[2020 National Audit] Judiciary Committee Audit "Supreme Court Judicial Reform Inadequate"... Criticism from Both Ruling and Opposition Parties

[Asia Economy Reporter Baek Kyunghwan] Members of the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee criticized the Supreme Court's lack of progress in judicial reform. Although Chief Justice Kim Myung-soo has been in office for over three years, there has been no achievement in the judicial reform initiatives he launched upon taking office.

At the Supreme Court's national audit on the 7th, Shin Dong-geun, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea, pointed out, "It has been three years since the judicial corruption scandal involving former Chief Justice Yang Seung-tae, but the judges involved are being acquitted one after another," adding, "Except for the abolition of the position of high court chief judge, there has been little progress in judicial reform."

Jang Je-won, a member of the People Power Party, also emphasized the lack of willingness for reform within the judiciary, stating, "Out of 32 tasks including blocking preferential treatment for retired judges and reforming the judicial personnel system, only four have been implemented." He further demanded that Chief Justice Kim express his determination to protect judicial independence against political criticism of rulings by pro-government judges.

In response, Cho Jae-yeon, Director of the Court Administration Office, said, "The Chief Justice's commitment to judicial reform is firm, and court members are participating," adding, "I understand the sharp criticism urging us to actively achieve results."

Poor disciplinary measures against corrupt judges were also brought up. Kim Jin-ae, a member of the Open Democratic Party, criticized the disciplinary regulations for corrupt judges, asking, "Isn't this a 'bulletproof judge group'?" According to Kim, only half of the 64 judges suspected of judicial corruption were referred to the disciplinary committee, and only 10 were prosecuted. She stated, "Considering that the prosecuted judges are being acquitted one after another, I wonder if this is not a 'bulletproof judge group.'"

Kim added, "According to internal disciplinary data for judges over the past five years, even those sentenced to four or five years in prison effectively received only one year of suspension," criticizing, "Isn't this to protect judges' privileges since dismissal or removal cannot be enforced under the Judges Disciplinary Act?" Under the current Judges Disciplinary Act, disciplinary actions against judges are limited to suspension, salary reduction, or reprimand, with the maximum penalty being a one-year suspension.

In response, Director Cho said, "This part reflects the decision made by the National Assembly at the time of enacting the Constitution, emphasizing the values of judicial power, judicial independence, and trial independence."

Meanwhile, before the Supreme Court's national audit began that day, a lengthy standoff occurred over the selection of witnesses related to allegations of special leave privileges for the son of Justice Minister Choo Mi-ae. Previously, the People Power Party requested about 20 witnesses, including Mr. Seo, regarding the allegations and investigation of the minister's son, but the Democratic Party rejected all requests. The opposition's demand for witness selection was met with resistance from the Democratic Party, citing that the matter is still under investigation and thus witness selection is difficult.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.