President Lee Jae Myung called for bipartisan support to embed the spirit of the May 18 pro-democracy movement in South Korea’s Constitution on Monday [1].

The proposal seeks to permanently codify the values of the 1980 uprising within the nation's founding document to prevent future democratic erosion. By elevating the movement to a constitutional level, the administration aims to create a legal and symbolic bulwark against authoritarianism.

Lee said the announcement in Gwangju during the 46th commemoration ceremony of the May 18 movement [1, 2]. The city of Gwangju served as the epicenter of the 1980 pro-democracy movement [3], which saw citizens rise against military rule.

During the event, Lee said that the democratic spirit of the uprising remains relevant to modern governance. He linked the historical struggle to recent political instability, noting that the spirit of the 1980 movement was reborn during the efforts to thwart martial law forces in 2024 [3].

The president said that bipartisan cooperation is necessary to achieve this constitutional revision. Such a change would require a supermajority in the National Assembly, making the support of opposition parties essential for the amendment to move forward.

This initiative comes as part of a broader effort to recognize the sacrifices of those who fought for democratic reforms decades ago. The 46th anniversary [2] marks a continued national effort to reconcile with the violence of the military era, and ensure such events are not repeated.

Lee said the preamble of the Constitution should reflect the courage of the Gwangju citizens to ensure the democratic legacy is preserved for future generations.

“President Lee Jae Myung called for bipartisan support to embed the spirit of the May 18 pro-democracy movement in South Korea’s Constitution”

This push for constitutional revision represents an attempt to institutionalize the legacy of the Gwangju Uprising as a fundamental pillar of the South Korean state. By linking the 1980 events to the 2024 martial law crisis, the administration is framing the protection of democracy not as a finished historical achievement, but as an ongoing necessity that requires the highest level of legal protection.