[Column] Supreme Court Justices Are Called 'Justice'

Isun Byung, Senior Member of the National Academy of Engineering of Korea

The emergence of the so-called left-wing government five years ago was a reaction against the vested interests of the conservative regime. In this presidential election, the Democratic Party of Korea asked for one more chance but did not receive the people's choice, resulting in a 1:1 scenario between the two major parties.

This proves that public opinion is clearly divided into two. There are concerns about political turmoil even greater than in the past five years. The People Power Party must reflect on the original sin that the people suffered due to the ideological politics of the left-wing government and devote all their efforts to restoring the country to fairness and common sense.

The current government conducted a massive experiment on the entire population. Unintentionally, the greatest achievement of this administration lies in allowing the people to experience the reality of ideological politics in their daily lives. It was a valuable lesson for which the people paid a high tuition fee. Paying to learn something once is enough. Learning it twice is called foolish.

During the right-wing government era, the people realized that "businesses cannot survive without workers," and during the left-wing era, they learned that "workers cannot survive without businesses." The new government will likely use many parts of these experimental results in policy-making. If they do not have ulterior motives, a foundation that easily gains public consent can be said to have been established.

Many countries have the word "democracy" in their names. However, whether they truly reflect the free will of the people is a separate issue. Dictatorship refers to a state where one power controls the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The term "political engineering," which rationalizes dictatorship, originated during the Soviet Union era.

The Constitution of the People's Republic of China proclaims the people's democratic dictatorship. The logic is that since the people are the owners of the country, the Communist Party, as the people's party, stands above the three branches of government. However, in China today, workers' assemblies are being suppressed. The Communist Party elites maintain power by dividing it among themselves. This is the irony of history and the true nature of world affairs. The owner of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is not the people but a hereditary monarch.

If military dictatorship inflicts physical harm, the dictatorship of legalists silently deteriorates the minds and bodies of the people. After the 21st National Assembly was formed, when those who know the law seized power, I painfully experienced that "this is dictatorship disguised as legality" by witnessing legislative dictatorship. There is no task more important than restoring the broken framework of separation of powers.

Both the current and the next presidents talk about great unity. However, realistically, there will be many legal disputes, and the judiciary is the last place the people can trust to determine which side is right. This makes its role even more important, with the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court serving as the final arbiters.

The original title of Michael Sandel's book Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do? was translated as "Justice: What is the Right Action?" This book, which was particularly popular in Korea, sparked various opinions about justice. The definition of justice (正義 Justice) is likely subjective.

In sports, referees are called judges, and judges are also called judges. However, Supreme Court justices are called Justices. The people demand that they make just decisions. While the president represents the country, the final decision-maker in legal disputes is the Supreme Court justice. The constitutional body that can impeach the president is the Constitutional Court. I still vividly remember the moment when the acting Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, who came to work with a golf cap on his head, read the decision order "to impeach the respondent President Park Geun-hye."

In August 2017, the Supreme Court Chief Justice nominee took a highway bus and subway to Seoul the day after being nominated. He said, "I will show you the level of someone who has only judged for 31 years." At the 70th anniversary ceremony of the judiciary in September 2018, he said, "Remembering the spirit of the first Chief Justice who upheld judicial independence without bending to any pressure from power... I and all members of the judiciary should read the judicial oath again with the mindset that this year should be the first year to start a new 70-year history." However, his resolve ended there.

In April 2020, the Democratic Party of Korea held 180 seats in the 21st National Assembly. A month later, the Chief Justice said to Judge Im Amu-gae, who had expressed his intention to resign, "To be frank, if I accept your resignation now, what do you think the National Assembly will say when they are trying to impeach?" I do not know whether Judge Im Amu-gae was illegal. However, transferring judicial decisions to the National Assembly because it is making a fuss uproots the foundation of the separation of powers. This is unacceptable under any circumstances as an act of the Chief Justice of the Republic of Korea. This shameful statement should be hung in the court lobby and read by judges along with the judicial oath when they come to work.

The first prime minister of the current government said in his inaugural speech, "Civil servants must become tools that obey the orders of the Candlelight Revolution." Judges are not administrative civil servants. However, it seems the Chief Justice focused more on the candlelight than the Constitution in his judgments. The suddenly appointed Prosecutor General in 2019 was an administrative civil servant but worked as an instrument of the Constitution rather than living power. The prosecutor general, who was criticized for betraying the appointing president, was elected president three years later.

Every time I see articles about Supreme Court justices being swayed by specific ideologies, power, or money, my heart aches. Now that a regime that pledges to serve the people has come to power, the Chief Justice might be thinking of serving the people through the judiciary this time. The most desirable outcome would be for him to step down voluntarily, but judging from past actions, I wonder if he has the courage to leave on his own. I hope the live broadcast of "The respondent Chief Justice ㅇㅇㅇ is impeached" does not happen worldwide. Even if the whole country is rotten, the Supreme Court is the last place the people can rely on. Surely, this country can fill all 13 Supreme Court justice positions properly. And let us watch together who will pay for the cost of the grandchild playground built at the Chief Justice's official residence and the restoration expenses.

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