The Democratic Party of Korea's election countermeasures committee has initiated a response by demanding the withdrawal of two court organization laws, which are considered ‘judicial pressure laws,’ from lawmakers Park Beom-kye and Jang Kyung-tae, but in reality, the withdrawal has only occurred for one bill.
According to the political realm on the 27th, Representative Jang Kyung-tae, who was asked by the Democratic Party’s election committee to withdraw the bill, is not withdrawing the ‘increase of 100 Supreme Court justices’ bill. He expressed his position, stating, 'I am deeply regrettable to hear the phrase unilateral offensive.'
Recently, the Democratic Party’s election committee requested the withdrawal of the ‘non-lawyer Supreme Court justice appointment law’ and the ‘Supreme Court justice increase bill’ proposed by members of the party. The amendment to the court organization law, co-sponsored by lawmakers Park Beom-kye and Jang Kyung-tae, allows non-lawyers to be appointed as Supreme Court justices (Park Beom-kye's bill) and includes provisions to increase the number of justices from the current 14 to a minimum of 30 or 100.
On the previous day (26th), Representative Jang Kyung-tae stated on Facebook, 'I respect the election committee's decision,' but regarding the bill, he said, 'It may feel unfamiliar as it benchmarks advanced judicial systems from foreign countries, but it can be sufficiently adjusted to suit the realities of Korea during discussions in the bill subcommittee and the judiciary committee.'
He added, 'Some claim it is an offensive against the judiciary, but according to our Constitution, the appointment recommendation authority for Supreme Court justices is vested in the Chief Justice.' He remarked, 'In a situation where the recommendation authority distinctly exists with Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae, to label it as a unilateral offensive is deeply regrettable.'
Within and outside the party, many view that the background for Representative Jang's actions is based on the premise that ‘Democratic presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung also supports the increase of Supreme Court justices.’ Given the power structure of the Democratic Party, it is difficult for Representative Jang to make such statements solely based on his personal beliefs. In fact, the election committee did not demand the withdrawal of the bill proposed by Democratic lawmaker Kim Yong-min, which centers on the increase of 30 Supreme Court justices.
A Democratic Party official said, 'Representative Jang is not refusing to withdraw the bill solely based on his beliefs. He absolutely cannot do that,' adding, 'Basically, he can express that because he believes candidate Lee Jae-myung agrees with that direction.'
Candidate Lee actually stated regarding the election committee's directive for bill withdrawal, 'I did not give such instructions.' He explained, 'Since livelihood reform is the most urgent task, I mentioned yesterday that, in terms of priorities, it is not yet the right time for the judicial reform bills.' Interpreted differently, several officials explain that it means 'it does not mean that we will not increase the number of justices.'
Chief Spokesperson Cho Seung-rae noted in a briefing on the 27th about this, 'Withdrawing judicial issues also requires procedures,' adding that '(excluding non-lawyers as Supreme Court justices) the other bills are a framework of judicial pressure and a framework of the People Power Party, and it is not appropriate for the media to frame it that way.'
Meanwhile, Democratic Party lawmaker Jeong Cheong-rae, who serves as the chair of the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee, appeared on the YouTube show 'Maebulshow' on the 21st and stated, 'We will definitely increase the number of Supreme Court justices,' noting that 'there are options of increasing to 100, 50, or 30 justices, and the numbers can be adjusted. It will be processed immediately when the Lee Jae-myung administration is established.'
Representative Jeong remarked, 'If I cannot handle this, I would rather support former lawmaker Choi Kang-wook,' and added, 'Hasn't there been unprecedented actions overturning the unanimous decisions of the judiciary or the acquittals of high courts?' He also stated, '(The media) portrays it as if the chair of the judiciary committee is rushing ahead alone, but we engage in team play.'