"Step Down Immediately, Cho Hee-dae" vs. "Cannot Intimidate the Judiciary"

[Anchor]

Following Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae's written nomination of Supreme Court justice candidates, Democratic Party leader Kim Min-seok immediately demanded his resignation. Calling him "Cho Hee-dae" and using harsh language, Kim launched a fierce critique, to which the People Power Party strongly protested, calling it an intimidation of the judiciary.

Reporter Kim Kwan-jin has the story.

[Reporter]

Democratic Party leader Kim Min-seok demanded the resignation of Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae over his written nomination of Supreme Court justice candidates, criticizing him with harsh expressions such as "accomplice in rebellion" and "bad student."

[Kim Min-seok / Leader, Democratic Party]: "I believe it is right for Cho Hee-dae, the worst Chief Justice since liberation, to step down. Has he not played the tricks of a legal technician? Do you think the public is a fool? Cho Hee-dae."

Defining the Chief Justice's written nomination as "judicial abuse of power," leader Kim raised his voice, stating, "Reconstitute the Supreme Court itself," and vowed to initiate judicial reform using this incident as a turning point.

Rival parties clashed fiercely at the Legislation and Judiciary Committee of the National Assembly.

The Democratic Party took issue with Chief Justice Cho's nomination, arguing that it neutralized the president's constitutional authority to appoint Supreme Court justices.

[Kim Gi-pyo / Democratic Party Lawmaker]: "Saying 'I have the nomination power, so I'll just submit it in writing and you deal with it'—is this not completely politicizing the appointment process of Supreme Court justices?"

The People Power Party countered that the Chief Justice's nomination power is also a right guaranteed by the Constitution.

[Kwak Kyu-taek / People Power Party Lawmaker]: "If you do that in advance, it is presidential interference with the nomination power, which does not exist anywhere in our country's constitutional provisions. It is illegal interference."

Regarding the customary practice of prior agreement between the presidential office and the Supreme Court, the ruling party argued that "the Chief Justice broke tradition and ignored presidential authority," while the opposition argued that "the presidential office's prior demand, rather than consultation, is unconstitutional."

The Democratic Party announced that it would summon Chief Justice Cho to the National Assembly to question him directly.

[Kim Seung-won / Democratic Party Lawmaker]: "Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae should not hide behind proxies, but appear directly before the Legislation and Judiciary Committee to explain himself to the public."

The People Power Party pushed back, calling it a shaming tactic and an intimidation of the judiciary.

[Joo Jin-woo / People Power Party Lawmaker]: "Summoning the Chief Justice out of the blue during a settlement meeting—this is truly an abuse of authority, an abuse of power, and legislative dictatorship."

At the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, a motion demanding Chief Justice Cho's attendance at the National Assembly was passed led by the Democratic Party, but Chief Justice Cho did not attend yesterday (August 19).

(Video reporting: Oh Young-chun, Kim Yong-woo | Video editing: Yu Mi-ra)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.