Home > Opinion > Editorials

Ruling party shouldn't rush controversial judicial reform bills

Published: 24 Feb. 2026, 00:00

Chief Justice Jo Hee-de answers reporters’ questions as he arrives at the Supreme Court in Seocho District, Seoul, on the morning of Feb. 23. [NEWS1]

The Democratic Party has decided to push ahead with three major judicial reform bills during the current extraordinary session of the National Assembly. The package includes the creation of a new offense of judicial misconduct, the introduction of constitutional complaints against court rulings and an expansion of the number of Supreme Court justices.

Legal experts and the Supreme Court have repeatedly warned that the proposals could violate the Constitution. Moving to pass them in a plenary session without fully addressing those concerns is highly inappropriate.

Since the launch of the Lee Jae Myung administration in June last year, the ruling party has pursued what it calls judicial reform alongside separate efforts to restructure the prosecution system. The three bills would amend the Criminal Act to allow punishment of judges and prosecutors for alleged distortions of the law, revise the Constitutional Court Act to permit challenges to final court decisions and amend the Court Organization Act to increase the number of Supreme Court justices from 14 to 26.

Scholars of constitutional law and members of the legal community warn that the measures could weaken rather than improve the judiciary. The proposed judicial misconduct offense could expose judges and prosecutors to political pressure. Allowing constitutional complaints against finalized rulings could prolong litigation and create a surge in repetitive lawsuits.

The expansion of the Supreme Court also raises concerns about judicial independence. If the additional 12 justices are appointed during President Lee’s term, the composition of the court could shift significantly toward the current administration. All three measures risk undermining public confidence, which is the foundation of judicial authority.

Previous administrations treated judicial reform as a matter requiring extensive consultation and bipartisan agreement because of its far-reaching impact on citizens’ lives. In contrast, the ruling party’s current approach has been criticized as a one-sided legislative push that gives little weight to procedural legitimacy.

Supreme Court Chief Justice Jo Hee-de again voiced concern on his way to work Monday, following a similar appeal earlier this month. He warned that the bills would fundamentally alter a judicial framework that has been in place for nearly eight decades and could even require constitutional revision.

Jo said the changes carry serious consequences that could directly affect citizens. Pressing ahead despite such warnings risks being seen as legislative overreach rather than reform.

Judicial reform should strengthen the rule of law and public trust. Rushing through measures that raise constitutional doubts without broader consensus could deepen political division and weaken confidence in the justice system. The ruling party should pause and seek sufficient public discussion and bipartisan agreement before proceeding with legislation that could reshape the country’s judicial structure.

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.