[Park Joo-hee, Managing Partner at Law Firm J] An unacceptable incident occurred during the 9th nationwide local elections held on the 3rd. Voting was suspended at some polling stations, including those in Songpa-gu, Seoul, due to a shortage of ballots. Even after the legal voting deadline of 6:00 p.m. had passed, and with exit poll results already announced and vote counting underway, an unusual situation arose where voting was extended until 10:00 p.m. at some polling stations.

The essence of this incident is not why such a problem occurred at polling stations where a specific candidate was leading. The core issue is that the electoral process itself—which upholds the people’s right to vote guaranteed by the Constitution and the legitimacy of democracy—was compromised. This is precisely why criticism of this incident has poured in from across the political spectrum, regardless of whether one is progressive or conservative. Democracy flourishes on the belief that elections are conducted fairly. Even if the candidate they supported loses, citizens can accept the results as long as they believe the electoral process was fair. However, a situation where voting is suspended due to a shortage of ballots and continues even after exit polls have been released raises doubts about the entire electoral process. Regardless of whether these procedural flaws actually influenced the election results, the fact that they caused the public to doubt the fairness of the election is fatal.

Since elections are the foundation of democracy, the Constitution entrusts the National Election Commission with the duty of serving as the guardian of democracy. The National Election Commission is an independent constitutional body on par with the National Assembly, the government, the courts, and the Constitutional Court. By imposing a duty of political neutrality on its members and guaranteeing their terms and status through the Constitution and laws, the Commission ensures the utmost fairness in the performance of its duties. The intent is to ensure fair election administration and the protection of citizens’ suffrage rights, free from the influence of the government or specific political forces.

In this regard, observing the current situation, one cannot help but question whether the National Election Commission is an institution with the level of competence and expertise commensurate with its constitutional duties. It is difficult to dismiss this incident as a mere administrative error. According to reports, concerns about a shortage of ballots were raised at the polling station in question as early as 1:00 p.m. The National Election Commission, which knows better than anyone that additional ballots cannot be produced immediately due to security and procedural requirements, should have responded more swiftly and proactively in advance.

What is even more difficult to accept is the explanation provided after the fact. The National Election Commission explained that it had prepared ballots for only about 50% of voters, citing the low early voting rate as justification. However, considering that the lowest voter turnout in any previous local election was 50.9%, this explanation lacks credibility. The more fundamental problem is that the National Election Commission is not an agency that operates on the premise of a low voter turnout. Rather, it has a responsibility to create conditions and encourage as many citizens as possible to participate in voting. Nevertheless, explaining the ballot shortage by implying that they had anticipated a low turnout amounts to an admission that they do not even properly understand the Commission’s fundamental role.

Conspiracy theories about election fraud have been raised incessantly during every election. Given this context, it seems difficult for the National Election Commission to avoid criticism that it has provided grounds for distrust and controversy. Former NEC Chairwoman Noh Jeong-hee apologized for the controversy over mismanagement of early voting in the 20th presidential election, and current NEC Chairman Noh Tae-ak apologized for incidents such as the removal of ballots and proxy voting during the early voting period of the 21st presidential election.

Criminal charges have been filed against National Election Commission officials in connection with this incident, and investigations are underway. Regardless of the final election results, it cannot be ruled out that various legal disputes and election lawsuits based on procedural flaws will follow. However, what is more important than criminal liability or judicial rulings is a thorough re-examination of the National Election Commission’s capabilities and sense of responsibility. The causes of the incident must be thoroughly investigated, and effective measures must be put in place to prevent such problems from recurring.

Democracy is realized through process rather than results. And the moment trust in that process collapses, it is not the outcome of a specific election that is shaken, but democracy itself. This situation serves as an opportunity for the National Election Commission to reflect on the constitutional duties entrusted to it.