[Anchor]
The Blue House has mounted another rebuttal. It argued that although the official document sent to the Supreme Court requesting a re-recommendation clearly stated that it had "decided not to submit the motion for appointment consent to the National Assembly," the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court misled the public on the facts. It also stated that the recommendation process itself had grave flaws.
Reporter Kang Cheong-wan has the details.
[Reporter]
Five hours after Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae issued an additional statement, the Blue House released a two-page rebuttal.
Regarding Chief Justice Cho's claim that the reasons for requesting a re-recommendation for the Supreme Court justice nominee were not clearly stated in the official document dated August 28, the Blue House emphasized, "The official document states, 'As it has been decided not to submit a motion for appointment consent to the National Assembly regarding Supreme Court Justice nominee Son Bong-gi.'"
The Blue House maintained that this sentence clearly articulated its position that it has no intention to appoint him—namely, the reason for requesting a re-recommendation.
The Blue House also dialed up its criticism, stating that Chief Justice Cho distorted the issue yesterday (September 22) as if there were flaws in the official document, and today misled by asserting that the reasons were unclear.
Earlier, it also took issue with Chief Justice Cho's recommendation process itself.
It claimed that contacting candidates individually to ask if they intended to step down, despite having legitimately received four recommendations from the Supreme Court Justice Candidate Recommendation Committee, constituted a "grave procedural flaw."
The Blue House stressed that the president's authority to appoint Supreme Court justices is not a mere formality requiring automatic compliance with the Chief Justice's recommendation, emphasizing that a president endowed with democratic legitimacy through an election must have the power to appoint or refuse to appoint Supreme Court justices.
A Blue House official told SBS, "The request for a re-recommendation was lawful," adding, "There is virtually no possibility that we will request a re-recommendation again or submit nominee Son's appointment consent motion to the National Assembly."
This means that the Blue House will neither send another official document detailing further reasons nor resort to having the Democratic Party lead a vote to reject Son's consent motion in the National Assembly.
The Blue House also officially announced that it is not considering filing for an adjudication on competence dispute.
This is seen as a judgment that doing so would offer no practical benefit.
Speculation is also emerging within political and legal circles that the standoff could drag on until June of next year, when Chief Justice Cho is scheduled to retire.
(Video by Yun Hyeong | Video Editing by Park Seon-soo | Graphics by Kang Yoon-jeong)
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.