Yoon Submits Jo Hee-dae's Appointment Consent to National Assembly... "The Best Candidate to Restore Trust in the Judiciary"

Request for Appointment Consent the Day Before: "Fair Judgment Ability Without Bias"
Nominee Cho: "Lack of Experience but Will Devote Sincerity... Exchange Opinions with Members"

President Yoon Suk-yeol has submitted the appointment consent bill for Supreme Court Chief Justice nominee Cho Hee-dae to the National Assembly. Once the appointment consent bill is submitted, the National Assembly will hold a confirmation hearing for the nominee and decide whether to approve the appointment through a plenary session vote.

According to the National Assembly's legislative information system on the 15th, President Yoon submitted the appointment consent bill for nominee Cho to the National Assembly the previous day, requesting the National Assembly's approval by stating, "Nominee Cho is the most suitable candidate to lead the Supreme Court, the last bastion for restoring public trust in the judiciary and protecting the fundamental rights of the people, as the next Chief Justice."

[Image source=Yonhap News]

In particular, President Yoon evaluated, "He possesses a strong sense of mission and firm belief in judicial independence and the rule of law, a willingness to protect and care for socially vulnerable groups and minorities, the inclusiveness to mediate so that diverse social values can be respected and harmoniously coexist, fair and balanced judgment without bias toward any side, a humble attitude to communicate and serve from the people's perspective, a simple character and gentle leadership, as well as integrity and morality."

Referring to nominee Cho's past rulings, he added, "He has carefully ensured that the legitimate rights of socially vulnerable groups and minorities are not ignored and has actively recognized the state's duty to protect them."

On the same day, nominee Cho, upon first arriving at the confirmation hearing preparation office set up in Seocho-gu, Seoul, said, "It is true that I lack experience, but I will do my utmost," and regarding the evaluation that he lacks judicial administrative experience, he said, "I trust the members of the judiciary. Becoming Chief Justice does not mean pushing things unilaterally; I believe that openly exchanging opinions with the members will suffice."

When asked about concerns over the vacancy of the heads of the two highest judicial bodies, he replied, "It is a duty to follow the principles set by the Constitution, but I believe the National Assembly will proceed with this in mind." The position of Chief Justice has been vacant for over 50 days since former Chief Justice Kim Myeong-su retired on September 24. The Constitutional Court also shifted to an acting authority system after Chief Justice Yoo Nam-seok retired on the 10th.

Earlier, President Yoon nominated Cho as the next Chief Justice candidate on the 8th. This came 33 days after the appointment consent bill for former nominee Lee Gyun-yong was rejected in the National Assembly, led by the opposition party. At that time, the presidential office explained the background of the nomination, stating, "The nominee served as a judge in courts nationwide for 27 years and served as a Supreme Court Justice from 2014 to 2020. He has devoted his life to the people's right to a fair trial as a judge," and added, "He is well known as a principled jurist as a Supreme Court Justice." Furthermore, "He has fair judgment based on law and principles and has taken the lead in protecting the rights of socially vulnerable groups and minorities. As a distinguished professor at Sungkyunkwan University Law School, he has also devoted himself to research and training future legal professionals. We judged him to be the most suitable candidate to lead the judiciary based on principles, justice, and common sense and to quickly restore judicial trust."

Currently, the legal community views nominee Cho's short remaining term as a variable. If former Justice Cho is finally appointed, he will serve as the head of the judiciary for three and a half years, not the full six years, due to the mandatory retirement age of 70 for the Chief Justice. In response, the presidential office said, "In selecting a successor, we considered that the vacancy should not last long and judged that this person would not be problematic even for the opposition party. Therefore, the term is set to about four years, but there have been about three cases in the past where the term was not fully served." Regarding the reason for the earlier-than-expected nomination of the new Chief Justice candidate, they mentioned, "The longer the vacancy lasts, the more the public suffers."

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