The presidential office decided not to submit to the National Assembly the motion seeking consent to appoint Son Bong-gi, nominated to succeed former Supreme Court justice Roh Tae-ak, and to ask Chief Justice Jo Hee-de to renominate. It is the first time in constitutional history that a president has rejected a chief justice's nomination.
Former Reform Party supreme council member Kim Jeong-cheol said in a Facebook post on the 28th, "Appointing a Supreme Court justice is not a matter of the president's 'taste.' It is a constitutional matter," adding, "Article 104 of the Constitution is clear: the chief justice's nomination, the National Assembly's consent, and the president's appointment. Nowhere is there a fourth gate for the president's return and a demand for renomination."
Kim said, "The chief justice's power to nominate is not a mere power to recommend. It is a lock for judicial independence designed so the president cannot decide at will even the composition of the highest court," adding, "If one believes the nominee is unfit, the answer is simple: vet in the National Assembly, and let the National Assembly vote it down."
He continued, "Why would a power that even holds a majority of seats ignore the path set by the Constitution and seek another?" adding, "When power begins to create a fourth gate not in the Constitution, the first thing to slip out that gate is the separation of powers. The president's return is unconstitutional."
Kim also rebutted the presidential office's claim that prior consultation is customary. He said, "Custom is not law. Custom is custom, and the Constitution is the Constitution. The moment custom prevails over the Constitution, those in power make custom and that custom then comes to dominate the Constitution," adding, "A Supreme Court justice's seat is not the spoils of power."