Filibuster Suspension Bill Passes Steering Committee... Clash Over Presidential Office Personnel Requests and Jang Donghyuk's Remarks

National Assembly Steering Committee Passes Amendment to Assembly Act Amid Opposition Walkout
Ruling Party: "A Bill to Normalize Filibusters"
Opposition: "A Bill to Suppress the Opposition and Trample on Parliament"

The partial amendment to the National Assembly Act, which strengthens the requirements for a filibuster (unlimited debate) by mandating the attendance of one-fifth of all lawmakers at the plenary session, passed the National Assembly Steering Committee on December 3. The People Power Party, which has frequently used filibusters for contentious bills, strongly objected, calling it a 'means of suppressing the opposition.'

The Steering Committee convened a plenary session at 10 a.m. that day and, led by the ruling party, approved the amendment to the National Assembly Act, making it easier to end a filibuster. Lawmakers from the People Power Party walked out just before the vote in protest, and only lawmakers from the Democratic Party, the Rebuilding Korea Party, and the Progressive Party participated in the vote.

Previously, the Subcommittee on Improving Parliamentary Operations, chaired by Democratic Party lawmaker Moon Jinseok, consolidated various amendment bills to the National Assembly Act, each proposing new requirements for ending a filibuster, submitted by Democratic Party lawmakers Moon Jinseok, Kim Hankyu, Min Hyungbae, Lee Geontae, and Moon Geumjoo, and forwarded them to the plenary session on November 26. The People Power Party did not attend the subcommittee meeting either.

According to the amendment, when a filibuster is underway, a lawmaker designated by the Speaker may preside over the session. If the number of lawmakers present falls short of one-fifth of the total membership (60 out of 300 lawmakers), and if a floor leader requests verification of a quorum, the Speaker must declare the session suspended. The amendment also stipulates that if the Speaker is unable to preside over the unlimited debate, a lawmaker designated by the Speaker must do so.

Ruling Party: "A Bill to Normalize Filibusters" vs Opposition: "A Bill to Suppress the Opposition and Trample on Parliament"

Kim Byungki, Chairman of the National Assembly Steering Committee, is presiding over the plenary session held at the National Assembly on December 3, 2025. Photo by Kim Hyunmin

The ruling party explained that the amendment aims to reduce the fatigue of the National Assembly’s leadership and resolve the problem of debates stalling due to a lack of lawmakers present. In response, the People Power Party argued that the ruling party is attempting to revise parliamentary procedures to ensure the smooth passage of judicial reform bills, thereby neutralizing the legitimate resistance tools of minority opposition parties.

Park Chungkwon, a lawmaker from the People Power Party, criticized, "This is a one-party dictatorship law that takes away even the last resort. If filibusters are blocked under the current parliamentary structure, any problematic bill from the Democratic Party or the ruling bloc will pass without any obstacles." Lawmaker Kang Sunyoung added, "This filibuster bill is a cowardly attempt to eliminate the opposition. If the Democratic Party wants to abolish the prosecution, control the judiciary, and wipe out the opposition without any restrictions, they should just propose a bill to abolish the filibuster entirely and face the judgment of the people."

Lawmaker Kim Eunhye cited the U.S. filibuster system, saying, "In the United States, the majority party is held responsible for failing to meet the quorum. There is a clear difference from the Democratic Party's amendment to the National Assembly Act. In the U.S., regardless of whether debate is suspended or resumed, the minority party is guaranteed an absolute 30 hours of debate." She went on to mention the ruling party's plans to push through bills such as the expansion of Supreme Court justices, Constitutional Court Act amendments, distortion of law crimes, and the Outdoor Advertising Act, stating, "I oppose this amendment to the National Assembly Act, which would tie the hands and feet of the opposition. This is what constitutes parliamentary tyranny."

In contrast, the Democratic Party insisted that the bill is necessary to normalize the filibuster. Lawmaker Seo Mihwa argued, "In just a year and a half since the 22nd National Assembly convened, there have been seven filibusters, covering as many as 16 agenda items. Using the filibuster as an excuse to disrupt state affairs and public livelihood, and turning the National Assembly into a battleground for political strife, is a clear dereliction of duty." She emphasized, "This amendment to the National Assembly Act is the first step toward moving beyond the scars of insurrection and restoring politics and public welfare."

Lawmaker Heo Young pointed out, "This bill is intended to ensure responsible and proper conduct of filibusters." Lawmaker Kim Youngbae added, "Can the current situation, where lawmakers repeatedly deliver speeches alone in an empty chamber, really be considered a legitimate act of protest in a normal democratic republic?" He also criticized Deputy Speaker Joo Ho-young of the People Power Party, saying, "It is truly bizarre for one of the Deputy Speakers to refuse to preside. If the party he belongs to keeps initiating filibusters, yet he refuses to preside over them, does that mean he opposes filibusters?"

Opposition: "Presidential Office Personnel Requests Must Be Investigated" vs Ruling Party: "Martial Law on December 3 Was to Resist Parliamentary Tyranny; Jang Donghyuk and People Power Party Must Reflect"

During the Steering Committee plenary session, a controversy erupted over a text message exchange between Moon Jinseok, the Democratic Party’s Senior Deputy Floor Leader and ruling party secretary of the committee, and Kim Namguk, Secretary for Digital Communication at the Presidential Office, regarding a personnel request, which was captured during the National Assembly plenary session.

Moon mentioned Hong Seongbeom, former head of the Korea Automobile Manufacturers Association, saying, "He is my junior from my military unit, served as a spokesperson during the governor’s campaign, and was head of the automobile association, so he seems qualified to be president. Could you recommend him for me? If I recommend him, Chief of Staff Kang Hoonshik will object, so could you recommend him instead?" Kim replied, "Yes, I will recommend him to Hoonshik and Hyunji." (Kim Hyunji is the First Deputy Chief of Staff at the Presidential Office.) Moon did not attend the Steering Committee meeting that day.

Joo Jinwoo, a lawmaker from the People Power Party, pointed out, "The president of the Korea Automobile Manufacturers Association is not appointed by the Presidential Office but selected by private member companies. Also, Kim Hyunji and the Digital Communication Secretary are not involved in personnel matters." He continued, "This incident has exposed to the public how personnel abuses occur in the Presidential Office. A thorough investigation is needed."

Seo Jiyeong, another lawmaker from the same party, said, "If Kim Hyunji is actually involved in personnel decisions, then instead of the reckless Choi Dongseok as head of the Ministry of Personnel Management, Kim Hyunji should be appointed to that position. The President has said, 'Anyone who makes personnel requests will be ruined.' We will watch to see if the President's personnel philosophy is truly realized."

The ruling party counterattacked, targeting Jang Donghyuk, leader of the People Power Party, who refused to apologize, stating, "The December 3 martial law was imposed to resist parliamentary tyranny." Kim Junhyuk, a Democratic Party lawmaker, said, "The Constitutional Court ruled that martial law was an act of destruction against the Constitution, an abnormal and irrational act, and held (former President Yoon Sukyeol) accountable for insurrection and removed him from office. Jang’s remarks deny both the Constitutional Court’s ruling and the Constitution," urging an apology from the People Power Party.

Lawmaker Kim Gipyo also criticized, "Was it not just a year ago that criticism from the National Assembly and the public was suppressed by military force, with the intent to remain in power indefinitely? How can the party leader claim that this was an act of resistance against parliamentary tyranny? Get a grip."

Shin Jangshik, a lawmaker from the Rebuilding Korea Party, which is aligned with the ruling bloc, noted that several bills have been submitted to designate December 3 as a commemorative day, saying, "We need to discuss and decide whether to mark it as a day of suppressing parliamentary tyranny or as a day of popular sovereignty and constitutional democracy. I ask the floor leaders and the Steering Committee chairman to discuss how December 3 should be commemorated."

Yonhap News Agency

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.