A legal organization with conservative views, **Lawyers for Human Rights and Unification of Korea (LHUK)**, released a statement on the 20th criticizing the Democratic Party of Korea for “denouncing the Chief Justice’s authority to nominate constitutionally as judicial interference.”
Chief Justice Jo Hee-de recommended Son Bong-gi, the head judge of the Daegu District Court, and Kim Sung-soo, the head judge of the Seoul High Court, to take the place of former Justices Rho Tae-ak and Lee Heung-gu on the 18th. Nevertheless, a dispute arose when it came to light that Chief Justice Jo had violated the tradition of meeting with the president in person to discuss appointments and instead provided a “written nomination.”
LHUK said, “Chief Justice Jo used the power given to him by the Constitution,” and noted, “Nevertheless, the Democratic Party has referred to it as a ‘circumvention of the president,’ ‘judicial interference,’ and ‘unlawful judicial action,’ and even suggested the possibility of impeachment.”
Kim Min-seok, head of the Democratic Party, labeled Chief Justice Jo as “the worst Chief Justice since the country’s independence” and “director of a legal technical office,” urging, “Step down immediately.” Choi Min-hee, a high-ranking member of the Democratic Party, suggested impeachment, stating, “Discussions regarding Chief Justice Jo’s role, including the possibility of impeachment, should commence.”
LHUK responded, “In-person nominations are just a tradition, not a legal requirement,” and stated, “The claim of a ‘workaround’ is baseless. The head of the National Court Administration explained in the National Assembly that Chief Justice Jo had asked for a meeting with the president, but Cheong Wa Dae did not grant it. The written nomination process was also approved after discussions with the senior presidential secretary for civil affairs.”
It also assessed, “Chief Justice Jo’s decision was a prudent action to avoid a judicial gap.” LHUK stated, “The position of former Justice Rho Tae-ak has remained empty for more than five months, and Justice Lee Heung-gu’s retirement is soon approaching, leading to an upcoming ‘simultaneous vacancy of two justices.’ Moreover, a significant reform of the criminal justice system is planned for October,” noting, “Chief Justice Jo carried out his constitutional responsibility by preventing a national judicial gap.”
LHUK also expressed criticism, stating, “The Democratic Party brings up impeachment when nominations are postponed, and then threatens it again if the nominations move forward, focusing on the procedure. This ultimately seeks to invalidate the Chief Justice’s nomination power as outlined in the Constitution.”
The statement ended with, “We strongly recommend that the Democratic Party immediately cease threatening impeachment and personal attacks on constitutional institutions. President Lee should quickly submit the nomination approval bill to the National Assembly, and the legislative body should diligently carry out the confirmation process to address the judicial vacancy issue and meet its constitutional responsibilities.”
A nonprofit legal organization named **People Making Good Law (Chakhansup)** also issued a statement on the same day, highlighting the importance of judicial independence. Chakhansup said, “The Chief Justice’s selection of new judicial candidates was an act of power provided by the Constitution and laws,” and cautioned, “Efforts to undermine the validity or legitimacy of the nomination due to its procedure would weaken the Chief Justice’s authority in appointments as protected by the Constitution and must not be accepted.”
It stated, “More alarming is the political pressure to criticize or effectively hinder the proper functioning of constitutional institutions’ rightful power,” and urged, “We strongly advocate for respecting the Chief Justice’s appointment authority as outlined in the Constitution.”
jasdooit 
Leave a comment