Last November, members of the Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) proposed an impeachment motion against former Broadcasting and Communications Commission Chairman Lee Dong-gwan and prosecutors Son Joon-sung and Lee Jeong-seop, then withdrew and refiled it. The Constitutional Court has ruled that the actions of National Assembly Speaker Kim Jin-pyo in accepting these withdrawals and refilings do not infringe upon the deliberation and voting rights of the People Power Party (PPP) members of the National Assembly.
On the 28th, the Constitutional Court unanimously dismissed the petition for adjudication of authority dispute filed by 111 PPP members, including floor leader Yoon Jae-ok, against Speaker Kim.
Regarding Speaker Kim’s acceptance of the withdrawal of the impeachment motion, the Constitutional Court stated, "The respondent only reported to the plenary session that the impeachment motion was proposed but did not submit the motion as an agenda item to the plenary session. Therefore, the impeachment motion does not fall under the 'bill that has become an agenda in the plenary session' as defined in Article 90, Paragraph 2 of the National Assembly Act. As a result, the member who proposed the motion may withdraw it without the plenary session’s consent."
It continued, "Therefore, the petitioners do not have the authority to deliberate or vote on whether to consent to the withdrawal of the impeachment motion, and since there is no possibility of infringement of such authority, the petition challenging the acceptance of the withdrawal is inadmissible."
Regarding the acceptance of the re-proposal of the impeachment motion by DPK members, the Court added, "Since the petitioners can no longer challenge the infringement of authority caused by this acceptance, the effect of the withdrawal of the impeachment motion remains valid. Accordingly, the re-proposed impeachment motion does not violate the principle of ne bis in idem (no double jeopardy). Therefore, there is no possibility that the declaration of approval infringes on the petitioners’ deliberation and voting rights, and the petition challenging the declaration of approval is also inadmissible."
On November 9 last year, 168 DPK members proposed an impeachment motion against former Chairman Lee and prosecutors Son Joon-sung and Lee Jeong-seop.
On the same day, at around 2:38 p.m., Speaker Kim reported to the National Assembly plenary session that the impeachment motion had been proposed, and at around 3:54 p.m. on the same day, he declared the adjournment of the plenary session.
According to the National Assembly Act, if a motion for impeachment is not voted on within 72 hours after being reported, it is discarded.
Due to the adjournment of the plenary session, it became impossible to hold a plenary vote on the impeachment motion between 24 hours and 72 hours after the motion was reported. Consequently, DPK members requested the withdrawal of the impeachment motion from the Speaker on November 10, just one day after the proposal, and Speaker Kim accepted the withdrawal.
In response, PPP members filed a petition for adjudication of authority dispute on November 13, claiming that Speaker Kim’s acceptance of the withdrawal infringed on their rights to deliberate and vote.
The PPP argued that this series of actions violated the National Assembly Act. According to Article 90 of the Act, a member may withdraw a proposed bill, but if it has become an agenda item in the plenary session, withdrawal requires the plenary session’s consent.
Subsequently, on November 28 last year, DPK members re-proposed the impeachment motion against prosecutors Son Joon-sung and Lee Jeong-seop with the same content. On December 1, Speaker Kim submitted the re-proposed impeachment motion as an agenda item to the National Assembly plenary session, conducted a vote, and declared its approval.
On December 5, PPP members submitted a request to the Constitutional Court to amend their petition to include a claim for nullification of Speaker Kim’s declaration of approval of the re-proposed impeachment motion.
However, the Constitutional Court judged that, based on the current interpretation of the National Assembly Act, Speaker Kim’s actions do not have the potential to infringe upon the PPP members’ rights to deliberate and vote.
The Constitutional Court is currently reviewing the impeachment trial petition against Prosecutor General Son Joon-sung and Prosecutor Lee Jeong-seop.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
