Home > National > Politics

Top judicial conference stresses 'judicial independence' amid growing partisan pressure

Published: 21 May. 2025, 19:05

Supreme Court Chief Justice Jo Hee-de goes to work at the Supreme Court in southern Seoul on May 13. [NEWS1]

Korea’s leading judicial conference, chaired by Kim Ye-young, a senior judge at the Seoul Southern District Court, adopted two agenda items on “judicial independence” for its extraordinary meeting scheduled for Monday.

Observers say the decision reflects judges’ growing unease over what they view as mounting political pressure on the judiciary from the Democratic Party (DP).

A proposal by some judges to adopt a formal statement of regret regarding a recent Supreme Court ruling was excluded. The meeting organizers explained that it was “inappropriate to express opinions on individual cases and their procedural validity.”

The DP launched fierce attacks following the Supreme Court’s May 1 ruling to remand the public election law case involving presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung back to a lower court with the intent to convict. The party labeled the decision “an unjust intervention in the presidential election and a judicial coup led by Supreme Court Chief Justice Jo Hee-de.”

After the Seoul High Court scheduled the retrial for May 15 at 2 p.m., criticism from the DP intensified. The party then introduced several legislative proposals seen as targeting the judiciary, including a bill to expand the Supreme Court from 14 to 30 justices, a penal code amendment to allow justices to be punished for “distorting the law” and a bill to require one-third of the Supreme Court justices be appointed from outside the judiciary.

The party also floated the idea of impeaching 10 justices who had issued majority opinions against Lee.

Democratic Party presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung makes a speech in Incheon on May 21. [NEWS1]

Even after the Seoul High Court accepted Lee’s request on May 7 to reschedule the trial for June 18, after the presidential election on June 3, criticism did not abate. On the same day, the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee passed an unprecedented motion to summon Chief Justice Jo for a hearing on May 14. Twelve justices summoned as witnesses all declined to attend, citing the constitutional principle of “judicial independence.”

On May 7, a group of more outspoken judges, including Kim Joo-ok, a senior judge at the Seoul Central District Court, demanded that the representative conference be convened. They criticized Chief Justice Jo and called for his resignation, saying “the judiciary has become an enemy of the parliamentary majority.”

Among the proposed agenda items at the time was a resolution expressing regret over the Supreme Court’s unusually swift ruling in Lee’s case and calling for measures to ensure political neutrality.

However, when Judge Kim, the chair of the conference, held an online vote among 126 court representatives on May 8, opinion was divided. Many judges opposed even holding the special session, interpreting it as siding with political attacks. Only 25 supported the proposal, and about 70 opposed, resulting in the meeting’s initial cancellation.

The leadership extended the vote by a day and managed to meet the quorum of 26 on May 9, agreeing to hold the meeting but postponing agenda decisions until after collecting input from each court. On Tuesday, they finalized two items focused solely on “judicial independence.”

Some judges saw this as a sign that concerns long held quietly within the judiciary are now surfacing.

“It reflects the growing fear among frontline judges that the system itself could be shaken,” said one senior judge at a district court.

“If people think even the chief justice can be controlled by political power, how little respect would they have for trial judges?” a High Court judge added.

“Regardless of one’s opinion on this particular case, any action that undermines judicial independence directly violates the principle of separation of the three powers,” another High Court judge said.

The Supreme Court in Seocho District, southern Seoul, on May 14 [YONHAP]

Many judges agreed with the decision to exclude discussion on Lee’s ruling from the agenda.

“It’s a basic rule that judges do not publicly comment on another judge’s ruling,” said one district court judge.

Some believe that the delay of Lee’s retrial until after the election has largely defused concerns about the pace of the judicial process.

“There were worries about the case being pushed unusually fast, but now that the hearing has been delayed, those concerns are mostly resolved,” said another district judge. “Still, attacks on the judiciary from the outside remain an ongoing issue, which is why people felt the matter needed discussion.”

Despite this, the judiciary’s internal meeting materials included the phrase, “We take seriously the erosion of public trust in the judiciary caused by the exceptional handling of a specific case,” prompting speculation that some representatives may still raise issues regarding the Supreme Court’s pace in Lee’s appeal during the upcoming meeting.

Translated from the JoongAng Ilbo using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.
BY KIM JEONG-YEON [[email protected]]