“As Pusan National University (PNU) students, we had the democratization movement in the past. However, we feel terrible that we are completely excluded from the democracy of PNU today. We deplore current violation of students’ rights.” (Among the positions of the College of Humanities) The student community expressed its position over the “fall in student voting value” in the 22nd presidential election, held on February 6th.

Compiling the coverage of “Channel PNU” on March 1st, PNU General Students’ Association (GSA) and the Students Council of College of Humanities (SCCH) each released official statements via Instagram on February 8th and 14th. The statements included criticisms that the recent presidential election did not reflect students’ voices and demanded explanation for the unilateral decisions of the Presidential Appointment Recommendation Committee (PARC). In this presidential election, the late decision by the PARC to expand the scope of the student electorate drastically reduced the influence of student votes to one-fourth of its original impact (reported by “Channel PNU” on January 30th, 2024).

The most infuriating aspect for students is that although the value of student votes decreases exponentially because of it, the decision was made unilaterally by some members of the PARC, without any discussion with the students. According to the GSA, the Faculty Council (FC) notified that the scope of electors, which is the denominator of student voting conversion, will be increased from 5,905 registered students to 23,439 whole students. It was revealed that there was no opportunity to gather student opinions thereafter. The GSA stated, in an interview with “Channel PNU” on February 21st, “This is the arbitrary judgment of the PARC chairman, and it was commissioned and signed without students’ agreement and legal processes.” 

The issue of student personal information leak was also mentioned. In the interview with “Channel PNU” on February 16th, Kim Jun-Seo (Dept. of Korean Language and Literature, 19), the president of the SCCH, stated, “In order to qualify as an elector, students must consent to the collection of personal information. However, the personal information of students who did not consent may have been transferred to the Geumjeong-gu National Election Commission (NEC).” Following the unilateral adjustment of the electorate by the PARC to include the entire student body, personal information of about 17,000 students who did not consent, in addition to the initially agreed 5,905 students, was arbitrarily transferred to the NEC without any subsequent notifications. 

In the joint statement towards the PARC, the GSA and the SCCH demanded three things: First, clarification of the reasons for changes in the electorate and the decision-making process through the release of meeting minutes. Second, justification for the transfer of personal information to NEC. Third, prevention of recurrence. The PARC convened at “The 4th PNU PARC Conference” on February 15th, where they unanimously agreed three things in response to the statement. First, to draft a public apology statement addressed to the students. Second, to request officially to the FC to revise the “Regulations for the Nomination of Candidates of the PNU President.” Third, to provide sincere responses to the statements from the GSA and the SCCH. The GSA stated, “We will continue to monitor the progress and inform students accordingly regarding the outcome of the conference.”

Meanwhile, some criticized about the delayed response from the student councils to this issue. The GSA and the SCCH convened an emergency Expanded Central Operations Committee Meeting on January 25th after being notified by the PARC, but no announcement or action was taken afterward. The statements from both student councils were published after the election on February 6th. In response, the GSA stated, “We hoped that students would make judgments based on the objective data such as the candidates’ policies and pledges rather than being moved by political issues. In reality, since agreements had already been made, there was little that could be done to bring about change.”

The GSA and  SCCH ultimately expressed a sense of helplessness following the decision of the PARC. Kim, the president of the SCCH, stated, “We convened the Expanded Central Operations Committee Meeting to deal with the situation. But realistically, it was impossible to devise and execute a response plan within a mere two weeks.” He added, “Even if we were to implement measures within two weeks, it wouldn’t change the careless attitude of the GSA. Even now, after the election, all we can do is to post a statement, leaving us feeling frustrated.”

The student councils emphasized the need for continuous and smooth communication between the PARC, the FC, and the student councils to prevent such incidents from happening again. They assert that student perspectives should be considered in further discussions or in the upcoming elections. Kim, the president of the SCCH stated, “The PARC should genuinely listen to student opinions, not just for show, and make sincere efforts to reflect them in the next election.”

The GSA also takes the stance that they will prevent recurrence of such issues in the future because this was the first election that students directly participated in. The GSA stated, “We will clearly specify how this election was held in the presidential election white paper, to prevent similar problems. We will meticulously identify what lacks in enabling students to voice their opinions. Also, we will strive to bring changes.”

                                                     Reporter Yoon Seo-Young

                                                     Translated by Ha Chae-Won