[Anchor]

As the conflict between the president and the chief justice over the appointment of Supreme Court justices escalates into a direct clash, we asked constitutional experts for their views. While some argue that the president's appointment power takes precedence and therefore the chief justice must accept the president's intent, others contend that if the president rejects a candidate, the reasons for doing so should at least be clearly stated.

Reporter Shin Yong-il has the story.

[Reporter]

Some constitutional scholars argue that between the president's appointment power and the chief justice's right to recommend candidates for appointment, the right of recommendation cannot override the appointment power.

While the chief justice's recommendation of candidates serves as an important safeguard to prevent the executive branch from taking over the judiciary through so-called crony appointments, it is merely a supplementary measure, and the president's final appointment constitutes the fundamental authority.

[Lim Ji-bong / Professor, Sogang University Law School: Throughout the entire process of appointing Supreme Court justices, the president's appointment power serves as the highest authority, exerting influence over the entire procedure of appointing Supreme Court justices.]

However, another view is that the appointment power and the right of recommendation are not hierarchical concepts, and that the appointment power is rather formal.

Just as the president appoints the three Constitutional Court justices designated by the chief justice without alteration, the logic follows that the president cannot reject Supreme Court justice candidates nominated by the chief justice.

Additionally, opinions have been raised that even if the president can decide whether to make an appointment, the president cannot interfere with the chief justice's right to recommendation, and even if an appointment is refused, the reasons must be clearly stated.

[Cha Jin-ah / Professor, Korea University Law School: By providing specific reasons, wouldn't it be possible to understand why this person is not suitable? Only then would it be possible to re-recommend another suitable person.]

Experts unanimously urged that as this conflict falls into a deadlock with a high likelihood of a prolonged vacancy among Supreme Court justices, both the presidential office and the Supreme Court should find a compromise as soon as possible.

(Video by: Kim Han-gyeol, Video Editing by: Kim Jong-mi)