CIVICUS discusses South Korea’s upcoming presidential election with Hyun-Phil Na, Executive Director of the Korean House for International Solidarity, a civil society organisation that promotes democracy and human rights across Asia and the Pacific.

South Korea faces a snap presidential election on 3 June following President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment over his attempt to impose martial law. The constitutional crisis has made democratic accountability a primary concern for voters, but far-right movements are also gaining ground. While Lee Jae-myung of the Democratic Party leads the polls, conservative and far-right candidates could unite to prevent his victory. 

What triggered this snap election?

This snap election is a direct response to the constitutional crisis sparked by Yoon Suk Yeol’s unconstitutional actions.

Yoon, who came to power in 2022 despite lacking political experience, quickly lost public support because of his authoritarian style and close ties with far-right groups. Following his party’s defeat in the 2024 general election, he tried to impose martial law, seemingly trying to dismantle opposition parties and civil society. This sparked widespread resistance, not just from the public and opposition but also from some parts of the military. And when the National Assembly voted to impeach him, Yoon doubled down, inciting his far-right base by claiming judicial bias and alleging Chinese election interference. These accusations deepened political divisions and further undermined democratic institutions. The Constitutional Court’s unanimous decision to remove Yoon from office on 4 April narrowly averted what many feared could escalate into civil conflict.

The upcoming snap election will have major implications for South Korea’s democracy. The political landscape has shifted sharply to the right, with far-right movements gaining ground while mainstream conservatives have largely rallied behind Yoon’s discredited agenda.

How has civil society responded?

From the moment Yoon announced martial law, civil society groups mobilised with remarkable speed and determination. Weekly mass rallies and daily protests maintained pressure throughout the impeachment process, while activists amplified the voices of minorities and vulnerable communities often overlooked in political crises.

Civil society remains highly engaged but strategically divided as election day approaches. Rather than uniting behind a single opposition candidate, different groups are backing various progressive figures, many with limited electoral prospects. Despite broad opposition to the conservative candidates who defended Yoon’s actions, activists have prioritised long-term accountability and systemic reform over short-term electoral tactics.

This approach reflects a deep commitment to democratic transformation. Civil society groups keep monitoring the ongoing investigations and trials of Yoon and his associates while simultaneously pushing for comprehensive democratic reforms and anti-discrimination legislation.

What issues are shaping voter sentiment?

The impeachment crisis has fundamentally reshaped electoral politics, overshadowing traditional policy debates. The liberal candidate, Lee Jae-myung, leads the polls with 45 to 50 per cent support, while his conservative rival Kim Moon-soo polls at 35 to 40 per cent. The wild card is Lee Jun-seok, a far-right figure who was once a key Yoon ally, with around 10 per cent. Along with Kim, he may attempt to forge an alliance to block Lee Jae-myung’s victory.

Conservative politicians warn against concentrating too much power in Democratic Party hands, while Lee Jun-seok appeals to younger male voters through anti-feminist rhetoric and discriminatory proposals targeting migrant workers.

The conservatives’ rightward shift is forcing Lee toward the political centre to capture moderate voters, narrowing ideological differences and limiting substantive policy discussion. Voters remain more concerned with accountability for Yoon’s constitutional violations than specific policy proposals.

Only Kwon Young-guk on the left consistently addresses gender equality and labour rights, but his support remains below two per cent.

What changes would different candidates bring?

As the likely winner, Lee Jae-myung would largely maintain current economic policies while introducing some progressive reforms. His economic platform balances competing priorities: promoting AI development, strengthening labour protections and supporting business investment within a framework of fiscal restraint. Criticism and debt concerns have forced him to significantly scale back his signature universal basic income proposal. However, over 40 per cent of voters remain sceptical, viewing his approach as populist.

But regardless of who wins, the most significant changes would likely come in democratic governance itself. Political leaders are discussing South Korea’s first constitutional amendment since democratisation in 1987, though whether reforms would emphasise expanded human rights or structural governmental changes remains unclear.

How might the election reshape international relations?

Lee Jae-myung’s foreign policy represents a sharp departure from Yoon’s confrontational approach. Rather than Yoon’s rigid pro-USA, anti-China alignment, Lee advocates pragmatic engagement that avoids choosing sides in competition between great powers, and particularly in the China-Taiwan conflict. His approach would emphasise cultural and economic cooperation with Japan and Southeast Asian countries while resisting military commitments that could entangle South Korea in regional conflicts.

The central challenge involves managing competing Chinese and US interests across trade, security and regional diplomacy. If Donald Trump pressures South Korea to expand its military role in containing China, tensions could escalate significantly. Lee’s support for arms exports suggests he may prioritise economic opportunities over human rights considerations, following patterns established by previous governments.

Regarding North Korea, Lee likely favours cautious diplomatic engagement over confrontation. However, should the USA formally recognise North Korea as a nuclear power, domestic pressure for South Korea to develop its own nuclear deterrent could intensify dramatically.