Talk:Elections in North Korea

Factual news
It is nice to know that there is actually democracy in North Korea and that the western media is lying to us. I vote for big Dong! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:7466:1700:DDAE:AEE3:ED94:E844 (talk) 06:49, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

POV
Removed neutrality dispute tag, as the article seems pretty accurate and uncontroversial. Please go ahead anyone and put the tag back if you write why you think it's NPOV. Buckshot06 10:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

could someone please remove the POV commentary, and correct details using neutral sources, as per my tag --Frogsprog 17:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I think that maybe something could be put in about the fairness of the elections, much like the article on Russian Elections. 99.9% turnout with 100% voting tally for the winning candidate sounds a little... suspicious? Communist? Argo117 (talk) 16:46, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Just removed dubious and POV stuff not supported by citations: Wikipedia is not a forum for rumor, myth, and propaganda. Multiple statements were just plain wrong. This article was wrong from the start, and the material just stayed. If the situation is otherwise, please provide an exact reference, like page number if referring to the current references. The current references say little about procedure, on the order of a half a dozen pages, so it is doubtful I missed something. Removed material such as:


 * "non-competitive, with a single unopposed candidate" - where does it say that in the IPU ref?;
 * "selected beforehand by party organizations" - ditto;
 * "but they are legally bound to accept the position of the Workers' Party." - ditto;
 * "All candidates in the elections must be members of the Democratic Front for the Reunification of the Fatherland" - blatantly contradicts "and independent deputies 1.9 per cent (13 seats)" from IPU ref, while citing the same: how can you be required to be in a party in a popular front but not be in a party?;
 * "In this way, the voters do not themselves choose representatives, but ratify the candidates chosen by the unelected party organization" - doesn't get anymore POV than that.

Not quite sure what is meant by "pretty accurate", but I don't think that's it. Int21h (talk) 12:56, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Useful source on NK elections
Aha, here's some info on elections. This is from the presentation of Mr. Li Chun Sik, Deputy Secretary General of the Standing Committee of the Supreme People's Assembly to the Inter-Parliamentary Union meeting in Pyongyang, April-May 1991, p. 17-18.
 * The PRESIDENT thanked Mr. Li Chun Sik for his presentation and asked about the electoral system. Mr. Li Chun Sik replied that the basic provisions governing the system were laid down in the Constitution and that elections were on the basis of universal direct suffrage with a secret ballot. Constituencies elected roughly one member per 30,000 population. While candidates could be nominated by anyone, it was the practice for all candidates to be nominated by the parties. These nominations were examined by the United Reunification Front and then by the Central Electoral Committee, which allocated candidates to seats. The candidate in each seat was then considered by the electors in meetings at the workplace or similar, and on election day the electors could then indicate approval or disapproval of the candidate on the ballot paper.

So indeed, the front chooses one candidate per seat, and the ordinary voters can only approve or disapprove. The article should note that elections in NK don't choose one candidate out of several, but only ratify the list of candidates already selected by the "United Reunification Front" (this is a mistranslation; should be Democratic Front for the Reunification of the Fatherland). --Reuben 17:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, it looks like this info was previously present, but banned user Frogsprog and others have removed it. It needs to be restored, using the source linked above for example. It comes directly from a high-ranking member of the SPA, and confirms the previous contents of the article; on the other hand, I haven't seen any sources at all to support the idea that North Korean voters choose between several competing candidates. If any more relevant sources can be found, by all means add them to the article, or drop them in here and we can work them in as needed. --Reuben 17:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I've made a first pass at it. Other editors are encouraged to review my changes, and hopefully we can remove the cleanup tag soon. --Reuben 20:40, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I think that the article has been cleaned up Kim976 09:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC).

No, it just means that only the Front, composed of its parties, submitted candidates, which were then allocated seats. It is doubtful policy of the Front is to allocate two candidates for the same seat, so only 1 Front candidate sits for election, which means only 1 candidate sits for election. This is not the same as saying "front chooses one candidate per seat, and the ordinary voters can only approve or disapprove". This implies this always must be, while it is only a practicality, since the voters (ordinary or not) are not formally limited to approving or disapproving only Front candidates, but it usually ends up that way. It would be true to say, as it appears or that in practice (stating why, ie. since most seats are not contested), voters my only approve or disapprove. Int21h (talk) 23:30, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Purpose
Apparently the reason for making these elections is to identify defectors, as it's knows that the family members of the defector may be punished. Also, it seems the "Past elections" section is outdated, as there were "elections" in 2019. Galzigler (talk) 20:03, 24 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Is this a proven occurrence or just a rumour? If you have a trustworthy source for this, please provide it. 176.10.253.136 (talk) 14:23, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Many references non-existent or not working.
Hello, it seems that many of the statements in this article have references that either have no links and refer to non-existent publications, dead links, or articles that don't support the statements made. Reference [7], for example, appears to be completely fabricated. 85.219.32.216 (talk) 15:38, 23 June 2022 (UTC)