Opposition: "Supreme Court's Expedited Trial for Lee Jaemyung Raises Suspicions of Political Considerations"

Democratic Party and Justice and Innovation Party Judiciary Committee Members:
"Referral to the Full Bench Is an Exceptional Pattern"
"There Must Not Be a Verdict That Ignores Substantive Truth and Reverses Priorities"

Regarding the Supreme Court's decision to expedite the trial process for Lee Jaemyung, former leader of the Democratic Party and a presidential primary candidate, opposition parties have criticized the move, questioning whether it was made for political reasons.

Members of the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee from the Democratic Party and the Party for Justice and Innovation held a press conference at the National Assembly on this day, expressing doubts about the Supreme Court's swift handling of the trial. They stated, "There must never be a verdict that prioritizes procedural deadlines over substantive truth, resulting in a reversal of priorities," and emphasized, "All 12 Supreme Court justices must thoroughly review the records and reach a sufficient consensus."

Members of the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee from the Democratic Party and the Party for Justice and Innovation hold a press conference at the National Assembly Communication Office in Yeouido, Seoul, on the 8th. Photo by Yonhap News

Representative Park, who serves as the Democratic Party's secretary on the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, and others stated at the press conference that the Supreme Court appears to be rushing the trial schedule for Lee Jaemyung. They said, "There must not be a verdict that ignores substantive truth and results in a reversal of priorities." While they acknowledged that the Supreme Court's decision on the 22nd to refer Lee's case to the full bench was understandable, they also pointed out, "However, if the referral to the full bench was anticipated from the beginning and the smaller panel's review was merely a formality, this is an unprecedented and exceptional pattern that we have not witnessed before."

They further stated, "It is not reasonable to treat this defendant's case differently simply because he is a prominent presidential candidate, especially considering the potential political and social repercussions." They reiterated, "All 12 Supreme Court justices must conduct a thorough review of the records and reach a sufficient consensus." They added, "The public will be watching this closely."