Cheong Wa Dae Asks for New Nomination of Supreme Court Justice, Jo Hee-dae Says 'Apologetic to Public'

[Anchor]

Regarding Supreme Court Justice nominee Son Bong-ki, who became embroiled in controversy over a "written nomination," the presidential office has requested Chief Justice Jo Hee-dae to re-nominate another candidate. Chief Justice Jo stated that he is "apologetic for causing concern to the public."

Reporter Park Yerim has the details.

[Reporter]

The presidential office announced yesterday afternoon (the 28th) that it would not submit the motion for the appointment of nominee Son Bong-ki—who was nominated as the successor to former Supreme Court Justice Noh Tae-ak—to the National Assembly, and that it has requested a "re-nomination" from Chief Justice Jo Hee-dae.

It explained the reason for the "re-nomination" as a lack of sufficient procedural completeness.

[Kang Yu-jung / Senior Presidential Spokesperson: Nominee Son Bong-ki was unilaterally nominated in writing without any substantial consultation taking place.]

This comes 10 days after the ruling bloc and the judiciary clashed on the 18th due to Chief Justice Jo's written nomination.

The presidential office recalled the "Supreme Court justice appointment procedure" stipulated by the Constitution—namely "nomination by the Chief Justice, consent by the National Assembly, and appointment by the President." It defined that the President is a public representative directly elected by the sovereign citizens, while the Chief Justice is an official appointed by the President with the consent of the National Assembly. Thus, the Chief Justice's right to nominate is "an authority that supports" the President's right to appointment so that it may be exercised correctly.

The presidential office particularly emphasized that the right to nominate must be exercised fairly by respecting the recommendations of the Supreme Court Justice Recommendation Committee. As the recommendation committee recommended Kim Min-ki, Park Sun-young, Son Bong-ki, and Yoon Sung-sik as successors to former Justice Noh Tae-ak last January, this is interpreted as a demand to nominate someone from the remaining three excluding nominee Son.

Some interpret that effectively nominee Kim is in mind, given that nominee Park is concurrently serving as a member of the National Election Commission and nominee Yoon has become the presiding judge of the trial division dedicated to internal rebellion cases.

In response to reporters' questions regarding whether the recommendation committee will be reconfigured, Chief Justice Jo only replied that he will organize and release an official stance next week.

[Jo Hee-dae / Chief Justice: I would like to say that I am sorry for causing concern to the citizens. Detailed matters are currently under review by us....]

Regarding the demand by the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee for his attendance on the 31st, Chief Justice Jo submitted an opinion stating that he will not attend, noting that "having the Chief Justice testify regarding the exercise of the nomination power, which is an independent constitutional authority of the judiciary, goes against the separation of powers and judicial independence."

The People Power Party criticized that the presidential office is blatantly intimidating the judiciary.

[Park Hyung-soo / Member of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, People Power Party: I hope you do not leave a precedent where the President can pick and choose judicial appointments to their liking.]

The Democratic Party pressured Chief Justice Jo to proceed with the re-nomination process without delay.

(Reported by Jung Sang-bo and Yoon Hyung | Video edited by Park Sun-soo | Designed by Yang Gi-tae)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.