The sovereignty of the Republic of Korea resides in the "people," and all state authority emanates from the "people." This is Article 1(2) of our Constitution. In a democratic state this is only natural. The beginning and end of power in the Republic of Korea is the people. All power comes from the people. Is the power delegated by the people really being exercised properly? Unfortunately, the gap between political power and public sentiment shows no sign of narrowing. Where did things go wrong? Can today's Republic of Korea really say that all power comes from the "people"?

As the Republic of Korea has recently been shaken by the former president's state-affairs manipulation scandal, many citizens think it should be taken as a good opportunity to become aware once again that they are citizens of a democracy. It planted in our hearts the hope that the great premise of democracy, that all power comes from the people, was not wrong. It showed the civic awareness and solidarity of the Korean people and inspired in them the pride of living in a country where the people defend democracy. Most important of all, this is a stage that calls for more fundamental reflection and practice on what mindset to hold and how to live from now on as democratic citizens. In a democratic state, we must think about the constitutional order and its true value. Can power in our country also change so that it truly comes from the people? Power comes from the people when the people recognize power as their own and when the people themselves exercise that power. The "lack of communication" that has been a chronic problem in our democratic politics can be eased by revitalizing democratic society. But that is possible only when institutional reform is carried out in a direction fundamentally different from what has been judged so far. Above all, democratic political reform must come through a substantial strengthening of the power of the legislature. If we want political parties to properly play the role of mediators of communication, democratic representative bodies to be run responsibly, and more capable politicians, our thinking about the direction of democratic political reform must change fundamentally. Now, such change in democratic society calls for an active expansion of participatory democracy through the opening up of democracy.

Korea's unlimited debate (filibuster) is provided for in Article 106-2 of the National Assembly Act, and it drew great attention when it was used in earnest for the first time since 1969 during the handling of the Anti-Terrorism Act in February 2016. Diversity jurisdiction in U.S. federal courts is recognized only when the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, so the material's expression "or more" should be read as "exceeding" to be accurate. Supplementing it with such recent cases and details makes it good debate material for comparative law, constitutional law and political science general-education assignments. Watching film scenes together with actual meeting minutes makes it more vivid.