Two Agenda Items Tabled for "Independent and Fair Trials"
Agenda Directly Addressing Supreme Court Ruling Fails to Meet Requirements
Chairperson: "Expressing Opinions on the Supreme Court Ruling and Procedures Deemed Inappropriate"
The agenda for the National Judges' Representatives Meeting, which will address the controversy surrounding the Supreme Court en banc ruling on Democratic Party presidential candidate Lee Jaemyung, has been set. This comes just 11 days after the decision to convene the meeting. However, the agenda effectively excludes any items that directly challenge the Supreme Court ruling at the center of the controversy.
On May 20, the Judges' Representatives Meeting announced that it had tabled two items under the theme of "Independent and Fair Trials," as proposed by Chairperson Kim Yeyoung (Judicial Research and Training Institute, 30th class), Chief Judge of the Seoul Southern District Court. These items will be discussed and put to a vote at an extraordinary meeting scheduled for the morning of May 26, after which the results will be made public. The meeting was prompted by growing internal controversy within the judiciary after the Supreme Court remanded Lee Jaemyung's violation of the Public Official Election Act case for a guilty verdict.
The first agenda item focuses on analyzing the causes of threats to judicial independence and discussing future countermeasures. The Judges' Representatives Meeting stated that it "reaffirms that judicial independence is an absolutely protected value in a democratic nation, and at the same time, will strive to uphold the fairness of trials and the democratic accountability of the judiciary." The statement also said, "Going forward, the 'Judicial Trust and Judicial Ethics Subcommittee' will monitor the developments of this situation, analyze its causes, and discuss countermeasures."
The second agenda item addresses the potential threat to judicial independence posed by legislative amendments targeting specific trials and attempts to impeach judges. This appears to reflect concerns over the Democratic Party's push to amend the Public Official Election Act and the Criminal Procedure Act following the Supreme Court ruling, as well as moves to launch a special investigation and impeachment proceedings against Chief Justice Cho Heedae. The Judges' Representatives Meeting stated that it "recognizes with grave concern the erosion of public trust in the judiciary, which forms the foundation of judicial independence," and "expresses deep concern over the possibility that various forms of accountability and institutional changes targeting specific trials may infringe on judicial independence."
Regarding the agenda items, a representative of the Judges' Representatives Meeting stated, "There were other proposed items besides those officially notified, but they were not formally tabled as they did not meet the requirements." An agenda item can be tabled if a judges' representative obtains the consent of four other representatives. It is reported that, prior to the meeting, more specific items were discussed in group chat rooms. These included whether to express opinions on the unusually rapid Supreme Court review and ruling in Lee's case, which raised suspicions about political neutrality, and whether the Democratic Party's public demand for Chief Justice Cho's resignation and the holding of a hearing should be regarded as infringements on judicial independence. However, amid widespread negative views about holding the meeting itself, it appears that agenda items calling for active statements of opinion did not meet the consent requirements.
Chairperson Kim, who tabled the items, said, "I prepared the agenda by taking into account as many of the opinions raised during the discussion on whether to convene an extraordinary meeting as possible," and added, "I determined that it would be inappropriate to express opinions on the merits of individual trials and procedures related to the case at the center of the Supreme Court controversy." She continued, "In connection with this situation, we will reflect deeply on and express concern about values such as judicial independence and the democratic accountability of judges, while limiting statements to general opinions on judicial trust and judicial independence."
Meanwhile, the Judges' Representatives Meeting can be convened at the discretion of the chairperson or at the request of at least one-fifth of the judges' representatives. Previously, 126 judges' representatives conducted a vote in an online group chat until 6 p.m. on May 8, but the deadline was extended to 10 a.m. on May 9 at the request for more time to gather opinions. However, as of the morning of May 9, the required quorum of one-fifth had not been reached, and it was only after securing the consent of 26 representatives that the meeting was decided. It is reported that about 70 judges' representatives voiced opposition to holding the meeting. The extraordinary meeting can be held if a majority of members are present, and each agenda item requires approval by a majority of those present to be adopted. Items approved by resolution become the official position of the meeting.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
