The legal community voiced concern over the Democratic Party of Korea's push to increase the number of Supreme Court justices as part of judicial reform.
The National Court Administration held a public hearing on "Judicial system reform for the people" at the Seoul Courts Complex in Seocho-gu on the 10th. In the final afternoon session of the hearing, there was discussion of the "plan to increase Supreme Court justices," addressing the Democratic Party of Korea's "Court Organization Act amendment." The amendment to the Court Organization Act introduced by the party calls for increasing the number of justices from 14 to 26 over three years.
Kim Do-hyeong, presiding judge at the Ansan branch of the Suwon District Court, who delivered the first presentation, said, "If the current number of Supreme Court justices, which has been in place for more than 40 years since 1981, is suddenly doubled, unforeseen problems could arise." The reason, he said, is that increasing the number of justices would require a corresponding shift to the Supreme Court of judges with extensive experience handling trials at the first and second instances.
Kim said, "This could lead to public distrust of fact-finding judgments (first and second instance) and, as a result, trigger a vicious cycle in which more appeals are filed." He added that to reduce the side effects of operating the full bench, the best option would be to add four justices.
Park Hyeon-su, a presiding judge at the Gwangju District Court, said, "This is an issue that requires adjusting the pace." Park said, "If 12 justices are appointed in a short span as the amendment stipulates, the Supreme Court will become bloated, fact-finding will be weakened, and it could act as a factor driving a further increase in appeals," emphasizing that "even if the number of justices is increased, it should be done sequentially with a small number of appointments."
Yeo Yeon-sim, chairperson of the court reform subcommittee at the Judicial Center of Lawyers for a Democratic Society, said, "Increasing the number of Supreme Court justices is a practical alternative to deal with the overload of appeals, but it is hard to evaluate it as a fundamental reform plan," adding, "The increase itself should not be the goal; instead, based on the capacity secured, continuous reforms are needed to win public trust." She said that even if the number of justices is increased, its effectiveness must be verified transparently and sufficiently. She also called for flexibility to adjust the pace and scale of the increase in justices accordingly.
Concerns were also raised about "court-packing," which means capturing control of the judiciary. Yeo said, "There is inevitably concern about a sitting president, whose trial is on hold, appointing more than 10 justices," adding, "Regardless of the actual intent, controversy could persist, so while agreement among political forces is important, public consent is also necessary."
Lee Jae-muk, a professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, also said, "A 'rapid increase' in the organization of the highest court tied to a particular administration could heighten suspicions of court-packing among many in the opposition camp and risks undermining judicial independence and institutional trust."
The need to increase judicial researchers in step with adding Supreme Court justices also emerged as an issue. Presiding Judge Kim Do-hyeong said, "If justices are increased by 12 under the party's amendment, the current 101 judicial researchers who are judges may also need to be increased by up to 101."