[Anchor]
The ruling bloc and the judiciary are locked in a truth battle following a direct clash over the issue of submitting written recommendations for Supreme Court justices. While this crisis superficially stems from differing interpretations of customs regarding the power of recommendation and appointment, analysts suggest it is essentially a preliminary skirmish to secure control over the upcoming appointments of 22 Supreme Court justices.
Reporter Park Jae-yeon has the details.
[Reporter]
The ruling bloc claims that Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae failed to properly coordinate with the presidential office in the process of recommending a successor to former Supreme Court Justice Roh Tae-ak, and that he only notified them of candidate Son Bong-ki on the day the written recommendation was submitted.
[Seo Young-kyo / Chairperson of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee : Isn't it true that the name Son Bong-ki was mentioned for the first time on that day?]
On the other hand, the Supreme Court argues that the presidential office failed to provide an opportunity for a meeting with the President, or that prior consultations regarding the submission of the written document were conducted through the presidential senior secretary for civil affairs.
[Seo Young-kyo / Chairperson of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee (Yesterday) : Have you ever asked for opinions on how things should be handled using the name Son Bong-ki prior to that, or not?]
[Noh Kyung-phil / Minister of Court Administration (Yesterday) : Yes, we continuously consulted on how to handle all four individuals.]
The Democratic Party has begun hanging banners nationwide demanding the voluntary resignation of the Chief Justice and has also vowed to change the appointment process for Supreme Court justices.
[Kim Min-seok / Leader of the Democratic Party : I believe it is also our duty to provide sufficient explanation so that he can step down in response to the demands of the entire nation.]
[Han Byeong-do / Floor Leader of the Democratic Party : We will also carefully review necessary institutional safeguards to ensure that the appointment process for Supreme Court justices is not dictated by the arbitrary judgment of a single Chief Justice.]
Analysts suggest that behind this unprecedented conflict lies a tug-of-war for control over a series of scheduled Supreme Court appointments.
Following the enactment of the law to expand the number of Supreme Court justices to 26 earlier this year, President Lee Jae-myung will exercise appointment power for as many as 22 justices, including the next Chief Justice, during his term in office.
Before retiring in June next year, Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae is set to recommend three successors—including replacements for Justices Roh Tae-ak, Lee Heung-gu, and Chun Dae-yeop—while the next Chief Justice will hold the power of recommendation for 18 justices starting the year after next, including 12 additional positions to be phased in at a rate of four per year over three years.
Consequently, as the judiciary seeks to emphasize the power of recommendation—the core of its independence—and the presidential office highlights the President's appointment power based on democratic legitimacy in future selections, the conflict between these two pillars of the three branches of government—comprising the court's recommendation, the National Assembly's consent, and the President's appointment—is expected to be difficult to resolve anytime soon.
(Video by Oh Young-chun, Shin Dong-hwan, Kim Yong-woo | Video Editing by Lee Seung-jin | Graphics by Seo Seung-hyun)
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.