Justice Kim Bok-hyeong's position in Han's impeachment dismissal raises stakes in Yoon ruling

Home > National > Politics

Justice Kim Bok-hyeong's position in Han's impeachment dismissal raises stakes in Yoon ruling

Published: 25 Mar. 2025, 16:28

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Justice Kim Bok-hyeong sits in the main chamber of the Constitutional Court in Jongno District, central Seoul, on Jan. 22. [YONHAP]

Justice Kim Bok-hyeong of the Constitutional Court has emerged as a potential swing voter in deciding President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment ruling after the court dismissed the impeachment motion against Prime Minister Han Duck-soo.

The eight sitting justices were split into four different positions in their reasoning for dismissing Han’s impeachment on Monday.

The divided votes follow their unanimous 8-0 decision on March 13 to overturn the impeachments of Board of Audit and Inspection Chair Choe Jae-hae and three senior prosecutors, including Lee Chang-soo, chief of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office. The justices’ reasoning in Han’s case was more detailed compared to their earlier 4-4 split decision on Jan. 23, which resulted in the dismissal of the impeachment motion against Korea Communications Commission (KCC) Chairperson Lee Jin-sook.

The eight-member bench, classified by judicial philosophy, consists of four liberal justices — acting Chief Justice Moon Hyung-bae, Lee Mi-son, Jung Jung-mi and Chung Kye-sun — two conservative moderates, Kim Hyeong-du and Kim Bok-hyeong, and two conservatives, Cheong Hyung-sik and Cho Han-chang.

In the latest 5-2-1 ruling on Han’s impeachment, the justices issued four separate opinions, including Justice Kim Bok-hyeong’s independent reasoning for dismissing the motion. The two conservative justices, Cheong, who was recommended by Yoon, and Cho, who was nominated by the People Power Party, both rejected Han’s impeachment. Meanwhile, one of the four liberal justices, Chung, supported the motion.

A law school professor speaking on condition of anonymity told the JoongAng Ilbo, an affiliate of the Korea JoongAng Daily, that Han’s impeachment trial suggests “at least two justices oppose Yoon’s impeachment, while one supports it.” At least six justices must uphold the impeachment to remove Yoon from office.

Among the five justices who dismissed Han’s impeachment, four agreed that the majority of reasons cited by liberals for his removal were neither unconstitutional nor unlawful. However, they differed in opinion regarding Han’s failure to appoint a Constitutional Court justice.

Justice Moon and Lee, both recommended by former liberal President Moon Jae-in, along with Kim Hyeong-du and Jung, who were recommended by former Supreme Court Chief Justice Kim Myeong-su, found that Han violated his constitutional duty to appoint parliamentary nominees. However, they ruled that this did not justify his impeachment, as it was not seen as an attempt to “disable the Constitutional Court.”

Meanwhile, Justice Kim Bok-hyeong argued that Han’s refusal to appoint justices was not unconstitutional, as he had not formally announced his intent not to appoint them. She also noted the brief time for Han to exercise his appointment rights, given that he was impeached by the National Assembly at 4:37 p.m. on Dec. 27, while the parliamentary nominees were announced at 2:56 p.m. the day before.

Justices sit in the main chamber of the Constitutional Court in Jongno District, central Seoul, on March 24. [JOINT PRESS CORPS]

Despite Justice Kim Bok-hyeong’s decision to dismiss the impeachment — aligning largely with the liberal justices — some observers believe her stance could act as a swing vote in Yoon’s impeachment, which has been pending for a month since his final hearing over his martial law declaration.

“Kim’s decision that Han did not violate the Constitution aligns with the conservative justices’ stance that the grounds for Han’s impeachment should be outright rejected,” a conservative official said. The official further noted that Kim sided with the two conservative justices in the ruling on KCC Chair Lee’s impeachment.

However, some legal experts caution against drawing conclusions about Yoon’s impeachment ruling based on Han’s case.

“The court's conclusion that Han’s refusal to appoint justice nominees was not unconstitutional could be drawn as he never explicitly stated that he would not appoint them,” said Cha Jin-a, a professor at Korea University School of Law.

“It is also difficult to predict the outcome of Yoon’s case based on Han’s ruling, as they are separate trials,” Cha added.

BY KIM JUN-YOUNG, SUK GYEONG-MIN [[email protected]]