Understanding the Selection Criteria for South Korean Presidential TV Debates
The South Korean presidential election is a critical event, yet only a select few candidates appear in the highly anticipated TV debates. In the upcoming 2025 election, only four candidates—Lee Jae-myung, Kim Moon-soo, Lee Jun-seok, and Kwon Young-guk—have been invited to participate, despite there being a total of seven registered candidates. Why is this the case?
The Legal Framework: Election Law and TV Debates
The criteria for who gets to appear in these debates are governed by the Public Official Election Act, specifically Article 82-2. This article outlines the prerequisites for participating in what are referred to as “invitation candidate debates.” The criteria are as follows:
1. The candidate must belong to a political party that holds at least five seats in the National Assembly.
2. The candidate’s party must have garnered at least 3% of the vote in one of the recent presidential, legislative, or local elections.
3. The candidate must have an average support rate of 5% or more in polls designated by the National Election Commission.
Meeting any one of these criteria grants candidates the opportunity to participate in the prime-time TV debates, broadcasted by major networks like KBS, MBC, and SBS between 8 PM and 10 PM.
Who Are the Four Candidates and Why Were They Chosen?
In the 2025 presidential election, four candidates met the criteria for TV debate inclusion:
– **Lee Jae-myung** of the Democratic Party fulfills both the National Assembly seats and past voting percentage requirements.
– **Kim Moon-soo** of the People Power Party also meets the seat and voting percentage criteria.
– **Lee Jun-seok** from the Reform Party, though lacking sufficient seats, has consistently maintained a poll support rate exceeding 5%.
– **Kwon Young-guk** of the Democratic Labor Party benefits from past election performance, where his former party, the Justice Party, achieved a vote share above 3%.
The Exclusion of Other Candidates: A Closer Look
Candidates such as Koo Joo-hwa, Hwang Kyo-ahn, and Song Jin-ho did not meet the criteria:
– **Koo Joo-hwa** of the Freedom Unification Party lacks parliamentary representation and a significant voting history.
– **Hwang Kyo-ahn**, running as an independent, doesn’t fulfill any party-based requirements and struggles with poll support.
– **Song Jin-ho**, also independent, is without party backing or historical election success.
The Single Opportunity for Non-Invited Candidates
Candidates not meeting the debate criteria are not entirely excluded. They are given one chance to participate in a “non-invitation candidate debate.” This event, however, often takes place late at night, typically after 10 PM, when viewership is significantly lower. For example, during the 2022 election, candidate Heo Kyung-young’s debate aired at 11 PM, drawing criticism for the lack of visibility despite paying the same candidacy deposit of 300 million won as others.
Is the Current Invitation Criteria Fair?
While the criteria seem straightforward, they arguably favor well-established parties and candidates. New parties with no parliamentary seats or previous election performance struggle to qualify. Achieving a 5% poll rate is also challenging given limited media exposure. Thus, the system may inadvertently create barriers for emerging and independent candidates, curtailing political diversity.
Calls for Reform in Debate Participation
Given the practical constraints of broadcast time, some argue for more inclusive debate formats. Suggestions include hosting multiple debates for non-invited candidates or scheduling these sessions at more viewer-friendly times. There’s also advocacy for ensuring that all candidates who pay the deposit are granted a reasonable level of public exposure, as this aligns with democratic principles.
Conclusion: Rethinking the Debate Framework
The participation of Lee Jae-myung, Kim Moon-soo, Lee Jun-seok, and Kwon Young-guk in prime-time debates highlights the impact of the current legal criteria. However, as society evolves, it’s crucial to reassess whether these criteria adequately reflect the diverse political landscape and voter expectations. Ultimately, TV debates are more than just broadcasts—they are vital tools for informed democratic decision-making, underscoring the need for ongoing improvement in access and fairness.