Pressure piles on chief justice

Ruling party hit for unilateral push against the judiciary

The ruling Democratic Party of Korea's (DPK) call for Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae to step down is triggering controversy. Since Cho said on Sept. 12 that judicial independence should be upheld, the DPK and larger ruling bloc has aggressively asked him to account for the suspected biases of the judiciary. A few hardliners have even called for his impeachment.

DPK chief Jung Chung-rae referred to Cho as "the vanguard of anti-Lee Jae Myung political struggle" and said he should step down. DPK Rep. Choo Mi-ae, who chairs the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee, accused Cho of "protecting the insurrectionists by delaying their trials." The DPK officials not only interpreted Cho's verbal call for judicial independence as a veiled opposition to the Lee administration's planned judiciary reform but also questioned his impartiality regarding insurrection cases in particular.

In a public statement Wednesday, Cho rebutted claims made by DPK Rep. Boo Seung-chan that the chief justice had met with former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo or other outside figures after the April impeachment of former President Yoon Suk Yeol. Boo alleged that Cho discussed a pending Supreme Court ruling on then presidential candidate Lee's election law violation charges, which allegedly undermined the top court's impartiality. The former prime minister also denied the allegation.

A behemoth ruling party working to oust a chief justice and the top judge's rebuttal is not common. But that is what is occurring, a ruling party and the judiciary sharply pitted against each other over judiciary's impartiality and independence against a series of sensitive cases and forthcoming judicial reform.

A political party will invariably act on its partisan interests. Nevertheless, the push against the chief justice is aggressive. The DPK enjoys a majority in the National Assembly. As a new president chosen in the wake of impeachment, Lee enjoys a support rating well over 50 percent. The actions of such a powerful ruling bloc carry the potential of being misunderstood as an attempt to wield influence on the judiciary, an independent branch of government.

The presidential office is making efforts to distance itself from the DPK's hardline stance, but the office and the president himself have made seemingly contradictory statements.

Presidential spokeswoman Kang Yu-jung on Monday had to retract her comment that the top judge should consider calls for resignation if they "reflect the spirit of the Constitution and the will of the people." She later clarified that her comments were meant to stress that the judiciary, as an appointed body, should respect the authority of elected officials. The president's Tuesday Cabinet meeting deepened the confusion when he warned that those who have authority or power should not mistake it as theirs, stressing that the "source of authority or power always comes from the people."

Understandably, partisan bickering is also part of the package in the Assembly, especially with Korea's single presidential term system, where the ruling administration and party are deemed most effective in their first two years. However, this brute push against the judiciary is overwhelming. In addition, a DPK-driven plan to create a new tribunal court to deal with insurrection cases stemming from the Dec. 3 martial law declaration is another controversial issue at the center of the DPK and the judiciary's friction.

The DPK's source of discontent dates back to May, when Cho sent back a not guilty verdict for then-candidate Lee on election law violation charges to a lower court, a move the party saw as an abuse of power and election interference. The confrontation is flaring up again with a judiciary reform bill set for early October. It seems that there is also a whiff of angst from the DPK that the insurrection cases against Yoon are stalling, triggered in particular by a recent court decision to not detain former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo even as he is being investigated for his role in the insurrection.

Any calls for accountability and reform of an independent branch of government like the judiciary would do well to go through more diverse parties or rounds of intense debate and discussion.

Having witnessed an unexpected decline in Korea's hard-won democracy with the Dec. 3 martial law declaration and the consequent impeachment of the former president, Korea can reform and improve some of its lacking elements in government structure. The fundamental principles of checks and balances and the division of power and independence of the three branches of government -- the heart and soul of Korea's democracy -- must stand immovable.

(END)