A bill to amend the Constitutional Court Act to allow constitutional complaints against court trials passed the first subcommittee on bill review of The National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee on the 11th, led by the Democratic Party of Korea.
The bill subcommittee of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee held a meeting at the National Assembly that day and approved the amendment to the Constitutional Court Act containing these provisions.
Kim Yong-min of the Democratic Party, the Chairperson of the bill subcommittee, met with reporters after the meeting that day and said, "We handled in the subcommittee the amendment to the Constitutional Court recognizing trial complaints," adding, "Recognizing trial complaints has long been discussed in academia, and the Constitutional Court has constantly brought the issue into the public sphere by requesting the introduction of a bill."
He added, "If trial complaints are recognized, even if a judgment has been finalized by a court, whenever a situation arises that violates the Constitution and the law or seriously infringes on basic rights, it can be reviewed again by the Constitutional Court at any time," and said, "Courts will also conduct trials more meticulously in adherence to the Constitution and the law."
The People Power Party said trial complaints violate the three-instance system stipulated in the Constitution and did not take part in the vote. Article 101, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Constitution designate the Supreme Court, the highest court, as the court of final appeal. The Supreme Court also pointed out regarding the bill, "If trials are conducted by a body other than a court, or if appeals continue beyond the Supreme Court, that would violate the Constitution."
Kim said, "Whether it is unconstitutional or not is for the Constitutional Court, the final body interpreting the Constitution, to decide. And the Constitutional Court has already issued many rulings to the effect that trial complaints are constitutional," adding, "As for the unconstitutionality debate, the final body to interpret the Constitution has already made many decisions that it is constitutional, so at least in official terms it has been settled as constitutional."
He continued, "We intend to use the introduction of trial complaints as an important opportunity to enhance trust in the judiciary and to provide robust protection of the people's basic rights," adding, "Our position is to put it on the plenary agenda as soon as possible, but that is for the floor leadership to decide."