There is a growing call within the political sphere to transfer the North Korean Provinces Committee, currently under the Ministry of Interior and Safety, to the Ministry of Unification, aiming to consolidate operations and completely overhaul its functions. This discussion comes as North Korea rapidly shifts its approach to inter-Korean relations, emphasizing a 'state-to-state' framework, which has raised concerns about the committee's unclear identity and lack of real authority, leading to perceived budget waste.
In a report published on May 27, the investigative team at Aju Economy examined the operational status of the North Korean Provinces Committee, highlighting issues such as late arrivals and allowances being paid near members' homes, reigniting debates about the committee's viability.
Following this report, lawmakers have repeatedly argued that the committee's functions should be transferred to the Ministry of Unification to enhance effectiveness in light of changing inter-Korean relations. Notably, independent lawmaker Choi Hyuk-jin has been a strong advocate for this transfer.
In an interview with the investigative team on June 1, Choi elaborated on the necessity of transferring the North Korean Provinces Committee to the Ministry of Unification. He previously pointed out during a National Assembly audit in December that restructuring such organizations could save over 10 billion won annually, suggesting that it would be more prudent to abolish the committee and transfer its responsibilities to the Ministry of Unification.
Choi emphasized that the North Korean Provinces Committee has become largely ineffective. He noted, "The President recently called for restructuring budgetary allocations that are maintained without results, as well as formal and symbolic institutions. By that standard, the North Korean Provinces Committee should be the first to undergo serious review. Initially, there were governors for Hwanghae Province, South and North Pyongan Provinces, and South and North Hamgyeong Provinces, but these no longer align with the current administrative divisions in North Korea (Pyongyang Directly Governed City, three special cities, nine provinces), and the Ministry of Unification is already handling support for defectors and research in preparation for unification."
He continued, "Given that access to North Korean regions is impossible, the committee lacks any real administrative authority. Therefore, I believe it is reasonable to abolish the North Korean Provinces Committee and transfer its duties to the Ministry of Unification."
Some have argued that the North Korean Provinces Committee and the Ministry of Unification cannot merge due to their respective constitutional bases in Articles 3 (territorial clause) and 4 (peaceful unification clause). Choi countered this by stating, "These two clauses are complementary principles that together form South Korea's North Korea policy and unification policy."
He added, "The North Korean Provinces Committee and the Ministry of Unification can be seen as addressing different aspects of this constitutional spirit. While some administrative adjustments may be necessary during the transfer of organizations or functions, I do not believe that the philosophies of the two institutions are fundamentally incompatible."
Choi emphasized that this could serve as an opportunity to more organically connect and clarify the 'principle of legitimacy' and 'principle of peaceful unification' enshrined in the South Korean Constitution."
To understand the backdrop of the strong calls for reform of the North Korean Provinces Committee, it is essential to consider its historical context. Established shortly after the government was formed in 1949, the committee originated from the concept of 'unrecovered territories' that emerged during the division at the 38th parallel and the Korean War.
At that time, the Syngman Rhee administration recognized the entire Korean Peninsula as territory of the Republic of Korea and viewed the North Korean region as something that must be recovered eventually. The North Korean Provinces Committee was an administrative mechanism to implement this territorial awareness and unification orientation.
Since then, it has officially undertaken tasks such as research and investigation of North Korean regions, promoting harmony and communication among North Korean residents, supporting the settlement of defectors, preserving intangible cultural heritage, and nurturing the next generation of leadership. To facilitate these efforts, it operates a large honorary position structure, including five vice-governors and honorary mayors, county heads, and township heads. However, as the division has persisted for over 70 years and inter-Korean relations have evolved, questions have been raised about whether the committee is fulfilling its original purpose.
While there are calls for both abolition and transfer of the North Korean Provinces Committee in the political arena, some scholars express a more cautious perspective on the matter.
Jeon Gap-saeng, director of the Cold War Peace Center at Sungkonghoe University, expressed in an interview with the investigative team on June 1 that the North Korean Provinces Committee, with its unique historical background, has become somewhat ineffective after enduring a long period of systemic competition. He noted that the general public finds it difficult to perceive the committee's actual activities, and it tends to operate as a formal position, akin to a 'reward appointment' following elections, depending on the administration in power.
However, Jeon took a reserved stance regarding the proposal to transfer the North Korean Provinces Committee under the Ministry of Unification. He stated, "The basic unit of the North Korean Provinces is the 'province,' which is an administrative district. Moving it to the Ministry of Unification, without considering the inter-Korean exchange aspect, is challenging."
He highlighted the limitations of approaching the issue without considering the historical context of an organization founded on territorial recognition.
Jeon also pointed out the ambiguity in the current government's perception of North Korea. He noted the coexistence of views within the government that regard North Korea as 'two states' while officially not recognizing it as a state, suggesting that this may have political implications and considerations related to elections.
Nevertheless, he remarked, "North Korea is showing a trend of thoroughly restructuring its relations with the South as a 'state-to-state' relationship while reorganizing its constitution and related organizations." He emphasized the need for South Korea to reassess its systems in light of these changes in North Korea.
He concluded by stating, "It is essential to consider the constitutional amendment issue, the long-standing perception of division, and the sentiments of those whose hometowns are in the North. Abolishing the North Korean Provinces Committee in the short term may not be easy, but there is a need to gradually adjust the committee's role to align with the changed reality of inter-Korean relations."
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.