Will the Deadlock Over Supreme Court Justice Appointments Be Broken? Focus Shifts to Court Administration Minister Appointment

As the recommendation process for the successor to Supreme Court Justice Lee Heung-gu (63, Judicial Research and Training Institute 22nd class), who is set to retire in September, takes place this month, attention is focused on whether the deadlock between the presidential office and the judiciary regarding the first Supreme Court justice appointments under the Lee Jae-myung administration will be resolved.

With growing concerns over leaving the position of Minister of National Court Administration (a Supreme Court Justice position) vacant for four months ahead of full-scale discussions on the revision of the Criminal Procedure Act, there are expectations that both sides may narrow their differences regarding the nomination of Supreme Court justices.

The Supreme Court concluded its collection of opinions on July 3 regarding the 28 individuals who agreed to be screened by the Recommendation Committee for Supreme Court Justice Candidates from among those nominated to succeed Justice Lee Heung-gu.

If the recommendation committee convenes within this month, at least three candidates are expected to be recommended.

Once Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae selects a final candidate based on the committee's opinion and formally nominates them to President Lee Jae-myung, the appointment will be finalized following a parliamentary confirmation hearing.

Particular interest is focused on whether Chief Justice Cho will simultaneously nominate two candidates, including a successor for Justice Noh Tae-ak (16th class), who retired in March, in addition to the successor for Justice Lee.

Previously, the recommendation committee formed ahead of Justice Noh's retirement recommended four individuals on January 21, including Seoul High Court Judges Kim Min-ki and Park Soon-young, Daegu District Court Presiding Judge Son Bong-gi, and Seoul High Court Presiding Judge Yoon Sung-sik. However, the Chief Justice's nomination has been delayed for over five months.

This is due to the failure of the presidential office and the judiciary to narrow their differences over the final candidates.

While the authority to nominate Supreme Court justices lies with the Chief Justice under the Constitution, it is customary for the presidential office and the Chief Justice to reach a final decision through consultation.

Once the recommendation for Justice Lee Heung-gu's successor is made, some observers suggest that a compromise could be reached through a give-and-take process while nominating both successors simultaneously. On the other hand, some view it as possible that the nominations could proceed sequentially, with the nomination for Justice Noh Tae-ak's successor remaining delayed while the process for Justice Lee Heung-gu's successor moves forward first.

The timing of the appointment for the Minister of National Court Administration, which has been vacant for four months, is also a point of interest.

Previously, Supreme Court Justice Park Young-jae (22nd class) took office as the successor to former Minister Cheon Dae-yeop on January 16, but he expressed his intention to resign on February 27, just 42 days after taking office, following the backlash over the three judicial bills (the law on judicial distortion, the introduction of trial appeals, and the increase in the number of Supreme Court justices).

Since then, Chief Justice Cho has not appointed a successor, leaving Ki Woo-jong, Deputy Minister of National Court Administration, to serve as acting minister.

The position of the minister was left vacant to prioritize preventing a disruption in trial operations, as the nomination process for the successor to Justice Noh had stalled.

In a full 14-member configuration, 12 Supreme Court justices, excluding the Chief Justice and the Minister of National Court Administration, handle trials.

However, there is criticism that it is inappropriate to leave the position of the Minister of National Court Administration vacant for a long time, as the minister must convey the judiciary's position to the National Assembly amid ongoing discussions on the revision of the Criminal Procedure Act as well as follow-up legislation for the three judicial bills.

Consequently, there is an expectation within the court that the vacancy for the minister will be filled within this month.

Once a new minister is appointed, it is expected that behind-the-scenes coordination between the presidential office and the Supreme Court will accelerate, as the appointment of successor justices can no longer be delayed if they are to avoid disruptions in trial operations.

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