[AK Radio] Three Key Points of the Aftermath Following I Jin-suk's Impeachment Dismissal

Is the Democratic Party Facing an "Impeachment Boomerang"?
Attention on the Impact for "Yoon Suk-yeol Impeachment"
Calls Grow for the Constitutional Court to Expedite Impeachment Trials

On the 23rd, the Constitutional Court dismissed the impeachment motion against Lee Jin-sook, Chairperson of the Korea Communications Commission (KCC). Among the eight justices, four voted in favor and four against. The motion was dismissed as it failed to secure the approval of at least six justices required for impeachment. The four justices with moderate-conservative leanings voted for dismissal, while the four with progressive-moderate leanings voted for acceptance, resulting in a split decision.

Lee, whose duties had been suspended for 174 days since the National Assembly passed the impeachment motion on August 2 last year, immediately resumed her work. Upon her return, she told reporters, "This is a meaningful result that allows at least two standing commissioners to perform administrative duties," and requested, "I ask the National Assembly to promptly recommend three commissioners to complete the five-member panel." She also emphasized, "If the National Assembly obstructs the appointment of standing commissioners for any reason, the executive branch cannot function properly."

※ Click the video to see detailed information.

The core issue in this impeachment trial was the legality of decisions made by the KCC under a two-member system. The KCC is supposed to consist of five members: one chairperson, one vice-chairperson, and three commissioners. However, currently only Lee Jin-sook and Vice-Chairperson Kim Tae-gyu are serving. The impeachment motion originated from Lee’s review and approval of the appointment of directors to the Korea Broadcasting Culture Promotion Foundation, the major shareholder of KBS and MBC. Lee recommended seven candidates for KBS directors and appointed six ruling party nominees among nine candidates for the Foundation’s directors. At the time, the Democratic Party criticized the two-member decision-making as illegal and accused it of blatant intentions to seize control of broadcasting, pushing for impeachment. Lee, on the other hand, maintained that the process was conducted according to law and procedure and denied any wrongdoing.

The Constitutional Court’s judgment hinged on the interpretation of “members in office” as stated in Article 13, Paragraph 2 of the KCC Act. The Act stipulates that the KCC is composed of five commissioners, and meetings can be convened with the request of two or more members, with decisions made by a majority of members in office. The four justices who voted to dismiss interpreted “members in office” as those currently serving, thus considering the decision made by the two present members as valid. Conversely, the four justices who voted to accept argued that since the KCC is fundamentally composed of five members, at least three must participate in decisions.

Chairperson Lee Jin-sook of the Korea Communications Commission, who returned to duty after the Constitutional Court dismissed the impeachment motion, is answering questions from the press after leaving the grand courtroom following the verdict on the impeachment trial of the Chairperson of the Korea Communications Commission held at the Constitutional Court in Jongno-gu, Seoul, on the morning of the 23rd. Photo by Jo Yong-jun

With this ruling, Lee has resumed her duties, but decision-making under the two-member system remains controversial. In fact, the Seoul Administrative Court suspended the effectiveness of the appointments of the new Foundation directors made by Lee and annulled the KCC’s legal sanctions against MBC. The court judged that making important decisions with only two members undermines the legislative intent of the KCC Act.

The KCC urgently needs to resolve the re-licensing issues for 146 channels, including KBS, MBC, and EBS. The broadcasting licenses for these stations expired on December 31 last year, meaning they are currently operating without legal authorization. Other pressing issues include imposing fines on Google and Apple for in-app payment violations and revising enforcement ordinances to ease ownership restrictions on broadcasters by large corporations.

Democratic Party floor spokesperson Noh Jong-myeon expressed regret over the decision, stating, "It is unfortunate and regrettable, but we must respect the Constitutional Court’s ruling," describing it as a "complex position." Given that none of the impeachment motions pushed by the Democratic Party under the Yoon Suk-yeol administration have been accepted by the Constitutional Court, there is a cautious atmosphere as this ruling could backfire as an "impeachment boomerang" against the Democratic Party.

Acting Chief Justice Moon Hyung-bae and constitutional justices are seated on the 23rd at the Constitutional Court in Jongno-gu, Seoul, for the verdict hearing of the impeachment trial of Lee Jin-sook, Chairperson of the Korea Communications Commission. Photo by Jo Yong-jun

Analysts have noted that the 4-4 split decision reflects judgments based on political leanings, raising interest in how this might affect the impeachment trial of President Yoon Suk-yeol in the future. However, as seen in the impeachment case of former President Park Geun-hye, there is also an opinion that unanimous decisions can be reached regardless of justices’ political orientations, depending on the gravity of constitutional violations.

Additionally, this case has sparked calls for the Constitutional Court to expedite impeachment trials. Currently, several high-ranking officials, including Prime Minister Han Duck-soo and Justice Minister Park Sung-jae, have had their duties suspended due to impeachment motions, leading to administrative gaps and waste of taxpayer money. There is growing support for the Court to swiftly determine the presence and severity of constitutional and legal violations in impeachment trials to minimize unnecessary suspension periods. Some suggest applying the principle of dismissal of prosecution from criminal procedure law as a precedent.

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