After failure to agree on a Supreme Court justice recommendation, did they try to select a new slate of candidates…Criticism over Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae’s court attempting to neutralize the recommendation committee - 경향신문

This article was translated by an AI tool. Feedback Here.

Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae heads to the Supreme Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul, on the 21st. Yonhap News

Controversy continues after it emerged that, before Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae recommended a Supreme Court justice candidate to President Lee Jae Myung, Court Administration Office Chief Noh Kyung-pil sounded out the candidates about rerunning the recommendation process. Critics say this amounts to an attempt to neutralize the Supreme Court Justice Candidate Recommendation Committee, a system introduced to check the chief justice’s exclusive recommendation power.

According to reporting compiled on the 23rd, Noh contacted the four candidates shortlisted by the recommendation committee to succeed former Justice Noh Tae-ak early last week to ask their views on rerunning the recommendation process. Earlier, in January, the committee recommended four candidates to Chief Justice Cho: Seoul High Court judges Kim Min-gi and Park Soon-young, Daegu District Court senior judge Son Bong-gi, and Seoul High Court senior judge Yoon Sung-sik.

With no agreement on a final nominee for Chief Justice Cho to recommend to President Lee having been reached for roughly seven months, this is seen as considering effectively setting aside the existing recommendations and drawing up a new slate. On the 18th, without an agreement with the presidential office, Cho recommended Senior Judge Son to the president. At the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee’s full session on the 19th, Noh said he had phoned the four candidates, stating, “Some candidates refused, so it was immediately scrapped,” and, “There was no instruction from the chief justice, and I didn’t tell them to resign; I merely sought their views freely.”

Even so, criticism is emerging inside and outside the judiciary that the Court Administration Office attempted to hollow out the recommendation committee system by intervening in the process of recommending a Supreme Court justice. The Court Organization Act stipulates that a recommendation committee be formed each time a justice is to be recommended, and that the chief justice, when making a recommendation, respect the committee’s recommendations. This is a mechanism to control the recommendation power concentrated in the chief justice.

Han Sang-hee, emeritus professor at Konkuk University Law School, said, “For the head of the Court Administration Office to tamper with an outcome produced by procedures set forth in law exceeds his authority,” adding, “The candidates emerged through the committee’s formal procedures; asking them whether they would be willing to resign is unthinkable.” He continued, “Regardless of whether the chief justice issued any instructions, the fact that the administration office chief approached the candidates to ask about rerunning the process ignores the very existence of the recommendation committee,” and, “It is deplorable that the selection of Supreme Court justices, which profoundly affects people’s daily lives, would be carried out through backroom, collusive dealings.”

A senior judge who requested anonymity also said, “In the past, the chief justice would send ‘notes’ to the committee to demand a particular candidate, but reforms eliminated that practice; this episode reads as a de facto attempt to disregard the committee’s decision,” adding, “It is worrisome because it could set a bad precedent that, whenever there is no favored candidate, the committee can simply be run again and again until one is picked.”

On the 21st, ruling-party members of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, including its ruling-party secretary Kim Seung-won, hold a press conference at the National Assembly press center calling for Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae to resign. Yonhap News

Some argue that, to prevent the various controversies surrounding this justice recommendation, the overall selection process needs to be overhauled at a fundamental level. On the 20th, the Judicial Center of Lawyers for a Democratic Society (Minbyun) issued a statement urging the National Assembly to amend the Court Organization Act to establish concrete measures to rein in abuses of the chief justice’s recommendation power and to abolish the Court Administration Office to block the possibility of abuse of judicial administration authority. The civic group People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy also said in a commentary that “there should be discussions on amending the Court Organization Act, including the chief justice’s recommendation authority, and on constitutional amendments.”

The presidential office has labeled Cho’s written-form recommendation of Senior Judge Son as an ‘unprecedented unilateral notice that skipped consultations’ and is discussing follow-up responses. One option reportedly under consideration is for President Lee to ask Chief Justice Cho to resubmit a nominee to succeed former Justice Noh.

In that case, observers expect the Supreme Court would have to start over from the stage of soliciting recommendations for candidates. It could newly constitute a recommendation committee for Noh’s successor, or, for a quicker selection, reactivate the committee formed in December last year.

Some also argue that if President Lee rejects the recommendation, Chief Justice Cho should file a competence dispute adjudication with the Constitutional Court. Attorney Ha Seung-soo said, “Such disputes between the recommender and the appointing authority could arise again in the future,” adding, “If the Constitutional Court rules in a competence dispute case, it could clarify the relationship between the recommendation authority and the appointment authority.”