The so-called "three judiciary bills," led by the Democratic Party of Korea, passed the National Assembly and were reviewed and approved at the Cabinet meeting on the 5th. Despite strong opposition from the opposition bloc and the legal community, President Lee Jae-myung did not exercise the right to request reconsideration (veto). In political circles, some expect the ruling bloc could move to the next step by pushing to introduce an impeachment motion targeting Chief Justice Jo Hee-de, the head of the judiciary.
On this day, the president convened an extraordinary Cabinet meeting and approved the three judiciary bills. The three judiciary bills refer to the "Criminal Act amendment," which creates the offense of distorting the law; the "Constitutional Court Act amendment," which introduces a constitutional complaint against final judgments; and the "Court Organization Act amendment," which increases the number of Supreme Court justices from the current 14 to 26.
If the three bills take effect, judges or prosecutors who distort and apply the law could face imprisonment of up to 10 years. A constitutional complaint would also be allowed against Supreme Court final judgments. With the increase in the number of justices, the president would be able to appoint up to 22 Supreme Court justices during the term, including 12 additional seats.
◇ Legal elders urged "exercise the veto," but it was approved at an extraordinary Cabinet meeting
Concerns over the three judiciary bills continue in the legal community. On the 3rd, Chief Justice Jo said, "Please deliberate once more until the very end on whether a sudden great upheaval truly helps the people and whether there is anything that could harm them."
Eight former presidents of the Korean Bar Association and six former presidents of the Korean Women Lawyers Association also issued a joint statement on the 4th urging the president to exercise the veto.
What the legal community particularly flags is the possibility of unconstitutionality. After concluding their meeting last month, chief judges nationwide pointed out regarding the offense of distorting the law that "the elements of the crime are abstract, so the scope of punishment could be excessively expanded, and there are concerns about a flood of complaints and accusations." There were also concerns that it could become difficult for judges to hand down "conviction-of-conscience rulings" that differ from existing Supreme Court precedents.
Concerns were also raised about the constitutional complaint system. The chief judges said, "The finalization of trials could be delayed, causing harm to the public." Former heads of the Korean Bar Association and former presidents of the women lawyers' association also said, "For those in power, it becomes an opportunity to overturn a final Supreme Court ruling, but ordinary people could become victims of the powerful dragging things out." The Supreme Court likewise called the constitutional complaint a "de facto fourth instance" and said, "It does not align with the current constitutional framework."
Concerns were also raised about increasing the number of justices. If the number of justices rises, the number of judicial researchers assisting them must also increase, but because the current number of judges is fixed, transfers of lower-court judges to the Supreme Court could significantly worsen trial delays at frontline courts. At present, an average of 8.4 judicial researchers are assigned per justice.
The government and the ruling party, on the other hand, say these concerns are excessive. Minister of Justice Jung Sung-ho agreed at a full session of The National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee with a question that "if judges and prosecutors intentionally misapply laws and regulations, it could be a crime," in relation to the offense of distorting the law. On the constitutional complaint, he said, "Because it is a system that deals with cases in which fundamental rights are infringed by court rulings, it will be operated in a limited manner." On increasing the number of justices, he emphasized the need, saying, "Delays in appeals at the Supreme Court level are severe."
◇ Ruling bloc directly pressures Chief Justice Jo Hee-de… an "impeachment hearing," too
Debate over the three judiciary bills gained full steam after the Supreme Court on May 1 last year, one month before the presidential election, overturned and remanded President Lee's Public Official Election Act case with a view to conviction. It then took 308 days until the three judiciary bills were approved at the Cabinet meeting.
The opposition argues that if the president appoints 22 of the 26 Supreme Court justices, it could affect the resumption of the president's own trials after leaving office. There are also claims that if an unfavorable outcome is maintained at the Supreme Court, the president could seek to overturn the result through a constitutional complaint.
Some in the ruling bloc are also directly pressuring Chief Justice Jo Hee-de to decide on his position. Democratic Party leader Jung Chung-rae on the 4th told Chief Justice Jo, who had expressed concerns about the three judiciary bills, to "state your position."
The "Fair Society Forum," a group of hard-line ruling-party lawmakers, also held a public hearing at the National Assembly the same day on "the necessity and urgency of impeaching Jo Hee-de."
After the Democratic Party pushed the three judiciary bills through, former National Court Administration Minister (Supreme Court justice) Park Young-jae resigned as minister on the 27th of last month. Park, who had served as the presiding justice on the case before it was referred to the full bench in the president's election-law appeal, had faced calls to step down from Democratic Party members of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee after taking office as minister.
Democratic Party lawmaker Min Hyung-bae said at the hearing, "I believe it should have been the chief justice, not the head of the National Court Administration, who stepped down," adding, "The articles of impeachment have already been prepared."
The hearing was attended by figures including Kim Min-woong, executive representative of Candlelight Action and the brother of Prime Minister Kim Min-seok. Attorney Baek Ju-seon, who delivered the lead presentation, argued regarding the Supreme Court's overturn-and-remand of the president's election-law case with a view to conviction that it "violated the right to a fair trial."