BUSAN — Changwon National University's push to convert into an incorporated institution and a rule change that would allow President Park Min-won to seek a second term both came under scrutiny at a parliamentary audit. Lawmakers from both the ruling and opposition parties described the removal of the one-term limit, which would apply to the sitting president, as a "self-serving extension," and questioned the grounds and public consultation process behind the incorporation plan.
The National Assembly's Education Committee held an audit of regional national universities, including Changwon National University, at Pusan National University on the 21st. Rep. Jung Sung-kuk of the People Power Party, who represents Busanjin-A in Busan, took issue with a draft regulation on the selection of presidential candidates that the university put out for public comment on the 16th of this month. The draft deletes the phrase "shall serve a single term" from the current provision stating that "the president's term shall be four years and shall be a single term," and a supplementary clause would apply the change starting with the sitting president. It also includes a provision suspending the duties of a sitting president who runs again, from the time of candidate registration until the date the presidential nominee is selected. Park's term runs through February 2028, meaning he could seek another term if the draft takes effect.
"The person concerned is rewriting the rules for electing the president with his own hands," Jung said. "There are people strongly objecting that this has opened the way to a long stay in power." He added: "It brings to mind the question of presidential term extension that has been discussed in politics as well. Is it right for a university president to get caught up in this kind of controversy? Think about what dishonor you may have to live with later for trying to serve one more term."
Park responded that the matter had been referred to the faculty council and member organizations for review. "When the review results come out, we plan to humbly accept them," he said.
The scope and procedure of the incorporation plan also became a point of contention. Changwon National University has been reviewing options to convert into a national university under a special act or into an institute of science and technology, in response to declining student numbers and other pressures.
Rep. Baek Seung-ah, a proportional representation lawmaker of the Democratic Party of Korea, said the university's survey referred to "establishing the Gyeongnam Changwon Institute of Science and Technology (GCIST) under Changwon National University" and to "incorporation based on individual colleges." She asked whether creating a separate legal entity based on individual colleges was not fundamentally different from incorporating the entire university. Baek also asked when the incorporation and science institute plans were first taken up, and whether there had been prior discussions with the university administration before Gyeongsangnam-do Governor Park Wan-su announced his campaign pledge.
Park said a preparatory committee for public consultation would launch next week to hear the views of university members before any decision. "Nothing at all has been decided," he said. He added that the university had not yet consulted the Ministry of Education or the Ministry of Science and ICT on incorporation, nor held discussions with the National Assembly on enacting a special act.
The process by which "maintaining the status quo" was dropped from the public consultation agenda also drew questions. The original review options included conversion into a legal entity, merger with another national university, and maintaining the status quo, but the last option was excluded after a faculty affairs meeting in August. "If only conversion or merger are left on the table, there is bound to be criticism that the conclusion has already been set and consent is simply being sought," Baek said. "What is needed are reasons that university members and the local community can understand, and a proper public consultation process."
Park said all three options had been submitted to the faculty affairs meeting, and that the deans of the individual colleges had suggested removing the status quo option as an agenda item for change and innovation. "It was not something I removed personally," he said.
Within the university, conflict continues over checks on the president's authority. On the 8th of this month, the university asked the faculty council to review a plan to delete the faculty council review clause contained in Article 45 of the draft regulation and enforcement rules on the selection of presidential candidates. The move would eliminate the requirement that faculty council review be conducted when rules governing the presidential election are changed or abolished. Ahead of that, the regulations review committee passed the plan on the 15th of this month with nine votes in favor and five against. For the draft to take effect, it must undergo faculty council review and a faculty affairs meeting under the current rules before being promulgated by the president.
The university maintains that the regulations review committee can also serve as a check. "Just as the faculty council is not a decision-making body, the regulations review committee is not a decision-making body either but a deliberative body that presents opinions," a university official said. "Opinions raised at the regulations review committee are already being reflected to a considerable degree, and we believe that alone maintains the check."
Professors counter that the committee's composition makes it difficult to hold the president in check. Seven of the committee's 17 members serve ex officio, joining automatically when they take posts such as dean of academic affairs or section chief of a department or campus. The remaining 10 are appointed by the president from among faculty and staff, based on recommendations and other processes, and currently include nine professors and one staff member.