[Editorial] Change of the Government’s Venue Should Not Be Pushed Through

The government’s attempt to build an administrative capital is gaining speed. It said it would announce four or five possible sites for the capital and finalize it by August. Although it implements the project as planned, along the way, it’s been raising concerns that it is rushing through the change of the venue of administrative functions, a century’s policy by the country.

Although there has frequently been emphasis on moving just the administrative functions to another venue, it is not clear that what the government attempts is effectively to transfer the venue of the entire government. Then, the government should attempt to build national consensus about the plans by explaining the reason behind the transfer. It is hardly right for the government to push through the plans by brandishing the Special Law on Administrative Capital, the legislation passed at the National Assembly in December. Didn’t the Roh Moo-hyun government promise it would seek national consensus if it looks to move to a new capital? In opinion polls by the mass media, 60-70 percent of respondents said they want a national vote on the issue of capital transfer, regardless of whether they support or oppose the scheme.

The transfer of the capital is such an important issue which could determine the fate and future of the country. Any mistake will cost even the next generations dearly. Therefore, a regime which is merely responsible for the government of a certain limited period should not be allowed to roughly push through the issue of such a magnitude. In 1990, the Japanese Diet resolved to build an administrative capital, but the scheme did not come through in the face of the opposition of the Tokyo prefecture, coupled with the economic recession. The Japanese failure offers a lesson.

It should be remembered that the previous regimes’ ambitious projects—a reclamation project at Semangeum, the construction of a nuclear reprocessing facility, and the construction of a new national shrine in Seoul— were all ceased or failed.

The reason why the government should first seek prudence, legal justification, and national consensus for the transfer of the capital is that they are all indispensable to the smooth and successful implementation of the project. By doing so, the main players of the project will be rightly evaluated for their historical perspective and vision for the future by generations to come.