They were some of the most clamorous days in the South Korean National Assembly as the filibuster against the controversial Anti-Terrorism Bill continued for more than 190 hours without a break. Although the participants of the filibuster received a lot of encouragement from the public, several political experts have censured the practice of giving so much power to minority political parties. 

The filibuster, a legal parliamentary procedure in which a politician or group of politicians delays the passing of legislation by deliberately prolonging debate on the bill, has stirred a lot of controversy at both the public and political levels in South Korea lately. Several politicians have seen fit to question whether providing political minority parties with enough power to stop the majority party is halting all legislative actions.

The Congress Law, put into effect in 2012, “requires support from at least 60 percent of the quorum to pass legislation that causes severe debate from the conflicting political party.” Similar to the filibuster law, which gives the political minorities to speak out against the dominant party, the Congress Law was intended to give minority parties enough political advantage so that they can have their say in the National Assembly as well as ensuring a majority party does not take complete control of the government.

Although it is rational to consider that the dominant political party has had more votes from the people and therefore will better reflect what is best for the people and what people want, this does not happen in all situations. In fact, the presence of political minorities is crucial to alarm the public regarding issues that are necessary for the people but not for the political majorities. 

 the people's votes, this does not mean that such a party always represents the will and the need of the people. A case in point is the Anti-Terrorism Bill, which has been strongly criticized for placing limits on Koreans' human rights and for placing too much authority in the hands of the government. The legislation is neither wanted by most Korean people nor is it going to work best for them, since the people’s privacy will be severely damaged if the government has complete control of people’s personal information.

Moreover, some political parties exist just to voice the concerns of minorities. Although the media generally focuses on the top two parties when it comes to political issues, minority political groups do hold a few seats on the National Assembly from which they work to voice the needs of their constituents. Without them, some important issues ignored by the political majorities will remain unnoticed. 

Even if political minorities lack the power to embrace their opinions that produce enough influence in the National Assembly, their efforts can still create enough influence within the society as a whole. The recent filibuster that lasted for 192 hours turned out to be nothing in the National Assembly since the Anti-Terrorism Law passed despite the endeavors of the political outs. However, the filibuster did alarm the public and invite people into politics and gave an idea of what is going on in the Korean politics. This is a huge impact since the more the public knows about these current issues, the more its opinion will be reflected in politics. 

It is somewhat rational to consider that the dominant political party should have more right in deciding what laws to pass and to not. However, people should admit that political majorities may not always make the best decisions for the people, and that the political minorities should exist to alert the public to some unheard issues and create a system that is best for the people, not just the members of a particular political party.