Chief justice’s warning on judicial reform deserves careful attention

Home > Opinion > Editorials

Chief justice’s warning on judicial reform deserves careful attention

Published: 13 Feb. 2026, 00:00

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Chief Justice Jo Hee-de arrives at the Supreme Court in Seocho District, southern Seoul, on Feb. 12. [NEWS1]

Chief Justice Jo Hee-de on Thursday publicly expressed strong concern over the ruling party’s push for a package of judicial reform bills, an unusual step that underscores the judiciary’s deep unease.

His remarks came one day after the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee approved two key measures — a constitutional complaint system against court rulings and a plan to increase the number of Supreme Court justices — following an earlier proposal in December of last year to amend the Criminal Act to punish judges and prosecutors for distorting the law. The ruling party has reiterated its intention to pass the bills at a plenary session within the month.

It is rare for a sitting chief justice to issue a public statement on pending legislation. The decision reflects the judiciary’s view that the proposed reforms could significantly affect the constitutional order.

Among the measures, the constitutional complaint bill has drawn persistent controversy over its legality. Article 101 of the Constitution stipulates that judicial authority rests with the courts and designates the Supreme Court as the highest court. Under the current system, Supreme Court rulings are final, and their outcomes cannot be challenged before another body outside the judiciary, including the Constitutional Court.

Allowing constitutional complaints against Supreme Court decisions would effectively create a fourth level of trial beyond the existing three-tier system. Supporters of the bill cite Germany’s constitutional complaint system as a model. However, Germany’s Basic Law explicitly provides for such a mechanism, whereas Korea’s Constitution contains no comparable provision, making the proposal vulnerable to constitutional challenge.

Beyond the legal debate, Jo’s warning that the measure could cause “serious harm to the public” merits particular attention. If constitutional complaints are allowed, litigants would face an additional stage in the judicial process, increasing legal costs and delaying the final resolution of disputes.

Similar concerns have been raised by legal figures across the ideological spectrum, including former Acting Constitutional Court President Moon Hyung-bae and former Supreme Court Justice Kim Seok-soo. Their views suggest that the issue extends beyond partisan divisions and reflects broader institutional concerns.

Jo emphasized that the three judicial reform bills involve “a fundamental pillar of the Constitution and the national order” and should be decided only after sufficient public discussion and deliberation. At present, however, it is difficult to conclude that such a process has taken place.

The ruling party should avoid a rapid legislative push driven by political urgency or pressure from core supporters. Instead, it should listen to diverse perspectives and create a forum for careful public debate.

Judicial reform is not a matter that can be approached from the perspective of political advantage or party strategy. It concerns the constitutional framework and the principle of separation of powers. Ensuring that any reform strengthens, rather than destabilizes, that foundation is essential for maintaining public trust in the justice system and democratic governance.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.