895.011/12–1047
The Acting Political Adviser in Korea (Langdon) to the Secretary of State
No. 165
Subject: Temporary Constitution of Korea.
Sir: Reference is made to this Office’Sir despatch No. 70 of September 3, 1947,95 on the above captioned law passed August 6, 1947 by the South Korean Interim Legislative Assembly.
On November 20, 1947, the Deputy Military Governor addressed a letter to the Assembly withholding approval of the bill and stating that a legislature composed of members, one-half of whom were appointed, could hardly be said to have a mandate from the people to enact so fundamental a document as a constitution. He further stated that the constitution could apply to South Korea only and that such a document actually should be approved by representatives of a united Korea and should be written for a united Korea. The letter pointed out that the constitution would require the reorganization of the present government of South Korea, a step deemed unwise under present conditions, and added that the adoption of the constitution at the present time might make more difficult the task of the ultimate unification of Korea. The substantive provisions of the proposed constitution were not discussed.
The letter of disapproval was read at the same time as the letter disapproving the law on pro-Japanese, National Traitors and Profiteers, [Page 876] and the virtual veto of the two bills caused visible resentment in KILA. The Assembly addressed a written list of questions to General Helmick on December 2, 1947, most of which applied to the Anti-Collaborationist bill and have been discussed in this Office’s despatch No. 163 of December 9, 1947.95a
Apparently the disapproval of the temporary constitution did not arouse as much resentment as the Anti-Collaborationist bill failure. However, in point VI of questions raised by the Assembly, the disapproval of the temporary constitution was discussed. The same basic argument was raised as to the right of KILA to pass fundamental legislation, with Assembly members seeming to feel that if the two bills in question were beyond the scope of the Assembly, then any bill passed by the Assembly would be equally illegal for the same reason.
The Assembly pointed out that the temporary constitution was actually only for South Korea and that the word “Provisional” should be emphasized. The Assembly asked why, if it was difficult to reorganize the government due to present unstable conditions, the present government is proceeding to reform its own structure.
The paper addressed to General Helmick by the Assembly stated the belief that a provisional constitution was necessary for the transfer of administrative power to the Koreans as outlined by U.S. military authorities in the past.
General Helmick’s letter of December 5, 1947 postponed an immediate answer to the questions raised by the Assembly. In all probability the Assembly will accept a compromise measure on the “Anti-Collaborationist” bill and the temporary constitution will remain tabled for the time being.96
General Helmick’s answers to the Assembly will be submitted to the Department when they are prepared.
Respectfully yours,