Understanding the Financial Requirements for Presidential Candidacy
Running for president in South Korea is not just a political endeavor; it is a significant financial commitment. According to the Public Official Election Act, any presidential candidate must deposit 300 million Korean won (approximately USD 250,000) to the National Election Commission. This deposit is intended to demonstrate the candidate’s seriousness and deter frivolous candidates. However, this requirement places a substantial financial burden on individuals, especially those running as independents.
Candidacy Deposit: A Deterrent or a Necessity?
The candidacy deposit, mandated by Article 56 of the Public Official Election Act, requires that the deposit be made in the candidate’s name. While political parties can provide financial support to their candidates, the official record must reflect the candidate’s personal contribution. This ensures accountability and discourages unwarranted candidacies. Independent candidates, without party support, must rely entirely on personal funds or external sponsors, which can be a major hurdle.
Reimbursement of Candidacy Deposit
Candidates who achieve a vote share of 15% or more have their entire deposit refunded. Those receiving between 10% and 15% get a 50% refund, while candidates with less than 10% lose their entire deposit. This policy underscores the importance of substantial voter support not just for electoral success but also for financial recovery.
Election Campaign Costs: Beyond the Deposit
The candidacy deposit is merely the tip of the iceberg. Actual election campaign costs can be staggering. Leading candidates like Yoon Suk-yeol from the People Power Party and Lee Jae-myung from the Democratic Party spent approximately 42.5 billion won (around USD 36 million) and 48.7 billion won (around USD 41 million) respectively during their campaigns. These figures illustrate the massive financial resources required to mount a competitive campaign.
Who Funds These Campaigns?
Campaign financing typically involves a combination of personal funds, party contributions, public funding, and donations. For party-affiliated candidates, financial support from the party and public funding can significantly alleviate the burden. However, independents must navigate the financial landscape without such institutional backing, often leading to limited campaign efforts or early withdrawal due to financial constraints.
Post-Election Reimbursements
Under Article 122 of the Public Official Election Act, the state reimburses election expenses based on the candidate’s vote share. Full reimbursement is granted for those exceeding 15%, while those between 10% and 15% receive 50% reimbursement. Candidates securing less than 10% bear the full financial burden, emphasizing the high stakes involved.
Case Study: The 2022 Presidential Election
In the 2022 presidential election, Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung, with vote shares of 48% and 47% respectively, received full reimbursement for their campaign expenses. Sim Sang-jung of the Justice Party, with a 6.4% vote share, received only partial reimbursement. Huh Kyung-young of the National Revolutionary Party, who failed to garner even 1%, had no expenses reimbursed, highlighting the financial risks of a low-performing candidacy.
Financial Implications for New Political Entrants
The financial model of South Korea’s presidential elections poses a significant barrier for newcomers and smaller parties. The necessity to secure at least 10% of the vote for any financial reimbursement underscores the importance of organizational strength, media presence, and financial resources. Candidates like Lee Jun-seok, with his new political party, face daunting financial challenges despite innovative platforms and youthful appeal.
Conclusion: The Financial Tightrope of Presidential Campaigns
Running for president in South Korea is a financially risky venture, particularly for independents and new party candidates. The requirement for substantial upfront deposits and the potential for losing millions if voter support fails to materialize underscore the financial tightrope these candidates walk. While the intention behind these financial requirements is to ensure serious candidacies, they also reinforce the need for robust financial backing and strategic planning in any presidential bid.