Why Only Four Candidates Participate in South Korean Presidential Debates
South Korean presidential debates are a significant platform for candidates to present their policies to the public. However, in the 2025 presidential election, only four candidates—Lee Jae-myung, Kim Moon-soo, Lee Jun-seok, and Kwon Young-guk—were seen on the televised debates. This selective appearance raises questions when there are a total of seven registered candidates. The reasons behind this selective participation are rooted in the criteria established by the South Korean Public Official Election Act.
The Criteria for Debate Participation
The Public Official Election Act outlines specific criteria that candidates must meet to participate in televised debates. According to Article 82-2 of the Act, a candidate can be invited to a debate if they meet one of the following conditions:
1. The candidate’s party holds at least five seats in the National Assembly.
2. The candidate’s party garnered at least 3% of the votes in any of the last presidential, legislative, or local elections.
3. The candidate has an average support rate of 5% or more in polls designated by the National Election Commission.
These stringent conditions mean that only candidates who meet at least one of these criteria are invited to participate in the debates aired during the prime time, from 8 PM to 10 PM, when viewership is at its peak.
Who Made the Cut and Why
In the 2025 presidential election, the candidates who satisfied these criteria were:
– **Lee Jae-myung** of the Democratic Party, fulfilling both the National Assembly seat and the past voting percentage criteria.
– **Kim Moon-soo** of the People Power Party, also meeting the assembly seat and party vote share requirements.
– **Lee Jun-seok** of the Reform Party, who, despite lacking the necessary assembly seats, maintained a support rate above 5% in polls.
– **Kwon Young-guk** of the Democratic Labor Party, who leveraged the historical 3% vote share from his time with the Justice Party.
These candidates were thus able to participate in the highly influential TV debates, gaining significant exposure to the electorate.
The Exclusion of the Remaining Candidates
The other three candidates—Koo Joo-hwa, Hwang Kyo-ahn, and Song Jin-ho—failed to meet the debate participation criteria:
– **Koo Joo-hwa** from the Liberty Unification Party did not have any seats in the National Assembly or a significant past vote share, nor did he achieve the necessary poll support.
– **Hwang Kyo-ahn**, running as an independent, was not affiliated with any party that could meet the required vote share or assembly seat conditions.
– **Song Jin-ho**, also an independent, lacked party backing and did not meet the polling threshold.
These candidates were consequently excluded from the prime time debates, limiting their visibility to the public.
A Single Opportunity for Non-Invited Candidates
Candidates who do not meet the invitation criteria are not entirely excluded from debates. They are given a single opportunity to participate in a “non-invited candidates’ debate.” However, these debates are often scheduled late at night, usually after 10 PM, when viewer engagement is minimal. This scheduling significantly reduces the impact these candidates can have on the electorate. For instance, in the 2022 election, candidate Heo Kyung-young participated in such a debate at 11 PM, expressing dissatisfaction despite having paid the same 300 million KRW deposit required of all candidates.
Is the Invitation Criteria Fair?
The criteria, while seemingly objective, have been criticized for favoring established parties and creating barriers for new or independent candidates. New parties, lacking historical vote shares or assembly seats, find it nearly impossible to meet the criteria. The 5% polling threshold is also a steep challenge without substantial media visibility. This structure often limits the diversity of political perspectives presented to the public.
Need for Reform in Debate Participation Rules
Considering the issues with the current debate participation rules, there is a growing call for reform. Critics suggest increasing the number of debates to provide more opportunities for all candidates to present their policies. Additionally, they argue for distributing debates across more accessible time slots to ensure voters can make informed decisions. There is also a push for guaranteeing a minimum level of media exposure for all candidates who have paid the required deposit.
In conclusion, the criteria that allowed only four candidates to participate in the prime time TV debates are rooted in the Public Official Election Act’s invitation conditions. However, these conditions are increasingly seen as inadequate in reflecting the current political landscape’s diversity. Ensuring a fair and comprehensive electoral process requires reevaluating these standards to enhance political diversity and voter choice. As televised debates are a crucial component of democratic engagement, improving these structures is imperative for a more inclusive democratic process.