(Purpose) This study examines the limitations of the deputy mayor appointment system in South Korea and its impact on local autonomy. The research focuses on how the current centralized system, governed by legal provisions, allows line ministries such as the Ministry of the Interior and Safety (MOIS) and the Ministry of Education (MOE) to appoint key officials, which undermines local governance and decision-making processes. (Design/methodology/approach) The study analyzes three key legal provisions: Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Number and Status of Public Officials Dispatched to Local Governments, Article 30 of the Local Education Autonomy Act, and Article 71 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Autonomy Act. These regulations were critically reviewed to evaluate their influence on the autonomy of local governments and educational governance, with a focus on proposing legal reforms to address these limitations. (Findings) The findings reveal that the current system significantly curtails local autonomy by enabling central line ministries to control the appointment of deputy mayors, deputy superintendents, and other key officials. This centralized structure restricts the ability of local governments to independently manage their operations. Moreover, the dispatch of metropolitan public officials to basic-level local governments diminishes local decision-making authority, leading to inefficiencies and a lack of responsiveness. (Research implications or Originality) This study highlights the structural challenges posed by South Korea’s centralized appointment system and advocates for reforms to decentralize the process. By transferring appointment authority to local governments and reducing the intervention of line ministries, the proposed reforms aim to enhance the accountability, responsiveness, and independence of local governance, fostering a more effective and autonomous administrative framework.
Ⅰ. Introduction
Ⅱ. The Organizational Structure of Local Governments and the Deputy Mayor System
Ⅲ. Limitations of the Deputy Mayor System
Ⅳ. The Structural Limitations of Local Government Operations
Ⅴ. Returning to Local Governance Autonomy through Decentralization
Ⅵ. Conclusion
References
(0)
(0)