The Constitutional Court arranged a session to hear from researchers at the German Federal Constitutional Court about their experiences with the constitutional complaint against judgments system introduced in March. The system allows final Supreme Court rulings to be challenged again at the Constitutional Court. Germany introduced the system in 1951 and has operated it for 75 years.
The Constitutional Court held a "Korea-Germany Constitutional Court researchers roundtable" on the morning of the day at the Constitutional Court in Jongno-gu, Seoul. On the Korean side, about 40 people, including constitutional researchers, attended, and on the German side, 29 former and current constitutional researchers from the Federal Constitutional Court attended.
Constitutional Court President Kim Sang-hwan said in a welcome remark, "Since its launch in 1998, Korea's Constitutional Court has issued many decisions expanding the fundamental rights of the people," and added, "Through important decisions on constitutional issues in cases such as the presidential impeachment trial and the dissolution of a political party, it has confirmed that the Constitution is the highest norm in our society." Kim continued, "This year, Korea newly introduced the constitutional complaint against judgments," and noted, "Germany's long-standing experience operating this system will be a very valuable reference."
At the roundtable, Korean researchers fired off questions on issues ranging from theoretical controversies to practical problems related to the constitutional complaint against judgments. When one researcher asked about the intensity of review in such cases, a German researcher said, "It depends on which specialized court's domain it falls into and which fundamental right is at issue," and added, "Cases in which a judgment directly restricts fundamental rights—such as criminal trials or the freedoms of person, expression, and assembly—are examined relatively strictly."
There was also a question about how to respond when a court repeats the same kind of decision even after the Constitutional Court has annulled a judgment. In response, the German side said, "In Germany, the party can file another constitutional complaint." In fact, in Germany there has been a case where the Federal Constitutional Court annulled the same case's judgment three times. The German side added, "There is no need to understand this as a conflict between the Constitutional Court and the specialized courts," and explained, "Specialized courts can experience multiple trials and errors in the process of implementing constitutional requirements."
The German Federal Constitutional Court side also said it does not separately monitor follow-up trials after annulling a judgment. A German researcher said, "There is no separate system that regularly tracks or oversees how a specialized court actually conducted the follow-up trial after an annulment or remand decision," and added, "As a rule, the Federal Constitutional Court no longer gets involved."
A Korean researcher asked why Germany does not list a separate respondent in constitutional complaint against judgments cases and whether court officials can be summoned if a hearing is held. In Korea, courts are typically listed as respondents. The German side explained, "There is a rule that a judge must not argue outside the court about a judgment they handed down," and added, "Opinions can be obtained in writing."
Meanwhile, Germany selects one country each year to meet with officials from that country's constitutional institutions. This year, it chose Korea as the country to visit. Germany first proposed a roundtable on the role of Korea's Constitutional Court on its 38th anniversary, the constitutional complaint system, and the Aug. 2024 constitutional nonconformity decision on the climate crisis. Korea accepted and asked Germany to share its experience with the constitutional complaint against judgments implemented this year, leading to the organization of this roundtable.