Chief Justice Jo Hee-de Expresses Deep Responsibility and Concerns Over Judicial Independence
On the 13th, Chief Justice Jo Hee-de expressed a profound sense of responsibility and regret regarding the current state of the judiciary. His remarks came during an address at the Supreme Court’s national audit held at the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee.
In his opening remarks, Chief Justice Jo emphasized that he has always performed his duties in accordance with the Constitution and laws, stating clearly that he has never deviated from justice and conscience. This statement was made in response to growing concerns about the independence of the judiciary.
The Democratic Party of Korea and other ruling parties had previously announced their intention to summon Chief Justice Jo as a general witness during the audit. They cited the swift decision to remand the case involving President Lee Jae-myung’s alleged violation of the Public Official Election Act. The parties planned to continue questioning regarding the so-called “election interference suspicions.” However, rather than avoiding the audit, Chief Justice Jo chose to attend directly and make a resolute statement.
Chief Justice Jo explained that his appearance followed the precedent set by previous chief justices who attended the audit’s opening and closing sessions to deliver remarks. However, he pointed out that the request for his attendance as a witness included demands for explanations regarding ongoing judicial deliberation processes.
He raised concerns about potential violations of several key legal provisions. Specifically, he mentioned Article 8 of the National Assembly Audit and Investigation Act, which states that audits must not interfere with ongoing trials. He also referenced Article 103 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, which guarantees judicial independence, and Article 65 of the Court Organization Act, which mandates the confidentiality of deliberations.
Chief Justice Jo continued, “If judges are summoned to testify about trial matters simply because they presided over certain cases, it could undermine their ability to adjudicate independently according to the Constitution, laws, and conscience, and may even lead to external pressure influencing judicial decisions.” He emphasized that in a constitutional democracy with a separation of powers, it is rare to find examples where judges are subjected to audits or hearings as witnesses regarding trial matters.
Acknowledging Public Expectations and Commitment to Improvement
In addition to his concerns about judicial independence, Chief Justice Jo acknowledged that the judiciary has yet to meet the public’s expectations and standards. He pledged to humbly accept the public’s criticisms of the judiciary and actively participate in ongoing discussions in the National Assembly to improve the judicial system.
His commitment to improvement includes striving to become a judiciary that earns the public’s trust. By engaging with the public and addressing concerns, he aims to strengthen the role of the judiciary in maintaining justice and upholding the rule of law.
Key Legal Provisions Involved
- Article 8 of the National Assembly Audit and Investigation Act: States that audits must not be conducted for the purpose of interfering with ongoing trials.
- Article 103 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea: Guarantees judicial independence.
- Article 65 of the Court Organization Act: Mandates the confidentiality of deliberations.
Implications for Judicial Independence
Chief Justice Jo’s remarks highlight the delicate balance between the legislative and judicial branches of government. His emphasis on the importance of judicial independence underscores the need for the judiciary to operate without undue influence from other branches of government.
By addressing these concerns publicly, Chief Justice Jo reinforces the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the principles of justice and fairness. His statements serve as a reminder of the critical role that an independent judiciary plays in a democratic society.
Conclusion
Chief Justice Jo Hee-de’s speech reflects both his deep sense of responsibility and his commitment to preserving the integrity of the judiciary. As the debate over judicial independence continues, his words emphasize the importance of maintaining the separation of powers and ensuring that the judiciary remains free from external pressures. Through open dialogue and a willingness to engage with public concerns, the judiciary can work towards earning the trust and confidence of the people it serves.