KB News Desk
President Lee Jae Myung is facing another politically fraught domestic challenge, this time over who will sit on South Korea’s Supreme Court and how much say the presidential office should have in choosing them.
The dispute erupted after Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae on Tuesday submitted a formal recommendation in writing for two judges to fill vacancies on the country’s highest court without the customary face-to-face consultation with Lee.
The move broke with a long-standing practice under which the presidential office and the chief justice have sought to meet in person to narrow their differences before nominees are formally recommended.
Frustration has been running high inside Cheong Wa Dae over Cho’s move, but the presidential office has been carefully weighing how to respond. Any attempt to push back could open a broader constitutional and political dispute.
In its first official response Thursday night, Cheong Wa Dae signaled caution.
“This is unprecedented in the constitutional history of the Republic of Korea,” Cheong Wa Dae said. “Given that it was an unprecedented unilateral notification that bypassed consultation, we believe established practices and relevant laws must first be thoroughly reviewed.”
The statement captured the dilemma confronting the presidential office.
Beyond its objection to the process, Cheong Wa Dae also has reservations about one of Cho’s nominees. Yet it must determine whether — and on what legal grounds — it can challenge the recommendation without escalating the dispute into a direct clash between the executive and judiciary branches.
There is relatively broad acceptance within Cheong Wa Dae of Kim Sung-soo, a senior Seoul High Court judge nominated to replace outgoing Justice Lee Heung-gu, who is set to retire in early September.
Cheong Wa Dae’s concerns are concentrated on Son Bong-kie, a senior Daegu District Court judge tapped to fill the seat left vacant by former Justice Rho Tae-ak, who retired in March.
Son’s nomination had already been a point of contention during informal discussions between the presidential office and the judiciary, according to people familiar with the matter. Some within the ruling bloc have voiced concern that his appointment could further reinforce what they see as an increasingly conservative Supreme Court under Cho, who was appointed chief justice by then-President Yoon Suk Yeol.
That makes the manner of Cho’s recommendation particularly sensitive for Cheong Wa Dae. From its perspective, the chief justice did more than depart from the customary consultation process: He formally put forward a candidate despite the two sides having failed to resolve their differences over him.
Lee weighs his options
Seong Ghi-hong, presidential secretary for public relations and communication, underscored the seriousness with which Cheong Wa Dae views the break from past practice in a media interview Friday.
“We view the matter itself as very serious,” Seong said. “Many Supreme Court justices have been recommended since the Constitution was revised in 1987, but this case departs from the practices and conventions that have been established over time.”
Seong said Cheong Wa Dae viewed the written recommendation as “unprecedented in the country’s constitutional history.”
“In particular, we are looking at this as a unilateral notification process that bypassed consultation and failed to respect the president’s appointment authority,” he said.
But the constitutional framework governing Supreme Court appointments also makes a direct rejection difficult.
Article 104, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution states: “Supreme Court justices shall be appointed by the president on the recommendation of the chief justice and with the consent of the National Assembly.”
The provision does not explicitly require the chief justice to consult the president before making a recommendation. Nor does the Constitution or any law clearly give the president the power to reject a recommendation and demand a new nominee. There is also little precedent for such a step.
That legal ambiguity lies at the heart of Cheong Wa Dae’s hesitation.
Asked whether Lee could seek a fresh recommendation instead of proceeding with Son’s appointment, Seong said the presidential office would “make a decision after carefully reviewing established practices and the relevant legal issues.”
A direct rejection by Lee would give the opposition more ammunition to portray the dispute as an attempt by the executive branch to influence the judiciary, potentially turning a fight over one nominee into a confrontation between the heads of two branches of government.
There are practical consequences to consider as well.
Rho’s seat has been vacant since March, and requiring a new recommendation could prolong the vacancy by forcing the selection process to begin again. With Lee Heung-gu due to retire next month, a prolonged standoff could leave the Supreme Court short-handed and potentially complicate the handling of appeals and other major cases.
One option would be to let the nominations proceed to the National Assembly rather than challenge Cho’s recommendation directly.
Under the Constitution, Supreme Court justices require the consent of the National Assembly before they can be appointed by the president.
That would allow Son to undergo a confirmation hearing and ultimately a floor vote, leaving his fate to a process explicitly prescribed by the Constitution rather than forcing Lee to assert a disputed presidential power to reject the chief justice’s recommendation.
Growing political flashpoint
Pressure from the ruling bloc for a tougher response, however, is mounting.
Lawmakers from the ruling Democratic Party of Korea, Rebuilding Korea Party and Jinbo Party on the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee said Friday they opposed Son’s nomination.
“If the recommendation to appoint Son is accepted without the normal consultation and procedures, it will set yet another bad precedent,” the lawmakers said in a joint statement on Friday.
They also demanded that Cho “beg forgiveness from the public and resign immediately.”
The opposition has responded by accusing the ruling camp of trying to bring the judiciary under government influence.
“President Lee will appoint as many as 22 Supreme Court justices during his term,” People Power Party leader Rep. Jang Dong-hyeok said Friday. “Does he intend to fill all 22 seats with ‘pro-Lee justices’ who will give Lee Jae Myung a free pass?”
People Power Party senior spokesperson Rep. Park Choong-kwon also criticized an order by newly elected Democratic Party Chair Rep. Kim Min-seok to put up banners nationwide calling for Cho’s resignation.
Park denounced the move as “an overt attempt to seize control of the judiciary by turning it into a servant of the administration, ultimately to shield Lee Jae Myung.”
“The authority to recommend Supreme Court justices is an exclusive power of the chief justice prescribed by the Constitution,” Park said.
