Cho Hee-dae's Written Nomination Triggers Debate: Conservative Lawyers' Group Defends Move vs. Progressive Group Cites Abuse of Power

Lawyers' organizations have expressed contrasting views regarding Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae's submission of a Supreme Court justice nominee through a written document.

Hanビョン (Lawyers for Human Rights and Unification of Korea / Hanbyun), a conservative lawyers' organization, criticized the controversy surrounding Chief Justice Cho's recent written nomination today (August 20), stating, "In-person nomination is merely a convention, not a legal obligation. Dismissing it as a unilateral notification completely distorts the facts."

In a statement released that day, Hanbyun stated, "The power to nominate Supreme Court justices is an inherent authority granted exclusively to the Chief Justice by the Constitution," adding, "Neither the Constitution nor the laws mandate any specific method, whether it be in-person or in writing."

Hanbyun further pointed out, "In-person nomination is just a convention, by no means a legal obligation. Furthermore, looking at the circumstances of this written nomination, there is no room for accusations of a 'passing' maneuver."

The group continued, "The Chief Justice requested a meeting with the President, but it did not materialize, and the written notification method was also discussed with the Office of the Senior Presidential Secretary for Civil Affairs. Dismissing this as a 'unilateral notification' is a direct distortion of the facts."

They also argued that the Chief Justice's nomination this time was a responsible measure to prevent a judicial vacancy and fulfilled the duties entrusted by the Constitution.

At the same time, they stated, "The President's appointment power is nothing more than a formal authority exercised in the status of the head of state," and added, "Threatening to refuse appointments under the pretext of the nomination format and intimidating the Chief Justice is an unconstitutional act that dismantles the foundation of the separation of powers on its own."

Hanbyun urged the Democratic Party to halt threats of impeachment against the Chief Justice, and urged the President and the National Assembly to promptly proceed with the Supreme Court justice appointment procedures.

Meanwhile, MINBYUN-Lawyers for a Democratic Society issued a critical stance on Chief Justice Cho's actions, calling it an "abuse of power."

In a statement released the same day, MINBYUN stated, "We condemn the abuse of the power to nominate Supreme Court justices and the attempt by the National Court Administration to neutralize the recommendation process."

MINBYUN pointed out that more than five months have passed since former Supreme Court Justice Roh Tae-ak retired in March without a successor being nominated, stating, "Nomination is a duty and obligation granted to the Chief Justice by the Constitution, not a private authority that can be delayed until a favorable outcome is produced."

In particular, citing the fact that National Court Administration Minister Noh Kyung-pil individually contacted four existing Supreme Court justice candidates and mentioned a plan to re-conduct the candidate recommendation process, they argued that "the National Court Administration attempted to invalidate the previous Supreme Court justice candidate recommendation procedure."

MINBYUN demanded, "Both failing to make a nomination for over five months and attempting to reverse the recommendation results in the meantime are clear abuses of the nomination power," adding, "The Chief Justice should immediately apologize for the abuse of nomination power and the attempt to neutralize the Supreme Court Justice Recommendation Committee."

In addition, they urged the National Assembly to revise the Court Organization Act to prevent the abuse of the power to nominate Supreme Court justices and to abolish the National Court Administration.

(Photo: Yonhap News)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.