The default political system throughout the world is representative democracy ― a form of government in which people are represented by those they have elected to the legislature. It applies not just to the parliamentary system of government but to the presidential system.

With representatives selected in multi-party elections, representative democracy is inseparable from party politics. Political parties compete against each other in elections to seat their nominees in the legislature and other political offices. In other words, they try to win the mandate for representation.

But a key question about Korean political parties is: Do they really represent their constituents? This question was being raised as recent opinion polls indicated a popular belief that a figure not affiliated with any party would be more responsive to the desires of people and better serve their interests than those political parties might nominate.

The figure in question is Ahn Cheol-soo, renowned founder of AhnLab, an anti-virus computer program developer, and dean of the Graduate School of Convergence Science and Technology, Seoul National University. His popularity soared among the electorate when he said he was considering running in the upcoming Seoul mayoral by-election and that, if he decided to so, he would run as an independent, instead of seeking nomination by a party.

One of the recent surveys conducted on the news showed his approval rating was at 50 percent, compared with 22 percent for the frontrunner for the ruling Grand National Party’s nomination. The outcome of the poll, which sent the ruling party reeling, was clear-cut evidence that the ruling party and, by extension, the entire political community was being discredited by the electorate. This was acknowledged by Rep. Hong Joon-pyo, chairman of the Grand National Party, who said, “On reading news reports about the Ahn phenomenon, I have come to grips with the scope of discontent Seoul citizens harbor against the political community.”

No less disconcerting was his caustic remark on the ruling party’s performance. Ahn, who had repeatedly been courted by the party to run for public office on its ticket, said that the party should be punished for its misrule so that “history could make progress.”

A case of misfortune for the ruling party usually provides the main opposition Democratic Party with an occasion for schadenfreude. But not this time, given that its forerunner for nomination came in as the distant third in the opinion poll. Still worse, the opposition party’s leadership was embroiled in an intra-party dispute over whom to nominate for the by-election.

The episode about Ahn ended when he decided not to run in the mayoral race in support for Park Won-soon, a lawyer-cum-social activist with no party affiliation, who heads the Hope Institute, on Tuesday. But the crisis for party politics is not over yet. Instead, the two rival parties will have much soul-searching to do with regard to how they are perceived by the electorate and what they need to do to lay a claim to the mandate for constituency representation.

The immediate issue they will have to address is whom to nominate for the mayoral contest, scheduled for Oct. 26.

The Grand National Party is given two choices ― taking the normal process of selecting a nominee among its members and inviting a candidate from the outside. Many claim the normal process will not suffice in the face of a new challenge. As such, pressure will undoubtedly mount on the party to put up a fresh and competent outsider as its candidate.

The Democratic Party is beset with a similar problem. It will have to decide whether it will demand Park Won-soon participate in its nomination process or team up with other opposition forces to put him up as their joint candidate as he is being promoted as such.

More importantly, however, the rival parties will have to determine what they need to do in the longer term, with the parliamentary and presidential elections scheduled for April and December next year, respectively. If they are to overcome the electorate’s distrust, they will have to develop new policies tailored to the needs of their constituents and take in new blood to retire those lawmakers deemed tainted, incompetent or uninspiring.