Jung Chung-rae’s vision of party member sovereignty

Home > Opinion > Columns

Jung Chung-rae’s vision of party member sovereignty

Published: 09 Dec. 2025, 00:01

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Park Sang-hoon

The author is a political scientist.

Sovereignty is a fearsome concept. Even the law must fall silent before it. Sovereignty stands above legal authority, and those who hold power are often tempted by it. They want to equate their own will with that of the sovereign. When political leaders invoke sovereignty, caution is in order. Under Vladimir Putin, for example, the idea of “sovereign democracy” became an excuse for arbitrary rule.

Jung Chung-rae, leader of the Democratic Party, touches his face during a meeting of the party’s Supreme Council at the National Assembly in Yeouido, western Seoul, on Dec. 5. The constitutional and bylaw revisions he championed, including a “one person, one vote” system, were voted down the same day. [NEWS1]

One of the most common abuses of sovereignty is the use of referendums. Few tools more effectively remove the constraints of existing laws and institutions. The Park Chung Hee government used a national referendum to create the Yushin system, and when opposition from students and the political arena grew, it held another. In February 1975, a referendum on maintaining the Yushin Constitution produced 73 percent approval, after which dissent was punished as defiance of the sovereign itself.

Sovereignty is absolute. No authority can stand above it. It is exclusive, since outside intervention is considered interference. It is permanent, for even when governments change, sovereignty must hold for the state to endure. It must be singular; if two sovereignties exist, civil war follows. A people that relinquishes sovereignty becomes a colony. A person who abandons it lives as a stateless individual.

A political party and its members do not form a sovereign relationship. One may use metaphors such as “consumer sovereignty” or “party member sovereignty,” but these are only figures of speech meant to emphasize rights, not actual forms of political authority. A dissatisfied member may leave a party at any time. A party is a matter of voluntary choice; a state is not. No one is born a party member, and no one is forced to become one.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau described sovereignty as a form of “compulsion that makes people free.” To secure freedom from hunger, disease, war and disaster, citizens accept obligations such as taxation and national defense. The essence of sovereignty is coercive. Only through that coercive bond can the state provide secure liberty. The relationship between a party and its members does not resemble this at all. Leaving citizenship endangers one’s life chances; leaving a party does not.

Jung Chung-rae, leader of the Democratic Party (DP), nevertheless invokes the strained phrase “party member sovereignty.” He seeks to decide major party matters through referendums of party members and is eager to establish what he calls a “party member sovereignty bureau,” a new organizational unit designed to institutionalize that power. The intention is clear: to maximize the influence of the fandom members who support him, and to send a warning to legislators who do not. The message is, “If you disobey, the members will deal with you.”

Jung argues that the party’s institutions do not match the enthusiasm of party members. This is unconvincing. The DP does not operate through participation. Participation shares an origin with “part” and “partnership,” implying coordinated action among actors with distinct roles who respect one another and work together for a shared future. Saying “I am the sovereign, so things must be done my way” is not participation.

The party runs not on participation, but on mobilization. Who conducts campaign operations? Not ordinary party members. Campaigns rely on people mobilized for the task and the money required to hire them. A party truly driven by participatory energy would not need to hire paid workers who repeat slogans without making eye contact with voters. Nor do ordinary members lead local party activities. Local events are dominated by “core members.”

Core members include local councilors, district representatives and those with business interests linked to the party. They respond to the district chair’s mobilization demands out of fear of repercussions. They are responsible for reporting recruitment figures and promotional activities for the party. They are mobilized for rallies and demonstrations, with quotas allocated to each district chapter and attendance taken on site. Even rallies at the National Assembly draw participants mobilized by lawmakers’ offices and provincial party branches.

There are moments when rights-holding members do participate more actively, particularly when party leaders or presidential candidates are chosen. About 720,000 members voted in the DP’s 2022 presidential primary, with turnout at 51 percent. This April’s presidential primary saw 680,000 participants and 60 percent turnout, while 630,000 voted in the August leadership race. High stakes drive engagement in every party. But when less is at stake, participation falls sharply. Only 16.8 percent of rights-holding members voted on the recent amendments to the party’s constitution and bylaws.

Newly-elected Democratic Party leader Jung Chung-rae waves the party flag during the party’s national convention at Kintex in Goyang, Gyeonggi, on Aug. 2. [YONHAP]

No political party can sustain daily operations based on the sovereignty of party members. This is where Jung miscalculated. His fandom members may be numerous enough to threaten legislators, but they represent only a minority of the total membership. Relying on them to push through referendums was a mistake. Jung lost legitimacy, while pro-Lee Jae Myung fandom groups gained leverage.

Recasting rights as sovereignty is a distortion. A party dominated by a politicized fandom has no future. Yet neither Jung nor the DP can abandon the idea. Party member sovereignty has already become part of the party’s identity. Unable to implement or discard it, the DP now finds itself trapped by its own rhetoric.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.