Obsession with retaliating against the judiciary leads only to ruin

Home > Opinion > Editorials

Obsession with retaliating against the judiciary leads only to ruin

Published: 15 May. 2025, 00:00

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

An unidentified individual enters the Seoul Western District Court through a broken window in Mapo District, western Seoul, on Jan. 19. [NEWS1]

On May 14, the first court ruling was handed down over the violent intrusion at the Seoul Western District Court earlier this year. Judge Kim Jin-seong of Criminal Division 6 sentenced two defendants to 18 months and 12 months in prison, respectively, for aggravated trespassing and destruction of public property. Despite submitting letters of remorse, both received prison terms. The judge described the incident as “a crime involving collective force targeting the court” and called its outcome “devastating.” He further noted that it stemmed from “an obsessive belief that the judiciary’s decision to issue an arrest warrant was a political conspiracy warranting immediate retaliation.”

The attack on the court took place in January, following the issuance of a detention warrant for former President Yoon Suk Yeol. It marked one of the most violent expressions of public dissatisfaction with the judiciary in Korea’s history. As political polarization deepens, judicial rulings have come to be interpreted not as impartial judgments but as partisan actions: rulings favorable to one side are seen as justice, while unfavorable decisions are labeled as judicial corruption or a “judicial coup.” In this climate, some supporters of political factions are no longer content to criticize verdicts and instead attempt to physically retaliate against the court itself.

Only two of the 96 individuals indicted have faced trial so far. While these first two defendants expressed remorse, accountability is necessary. For those who show no such regret, harsher penalties will be inevitable.

Even beyond physical violence, pressure on the judiciary has escalated to unprecedented levels. On the same day as the ruling, lawmakers from the Democratic Party led a hearing of the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee under the title, Fact-Finding Hearing on the Judiciary’s Alleged Presidential Election Interference. Chief Justice Jo Hee-de and other justices declined to attend, citing Article 103 of the Constitution, which mandates that judges rule independently, according to their conscience and the law. The Supreme Court also refused to submit documents.

Facilities at the Seoul Western District Court in Mapo District, western Seoul, are destroyed following the intrusion of protesters on Jan. 19. [YONHAP]

The Democratic Party may have grounds to question the speed of the Supreme Court’s recent full-bench ruling against their candidate, former Democratic Party (DP) leader Lee Jae-myung. However, holding a parliamentary hearing to scrutinize judicial decisions poses a serious threat to the principle of separation of powers. The committee also proposed a special counsel bill targeting Jo and others, a revision to the Court Organization Act to increase the number of Supreme Court justices and an amendment to the Constitutional Court Act to allow constitutional appeals of court rulings.

These actions appear aimed at influencing the ongoing trial of Lee following the presidential election. The Democratic Party must halt such attempts immediately. Without an independent judiciary, it is impossible to claim that a country upholds democracy. Pressuring the courts in this way undermines the very foundations of democratic governance and could lead to irreversible damage.

That said, the judiciary, too, must reflect on how it can maintain judicial independence and restore public trust amid this crisis. That is its responsibility in a democracy.

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