'First in Constitutional History': Impeachment Trial of Board of Audit and Inspection Chairman Dismissed
Unanimous Decision After 98 Days... Immediate Return to Work
"Difficult to Conclude Chairman Abandoned Neutrality"
Three Justices: "Violation Exists, But Not Grounds for Dismissal"
On the 13th, the Constitutional Court unanimously dismissed the impeachment trial of Choi Jae-hae, the Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection. Accordingly, Chairman Choi returned to work 98 days after the National Assembly passed the impeachment motion.
Choi Jae-hae, Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection, is stating his position as he arrives at the Board of Audit and Inspection in Jongno-gu, Seoul on the 13th. On the same day, the Constitutional Court unanimously dismissed the impeachment motion against Chairman Choi. March 13, 2025. Photo by Kang Jin-hyung
On the morning of the same day, the Constitutional Court held the impeachment trial verdict for Chairman Choi and dismissed the impeachment motion. The impeachment trial request for the Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection, the first of its kind in constitutional history, concluded with dismissal.
In the dismissal ruling, the Constitutional Court stated, "It is difficult to conclude that Chairman Choi's actions or statements abandoned independence or neutrality and were politically biased," and added, "It is hard to see that public trust was undermined or that the duty to maintain the dignity of public officials was violated."
On December 5 of last year, the National Assembly proposed and passed an impeachment motion against Chairman Choi for reasons including ▲ acts that undermined the independence of the Board of Audit and Inspection ▲ targeted audits against the Chairperson of the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission and others ▲ violations of duties as Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection ▲ refusal to submit materials requested by the National Assembly. The Constitutional Court held three preparatory hearings and one oral argument on the 12th of last month before concluding the trial.
On this day, the Constitutional Court judged that Chairman Choi's remark about "supporting the President's state administration" could be interpreted as intending to contribute to state administration through sincere audits and was not illegal. The Court also found that "(the Board of Audit and Inspection) conducted audits on whether the procedures prescribed by relevant laws were followed in the decision process for relocating the Presidential Office and residence, and there were no other circumstances indicating a deficient audit."
Regarding the allegation of conducting a "targeted audit" against former Chairperson Jeon Hyun-hee of the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission and others, the Court stated, "It was a specific issue audit based on multiple reports, and it is difficult to conclude that it was an audit intended to pressure the resignation of the Chairperson." The request for investigation against former Chairperson Jeon was also deemed "not clearly arbitrary or a violation of political neutrality, and thus not in violation of the State Public Officials Act."
Furthermore, the claim that the audit related to the 'West Sea Public Official Shooting Incident' violated the Military Secrets Protection Act was "not specified in the impeachment resolution" and therefore was not considered. The audit of the Central Election Commission was also judged not to be an act performed by Chairman Choi in his capacity as Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection.
Constitutional Court Justices Attending the Impeachment Trial Verdict of the Board of Audit and Inspection Chairman and Three Prosecutors. Photo by Yonhap News
Regarding the claim that refusal to submit materials to the National Assembly was grounds for impeachment, the Court ruled that "it cannot be seen as a violation of the National Assembly Witness Examination Act." However, it noted that "Chairman Choi's refusal to allow access to the minutes during the on-site inspection by the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee violated the National Assembly Witness Examination Act," but added, "this can be seen as intended to facilitate the smooth implementation of audit results, and it is difficult to view it as an intention to interfere with or unduly influence the audit results."
Justices Lee Mi-seon, Jung Jeong-mi, and Jung Gye-seon agreed with the court's conclusion that the impeachment request should be dismissed but left a separate opinion stating that Chairman Choi did violate the Constitution and the Board of Audit and Inspection Act. They stated, "The respondent's act of revising the directive to grant the Prime Minister the right to request a public interest audit also violated the Constitution and the Board of Audit and Inspection Act, but it is difficult to see that the violation was serious enough to justify dismissal."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
