The Democratic Party of Korea's proposal to amend the Public Official Election Act passed the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee on the 14th. If the amendment passes the full session of the National Assembly as is, Lee Jae-myung, the Democratic Party's presidential candidate, could avoid penalties in the election law case, which was previously sent back for retrial by the Supreme Court.
The Democratic Party also decided to review the special investigation law for Cho Hee-dae, the amendment to the Court Organization Act, and the amendment to the Constitutional Court Act in the subcommittee of the Legislative and Judiciary Committee.
In the legal community, there are remarks suggesting that, "These bills can be viewed as a four-part set aimed at eliminating the judicial risks of candidate Lee Jae-myung, who is undergoing five trials related to 12 charges, and intimidating the courts."
◇ Exclusion of 'acts' from false facts announcement target… Lee may avoid penalties in election law case
The election law amendment that passed the Legislative and Judiciary Committee on this day aims to delete 'acts' from the target of false facts announcements. Article 250, Paragraph 1 of the election law states that, "It prohibits the announcement of false facts regarding birthplace, family relationships, occupation, career, property, and acts for the purpose of winning the election through speeches, broadcasts, communications, and other means." By removing 'acts,' it intends to reduce the scope of penalties.
Previously, candidate Lee Jae-myung was subject to a guilty ruling by the Supreme Court on the 1st, as his statements that he "did not play golf with former Seongnam Development Corporation Minister Kim Moon-ki" and that "the Baekhyun-dong development was done under pressure from the Ministry of Land" were deemed to constitute false facts regarding 'acts.'
If the amendment passes the National Assembly's full session and is enacted, the retrial of this candidate's Public Official Election Act case could be entirely handled as 'non-prosecution' (termination of criminal proceedings without judicial judgment).
In response, Song Seok-jun, a member of the People Power Party, noted that the amendment is "merely a 'no-questions-asked Lee Jae-myung election law' meant to deceive voters."
◇ The Democratic Party pushes for 'special investigation of Chief Justice Cho' and 'up to 100 Supreme Court justices' and also for the Constitutional Court to review Supreme Court rulings
If the Democratic Party's proposed 'special investigation law for Cho Hee-dae' passes the National Assembly, a special investigation team for Chief Justice Cho could be formed and investigations could commence.
Previously, it was stated that the Supreme Court's en banc decision, which sent Lee's case of violating the Public Official Election Act back for retrial on the 1st, was based on an intention to influence the presidential election. The candidates for special prosecutors will be recommended one each by the Democratic Party and the Rebuilding Korea Party, with an investigation period of up to 140 days including a 20-day preparation period.
One legal expert mentioned, "It gives the impression that the Democratic Party can pass judges who produce unsatisfactory results in court to the special investigation team for prosecution." Another legal expert remarked, "This could also potentially influence trials regarding other cases in which the candidate is indicted."
Additionally, the amendment to the Court Organization Act aims to increase the current number of 14 Supreme Court justices to 30 or 100. Concerns have been raised in and out of the legal community that if the next president appoints a large number of justices that align with their preferences, judicial independence could be compromised.
A lawyer with a background as a judge questioned, "If cases involving this candidate come before the Supreme Court in the future with a substantial number of justices of a certain inclination, what conclusion will be reached?"
Meanwhile, the amendment to the Constitutional Court Act aims to allow the Constitutional Court to review Supreme Court rulings again. This could change the current court structure from a three-tier system to a four-tier system.
There are also observations regarding this amendment that it serves as a 'defense against judicial risks' for this candidate. It is considered a bill aimed at preparing for potential unfavorable rulings from the Supreme Court, as this candidate is currently undergoing four trials in the first and second instances.