Rivalry Erupts Between Ruling and Opposition Lawmakers Over Supreme Court Justice Renomination at Daegu Court Audit

Ruling and opposition lawmakers engaged in a war of words over the issue of the renomination of a Supreme Court justice candidate during a parliamentary audit of the Daegu High Court and other regional courts.

During the National Assembly Legislation and Judiciary Committee audit held on the morning of the 20th, Representative Kim Tae-gyu of the People Power Party raised suspicions of political bias and regional discrimination regarding the nomination of Daegu District Court Senior Judge Son Bong-ki for Supreme Court justice.

Praising Judge Son, Representative Kim stated, "He is a judge with profound legal knowledge and exceptional practical skills," adding, "I believe he is a thorough legalist who is neither to the left nor to the right."

He continued, "Those who preach equality are the very ones disparaging and looking down on candidate Son as a regional local judge," and argued, "Are they elevating those from the Honam region or with leftist tendencies while showing no interest in someone from the Yeongnam region who is a legalist?"

He further noted, "Even though a prestigious Supreme Court justice candidate from the region has emerged and is receiving this kind of treatment, the judiciary is as quiet as a dead mouse," and said, "I believe that at least within the Daegu judiciary, it is right to point this out and for judges to express their opinions collectively."

Representative Park Hyung-soo of the same party, who served as the audit chair, also pointed out the situation where the National Assembly's confirmation procedures for candidate Son are not proceeding.

Representative Park mentioned, "Under the Constitution, there is no hierarchy among the Chief Justice's right to nominate, the National Assembly's right to consent, and the President's right to appoint," adding, "If the President claims the right to pick whomever they want starting from the nomination stage simply because they hold the appointment power, the Chief Justice's nomination right becomes meaningless."

He also emphasized, "The way to resolve this crisis is to let the National Assembly proceed with the confirmation process," and stressed, "It cannot be resolved by demanding a renomination, as the National Assembly could vote it down or the President could refuse the appointment."

Representative Park also raised an issue regarding the fact that the candidate's spouse is a sitting Constitutional Court justice, stating, "The President is insisting on a specific Supreme Court justice candidate. With the introduction of the constitutional complaint system for trials, a conflict issue could arise if Supreme Court rulings become subject to review by the Constitutional Court."

In response, Representative Kim Ki-pyo of the Democratic Party of Korea countered Representative Park's argument, questioning, "Does that mean judicial couples are all barred?" and implying that it is inappropriate to raise conflict-of-interest issues solely on the grounds of being a judge couple.

Representative Kim Dong-a of the same party also challenged, "Are you saying judges rule not according to the law and their conscience, but according to their status and spouse?" and asked, "Does that mean they rule favorably when they are close to someone and strictly when they are distant?"

He then brought up the long-standing working relationship between candidate Son and the Chief Judge of the Daegu District Court, pointing out, "Does this mean the Chief Judge will also benefit if candidate Son becomes a Supreme Court justice?"

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