Kim Myeong-su’s erosion of judicial trust

Home > Opinion > Columns

Kim Myeong-su’s erosion of judicial trust

Published: 26 Mar. 2025, 00:03 Updated: 26 Mar. 2025, 20:58

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Ko Jung-ae

The author is the editor-in-chief at the JoongAng Sunday.

Chief Justice John Roberts, a pillar of the judicial establishment, once said during his confirmation hearing in 2005, “Judges are like umpires. Umpires don’t make the rules; they apply them. It is a limited role. Nobody ever went to a ball game to see the umpire.”

Recently, he clashed with U.S. President Donald Trump. After Trump called for the impeachment of a federal judge who had blocked his deportation order for undocumented immigrants, Roberts issued a rare rebuttal. “We have had 200 years of proof that impeachment is not a proper response to a disagreement with a judicial decision. The remedy for such disagreement lies in the appeals process,” he stated. He also pushed back in 2018 when Trump disparaged judges as “Obama judges.”

We know there are times when we must look to the umpire, and that not all umpires play their part. Still, when judges come under attack, the chief justice should respond as Roberts did — at least publicly.

In contrast, we had a chief justice who did the exact opposite. While the Democratic Party (DP) has pursued around 30 impeachment motions since President Yoon Suk Yeol took office, there was actually one more — dating back to February 2021. Just 20 days before his retirement, Judge Lim Seong-geun was impeached. The DP seized on the phrase “unconstitutional conduct” in a lower court ruling related to the so-called judicial manipulation scandal. Yet Lim was acquitted, and the appeals court later downgraded the accusation to “inappropriate interference in trials.” The Supreme Court upheld that ruling. The gravity of the offense hardly warranted impeachment.

Chief Justice Kim Myeong-su remained silent. Worse, evidence later emerged suggesting he had tacitly condoned the move. When Judge Lim tried to resign amid impeachment talk, Kim rejected the resignation, as revealed in a recorded conversation.

Kim Myeong-su, right, receives applause at his retirement ceremony at the top court’s headquarters in Seocho District, southern Seoul on Sep. 22, 2023 as his six-year term as Supreme Court chief justice ended. [NEWS1]

“They’re making a fuss about impeachment right now. If I accept your resignation, what do you think the National Assembly will say? If I approve it today, they won’t be able to push for impeachment. That kind of criticism is something I should avoid,” he said.

Ultimately, the Constitutional Court dismissed the case. Since Lim was no longer a sitting judge, there was nothing to remove. The ruling came 267 days after the case was filed — far beyond the 180-day limit stipulated by law. Surprisingly, three of the nine justices — those with progressive leanings — argued that the impeachment should have been upheld. Coincidentally, two of them, Kim Ki-young and Lee Seok-tae, were entangled in a 2018 rumor of a “justice trade.” The allegation was that Chief Justice Kim nominated Lee, a former civil rights attorney, in exchange for the Democratic Party nominating Kim Ki-young, one of the chief justice's closest allies. During his confirmation hearing, Kim Ki-young denied knowing Chief Justice Kim well. Was it all just a coincidence?

In a 2023 interview with a legal journal after stepping down, Kim Myeong-su said, “When it was obvious that restoring trust in the judiciary was impossible, I devoted myself — consistently and with resolve — to breaking away from the past and finding new alternatives that met the demands of a new era.”

But the words rang hollow. The impeachment case was only one example. As one commentator put it, “Even without the Candlelight Revolution, Moon Jae-in would have become president — but without it, Kim Myeong-su would never have become chief justice.” President Moon appointed an unremarkable judge to the nation’s highest judicial office, and that judge remained loyal to the political forces that had lifted him. He was not a neutral umpire with a limited role; He was a player. He further eroded public trust in the judiciary and left behind a court dominated by a small network of insiders.

The Supreme Court building in Seocho District, southern Seoul [JOONGANG ILBO]

Trials were delayed across the board, some more than others. While the Constitutional Court’s impeachment rulings stood out, the repeated postponements in DP leader Lee Jae-myung’s trials also trace back to Kim. A ruling in Lee’s election law case, which normally takes six months, took 26. As a result, the appellate court’s verdict, scheduled for March 26, could shift the political landscape.

Why bring up someone who’s already left office? Because we are still floundering in the aftermath of what he left behind. His damage was immense.

Translated using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.