One of the political reform pledges made by both the ruling Saenuri Party and the main opposition Democratic United Party during the presidential election campaign was to stop nominating candidates for elections in the basic units of local government ― provincial cities, counties and districts of metropolitan cities.

Now they face an early test of their commitment to political reform as by-elections are to be held in five constituencies on April 24 to elect new local government heads or fill vacancies at local councils.

Both parties are split over the issue. Yet the Saenuri Party is moving to implement its pledge starting with the upcoming by-elections, while the DUP has chosen to delay the reform to next year.

A debate erupted over the matter in the ruling party following an announcement last week by the party’s nomination committee that it would not pick any candidates for the April local by-elections.

The committee’s announcement was well received. The National Association of Mayors welcomed it in a statement and called on the DUP to follow suit. It also urged the two parties to rewrite the current laws on local autonomy as early as possible to implement the reform.

Yet some of the party’s leaders oppose the committee’s decision. They note that whether the party should field candidates in local elections or not goes beyond the bounds of the committee’s authority and therefore should be left to its top leaders.

While these leaders cite the committee’s lack of authority as the main reason for opposing its decision, they are actually worried that the party’s unilateral action would only benefit the DUP in the upcoming elections.

As the party’s leadership is divided over the matter, it is still unclear in what direction the party will move. Yet its key officials pledged to push the party toward abandoning the present nomination practice.

The ruling party’s move irked the DUP as it has already set up regional nomination screening committees to select candidates for the local by-elections.

Recalling its election pledge to overhaul the present local election processes, the opposition party reaffirmed its commitment to reform. Yet it said any attempt to change the status quo without first amending the present local government laws would only complicate matters.

Noting that the existing laws require a political party to nominate candidates for local elections, the party argues that if the ruling party is really committed to election reform, it should first come up with a revision proposal.

The DUP has a point but if it delays the reform to next year, it could face a backlash. True, it would take time to revise the current laws. Yet it would not be impossible to amend them before the elections if the two parties agree to do so.

The ruling party’s push for reform is desirable. It may refrain from nominating candidates for the April by-elections even without revising the laws. Yet it would do well to rewrite them first before abandoning the old practice.

The need for law revision is all the greater in light of the possibility that simply banning political parties’ involvement in local elections would give rise to other problems.

The two political parties pledged to reform the status quo because under the present system, candidates for local elections pay money to the lawmakers from their constituencies to win party nomination.

If political parties stop nominating candidates, money-for-nomination scandals involving lawmakers will be reduced. But it could pave the way for the rise of local figures with dubious qualifications. They may attempt to secure a firm control of their constituencies using their own political organizations.

The retreat of political parties could also reduce opportunities for women by reducing their chances of getting elected in local elections.

In this regard, the two political parties are advised to amend the current laws in a way that addresses these and other potential problems.

Reforming the local election processes is essential if the nation seeks to curb corruption and help local governments better serve their residents.

If political parties continue to nominate candidates, partisan politics in Seoul will be replicated at the local level, making it impossible for local governments and councils to conduct their affairs apolitically.