Delays in the appointment process for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and controversies over career payments within the court are being pointed out as threats to judicial independence.
The Recommendation Committee is dissolved after proposing a specific group of candidates, and must be re-formed to recommend new candidates. However, criticism is being raised that the current situation, where the president vetoes a specific individual, is effectively no different from the president exercising the right to propose.
The Democratic Party and the Blue House are demanding that the Chief Justice propose again from the remaining three candidates from the original recommendation pool, without re-forming the Recommendation Committee. However, there are many opinions that two of the remaining three candidates are unsuitable due to their roles as presiding judges and responsibilities as election commission members. Such a demand can be seen as an act disregarding constitutional procedures.
It was pointed out that re-forming the Supreme Court Justice Recommendation Committee to approve a new group of candidates and then proposing from that group is the unavoidable follow-up action according to constitutional interpretation. If this situation continues, filing a constitutional dispute judgment could be a legitimate response under constitutional procedure. It is analyzed that Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae's character makes it highly unlikely he will accept the Democratic Party's demands.
While consultation can occur during the proposal process, openly and formally demanding a re-proposal is considered unconstitutional. The rejection of an appointment motion by the National Assembly or the exercise of a presidential veto are constitutionally prescribed procedures. In contrast, openly demanding the re-proposal of a specific candidate is criticized as an act exceeding constitutional authority.
The audit period was from 2022 to September 2025, and concerns are being raised about the unusual timing of the announcement during this period of conflict. This raises questions as to whether there is an intention to pressure the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court is a crucial institution with the power to interpret the rule of law in such matters.
If Supreme Court justices are appointed in the way desired by Lee Jae-myung or the Blue House, the Supreme Court would effectively lose its independence. If Supreme Court justices are appointed in violation of the principles of personnel composition, the independence of the judiciary will inevitably be lost, which could lead to a long-term crisis of the rule of law.
A parliamentary current affairs inquiry is not a procedure that inherently involves witness selection. Witness selection is only possible when legal requirements are met, such as during parliamentary inspections or investigations. Therefore, it is legitimate for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to be absent from a current affairs inquiry for the sake of judicial independence, and criticizing this overlooks the procedural illegality.
Criticism arose that Lee Jae-myung's quoting of Morgan Stanley's interest rate forecast had an inappropriate background. His message of falling housing prices is analyzed to contain a political intention to suppress real estate purchasing sentiment. However, these remarks overlook realistic policy failures such as supply shortages and loan regulations, and are criticized as being too blunt to be considered effective policy.
In particular, it was suggested that when single-home owners' housing stability is threatened by auctions, the state should provide practical assistance. Current policies are criticized for not providing sufficient measures for these single-home owners in crisis.
It was pointed out that high comprehensive real estate tax and capital gains tax are reducing homeowners' disposable income, putting them in a situation similar to paying monthly rent. In this situation, the policy of using taxes to buy houses and convert them into public housing is criticized as a contradictory policy. An analysis also suggests that excessive tax burdens are causing distortions in the housing market.
Concerns are being raised that this situation could infringe on citizens' property rights and distort the role of the state.
This is a serious problem as it can create a blind spot in control without parliamentary budget review. Furthermore, there is a high risk of transparency issues as it may be operated under a broad name without clear specific project objectives.
It was pointed out that if funds with unclear uses and plans are accumulated without parliamentary control, there is a risk that Lee Jae-myung could use them arbitrarily as he sees fit. The ambiguity of the fund's name, 'Future Response,' could become a justification for misappropriation of funds, leading to concerns that citizens' taxes could be used like a 'personal piggy bank' by a specific individual. This method of fund operation is criticized for potentially harming national fiscal soundness and weakening accountability.
Despite concerns expressed by financial academics regarding this method, criticism is being raised that there is insufficient discussion on this within the political sphere.
Concerns are being raised that adjusting investigation powers without institutional improvement will ultimately lead to public harm.
You don't have the institutional capacity to do that. So, those cases will just be indicted or not sent as they are. Then what will you do about cases that are buried, shoddy, or result in innocent people being harmed or acquitted?
It was pointed out that while the head of the National Investigation Headquarters is in charge of investigations, acting Police Commissioner Yoo Jae-seong represents the entire police organization and effectively has no investigative authority. The failure to sufficiently consider the possibility of a crime during the initial missing person report, leading to insufficient securing of important data, was also pointed out as a problem.
It was pointed out that clear evidence of an economic motive or despair that would lead to an extreme choice in the Jang Min-hal death case has not yet been revealed. The process between the missing person report and the discovery of the body was not smooth, and criticism was raised about the police's inadequate initial response. It was also speculated that the head of the investigation headquarters might have given a generic answer to avoid responsibility. Concerns were raised that such inadequate handling processes could erode public trust.
Answers come from the transcript, with the exact spot cited.
Want the next article from 펜앤마이크TV?
When 펜앤마이크TV publishes, we'll write it up like the one you just read and email it to you.
펜앤마이크TV published 105 in the last 7 days.
