National Assembly’s pressure on Chief Justice undermines constitutional principles

 

Chief Justice Jo Hee-de delivers his opening remarks during the National Assembly Legislation and Judiciary Committee’s audit of the Supreme Court and related institutions at the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul, on Oct. 13. [YONHAP]

 
At the first parliamentary audit of the Lee Jae Myung administration on Dec. 13, an unsettling scene unfolded at the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee. Chief Justice Jo Hee-de of the Supreme Court, who would normally leave the chamber after delivering his opening remarks, was not permitted to do so. For more than 90 minutes, he faced a barrage of questions bordering on interrogation.
 
Choo Mi-ae, the committee chair from the Democratic Party, refused to grant Jo permission to leave. Lawmakers from the ruling bloc pressed him over the Supreme Court’s decision to swiftly overturn a lower court’s acquittal of President Lee Jae Myung in his election law violation case, sending it back with a ruling suggesting guilt. They accused the judiciary of intervening in the presidential election. It was a troubling breach of the constitutional principle of separation of powers.
 
Choo said, “We respectfully ask you to dispel public doubts through this questioning,” but questioning the chief justice about a court ruling was anything but respectful. It was an affront to judicial independence and the dignity of a democratic state.
 
Jo firmly rejected the accusations. “Since assuming office as chief justice, I have performed my duties solely in accordance with the Constitution and the law, and I have never deviated from justice or conscience,” he said. He added, “Nevertheless, I feel a deep sense of responsibility and heavy regret for the current situation surrounding the judiciary.”
 
Despite his clarification, ruling bloc lawmakers continued to press him, asking, “Why did you interfere in the middle of the presidential election?” One independent lawmaker even held up a doctored image of Jo’s face superimposed on a portrait of Toyotomi Hideyoshi, a childish and degrading act toward the head of the judiciary.
 
To citizens who believe in a democratic republic, the spectacle was deeply disturbing. The Constitution’s division of legislative, executive and judicial powers exists to safeguard the durability of democracy itself. Jo’s warning deserves attention: “If judges are ever forced to testify about their rulings, it will discourage them from adjudicating according to the Constitution, the law and their conscience, and may even lead them to consider outside influence.”
 

Related Article

• If Chief Justice Jo Hee-de were not in place

• Chief Justice Jo declines to attend Tuesday's parliamentary hearing

• Who cares about the chief justice?

• PPP blasts upcoming parliamentary hearing targeting chief justice as threat to separation of powers

 
It is reckless for lawmakers to disregard these constitutional safeguards, especially in a nation that only recently overcame the turmoil of a presidential declaration of martial law. Such behavior invites suspicion that the ruling party’s judicial reform drive is aimed solely at defending President Lee. If there were evidence that a judge violated the Constitution or the law, the National Assembly could pursue impeachment or other legitimate means of oversight.
 
Chief Justice Jo was eventually allowed to leave the session after the morning questioning. But uncertainty remains over how he will be treated during the on-site inspection of the Supreme Court scheduled for Oct. 15. Lawmakers from both parties should reflect on the meaning of the principles and traditions that uphold representative democracy, and approach the remainder of the audit with greater seriousness and respect.


This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.