Demands for "Re-Election" Grow, but Key Lies in Vote Margin Between Candidates

[Anchor]

Following the unprecedented "ballot paper shortage" that occurred on the day of the June 3 local elections, complaints and legal actions regarding poor election management are mounting. Along with condemnations of the infringement on voting rights, demands for a re-election are also emerging. Let's take a look at whether such a "re-election" is actually possible.

[Reporter]

① Legal Standards for Determining a Re-Election

[Jeong Jae-min / Attorney at JM Partners Law Firm: "A re-election is held when an election is declared invalid. However, making an election invalid is difficult. It is a given that election management regulations must have been violated, but that violation must also be capable of changing the outcome of the election for it to be declared void. (Is it correct that this incident is a violation of regulations?) Yes, that's correct. The shortage of ballot papers itself is problematic. Because ballots were not properly distributed, people voted late, and in that case, the ballot counting progress was already being exposed through the media or the internet. Since even the final election results were being exposed, it must be viewed as a very major violation of regulations. But that alone is not enough; the illegality must be capable of changing the first-place winner. So, two things are required: there must be an illegality regarding election management, and that illegality must affect the election outcome. If the outcome cannot be changed, the election cannot be declared invalid despite the illegality, meaning a re-election cannot be held."]

The core of whether a re-election can be held is whether the outcome could have changed. So, how can we determine this?

② The Key Lies in the Vote Margin Between Candidates

In other words, we estimate the number of voters who were unable to vote due to this incident and look at an extreme scenario where all of those votes are given to the second-place candidate.

Ultimately, the key is the difference in the number of votes between the two candidates.

The final vote margin in this Seoul mayoral election was 60,259 votes.


On the day of voting, the number of shorted ballots was about 2,000 in Songpa District alone.

For the entire city of Seoul, it is confirmed to be over 4,000 ballots.

[Jeong Jae-min / Attorney at JM Partners Law Firm: "If the number of missing ballots is around 5,000, even if we assume all 5,000 people voted for candidate Jeong Won-oh, the first and second places would not change. In that case, it becomes very difficult to obtain a ruling of invalidity."]

Could a re-election be possible if the vote margin is small?

In fact, as the ballot counting for Songpa District was added late, one proportional representation seat of Seoul—which was originally 8 seats for the Democratic Party of Korea and 7 seats for the People Power Party—was changed.

[Jeong Jae-min / Attorney at JM Partners Law Firm: "(For example, if the vote margin among city or district councilors is not large, can we not rule out the possibility of a re-vote?) That's right. In a narrow jurisdiction like a local city council, if the difference between first and second place is narrow, then the first and second places could change. In that case, there is a much higher chance of declaring it invalid. If it is declared invalid through a lawsuit, a re-election will be held."]

③ Demands for Re-Election by Elected Winners?

[Jeong Jae-min / Attorney at JM Partners Law Firm: "As it stands, it doesn't happen just because a candidate raises an issue and wants a re-election. Declaring an election invalid is done through a court ruling, so an immense level of fairness is required. Even if a candidate raises an issue, a re-election can only be held if the election is declared invalid."]

Ultimately, regardless of how serious this incident was, it is legally difficult for the election to be recognized as invalid.

Some are also talking about state compensation lawsuits to hold authorities accountable for the infringement of voting rights.

[Jeong Jae-min / Attorney at JM Partners Law Firm: "I think proving the illegality won't be that difficult. However, how much the alimony or damages resulting from it would be is a bit of a gray area. It will be quite difficult to prove that part."]

At a time when nerves are more frayed than ever over the fairness of future elections,

what needs to change first to prevent the same incident from happening again?
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.