fifths or more of all members' approval, or speakers must end debate themselves. If the motion to conclude is rejected, debate continues.

Q: What do you do during a filibuster? Can you say anything?

A: In principle, remarks should be related to the agenda, but in practice this is interpreted broadly.

• According to the National Assembly Act, unlimited debate should involve remarks about the agenda item. Therefore, one should speak about problems with the bill, arguments for and against, proposing alternatives, and other content related to the agenda. However, in practice, remarks cover various topics that can be seen as indirectly related to the agenda. For example, during the 2016 Anti-Terrorism Act filibuster, broad topics like human rights, democracy, and historical cases were addressed.
• The Speaker can stop remarks unrelated to the agenda, but the scope of 'relatedness' is often interpreted broadly. Some lawmakers read books or tell lengthy personal stories. In the U.S., there have been cases of reading phone books or reciting recipes. While these actions are criticized as time-wasting, they are not stopped unless extreme. What matters is maintaining continuous speech so debate doesn't break. The important thing is keeping speech going so the debate doesn't end.

Q: If the Democratic Party's National Assembly Act amendment passes, will filibusters disappear?

A: They won't completely disappear, but execution difficulty will greatly increase.

• The amendment pushed by the Democratic Party establishes a requirement that at least 60 members must be present in the plenary chamber for unlimited debate to continue. If numbers drop below 60, the Speaker can stop debate. This doesn't ban filibusters themselves, but makes them substantially difficult because many people must be continuously mobilized to maintain long debates.
• Particularly minority parties or opposition parties with few seats will find it hard to maintain 60 people continuously. It becomes difficult for lawmakers to take turns resting or handle other schedules, making long-term filibusters virtually impossible. Conversely, the majority party finds it relatively easy to mobilize personnel, so this requirement works unfavorably for minorities. The opposition criticizes this as a deterioration that seriously undermines minority rights and raises concerns that it restricts legislative activities guaranteed by the Constitution.

View Table of Contents

• Go to Guide