After Pusan National University (PNU) signed a “Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for construction of a connection road (Geumsaem-ro) to the Sanseong Tunnel'' with Geumjeong-gu in February, it has been confirmed that PNU members are paying close attention to the construction. Most of them asserted that they could not accommodate the current system of the building and continuously stressed damage limitations.

According to the survey of 176 PNU members, including graduated students, conducted by “Channel PNU” from March 9th to 21st, 145 (82.4%) of respondents said that PNU should never cooperate if the construction goes on as it is. 123 (69.9%) of them agreed with the part of MOU when the construction method would be changed, following when the method will switch to excavation (50.5%) and when the road will work as a bypass (19.9%). 22 (12.5%) of them said that they would bitterly oppose the construction in opposition to the side of citizens in Busan and Guemjeong-gu.

■ We Will Cooperate If There Are No Problems

When it comes to questions (multiple answers possible) about the essential parts when the construction method is changed, respondents answered that the damage limitation on campus should be considered. Overall, they were concerned about violations of rights, including a breach of the right to education caused by noise and vibration (61.9%), facility damage such as cracks in buildings (52.8%), violation of mobility rights (46.0%), environmental impact minimization (18.8%), and convenient mobility for residents (7.4%). 

In line with a welcome change after the MOU agreement, thoughts of benefits for PNU, including damage limitations, were overwhelming (45.5%), following altered construction system (23.9%), expedited building process (22.7%), and keeping the relationship between local governments moving forward (6.8%).

PNU students are against the construction due to the damage caused by the construction. Jang Moon-Suk (Dept. of Sociology, 22) said, “I understand why the road needs to be opened, but it is expected that I would feel so stressed as looking back at last year's protest on campus when constantly and repeatedly hearing the noise. Also, unsolved problems still remain, such as violation of students’ housing rights who live in the dormitory, repeated noise from construction, and absurdity of the building itself.” He continued, “When the method is changed, I think it should partially cooperate.” PNU graduate student A said, “I feel uncomfortable when going to classes because of the uphill road, but the students, who enroll at PNU at the point of starting the construction, would be reluctant to enter the university when getting to know that the establishment will not finish until graduation. That is why I really do not want the construction to begin.”

■ What Is the Effectiveness of the MOU?

The MOU agreement is considered to play a key role in letting PNU members know about Geumsaem-ro and to draw attention. This is because 144 (81.8%) of respondents said that they started to pay attention to Geumsaem-ro due to heightened interest related to the construction, but in the past, 108 (61.4%) of them responded that they had heard of it. Among them, 53 (30.1%) answered that they were concerned about the road, which means that most PNU members did not care about or focus on it.

It was determined that many respondents doubted the effectiveness and legitimacy of the MOU. Among the total 176 respondents, 86 (48.9%) said that the MOU was made without adequate reflection on PNU members. Given that a question about whether there will be a significant change or development derived from the agreement, 71 (40.3%) said, “Yes,” but 39 (22.1%) said, “No,” and 66 (37.5%) responded, “I don’t know.” PNU student B (Dept. of English Language & Literature, 20) said, “I guess the agreement was concluded without the students’ opinion. If the campus is for students, what really matters is their opinions, not the agreement between PNU headquarters and the local government.” Also, PNU student C (School of Computer Science & Engineering, 18) said, “I think this is crucial enough for the entirety of the students to vote on.”

A question has been posed about the intention of the MOU. Choi (Dept. of Law, graduate) said, “I do not even know if the university really wants to build when currently considering the agreement. It is unreasonable that it intends to avoid the problems of establishing a frontier science museum.” He continued, “If the campus does not want to cooperate, it would be better not to sign the MOU.” Jang Moon-Seok (Dept. of Sociology, 22) also criticized, “The agreement contains a mere formality, including a meeting only once every two months. It means that meetings will be held six times a year, and this is just for show.”

In addition, it was found that Geumjeong-gu Council is in the same boat. A district councillor of the Democratic Party of Korea explained, “I do not mean to disparage the mayor’s effort, but I am not sure the MOU, which consists of only declarative phrases, seems effective.” He added, “The content does not contain a specific timeline and method, so the district council unofficially said, ”Where is the beef?” It seems over-promoting because many citizens identify that the construction will begin soon. Both sides have conceded once, but apparently, they are unacceptable.”

However, PNU and Geumjeong-gu have not interacted since the MOU agreement on February 9th. PNU Headquarters says nothing has been decided yet, including negotiated agendas or schedules for a regular meeting. Jang Deok-Hyung (Dean of Strategic Planning, PNU) said, “Both sides are occupied in doing other businesses, so they did not have a meeting after the agreement.” He continued, adding, “We will discuss it with Busan city first and talk to the government after clearly defining our position.”

Reporter Jun Hyung-Seo

Translated by Park Yeon-Hee