Home > Opinion > Columns

Justice reshaped by and for the ruling party

Published: 25 Feb. 2026, 00:02

Ko Jung-ae

The author is the editor-in-chief at the JoongAng Sunday.

When a fellow journalist met attorney Park Jun-young last November, the intention was to hear his views on the ruling camp’s push for judicial and prosecutorial reform. Park, known for his work on retrials including the acquittal in the so-called cyanide makgeolli case, had served as an adviser to a prosecution reform task force. At the time, he spoke cautiously. Beginning in January, however, he posted a series of social media essays titled “A path we have never taken,” expressing concern about the direction of reform.

Democratic Party leader Jung Chung-rae speaks during a Supreme Council meeting at the National Assembly on Feb. 23, stressing the need to complete judicial reform by passing the related bills at a plenary session. [YONHAP]

Park noted that although his work focuses on correcting wrongful convictions, he opposes the introduction of a constitutional complaint against court judgments. Despite the impression that such a system offers another chance to contest a case, he argued that it is limited to reviewing constitutional interpretation rather than reexamining facts. While it signals hope, he said, most cases would not qualify, raising concerns that it could amount to false expectations.

He also stressed that meaningful protection of litigants’ rights is typically completed at the trial and appellate levels. Restoring trust in the judiciary, he argued, should begin not with expanding the Supreme Court’s role but with reducing delays and improving the quality of lower court proceedings. He questioned whether the proposed expansion of Supreme Court justices might reflect a political objective to dilute the court’s current leadership.

Park expressed similar concerns about proposals to introduce a new offense of judicial misconduct, often referred to as the crime of judicial distortion. While he has encountered cases that appear to warrant discipline, he warned that vague legal standards could invite abuse and ultimately weaken the judiciary’s independence. What appears today as a tool to check power, he said, could tomorrow be used to pressure minorities or dissenting voices.

His remarks helped revive public debate. Even civic groups traditionally supportive of reform have called for further deliberation. The Democratic Party, however, has continued to press ahead. After restructuring the prosecution system under the banner of reform, the ruling party is now advancing legislation that would expand the number of Supreme Court justices to 26. Under the proposal, President Lee Jae Myung would appoint 22 of the additional members.

The legislation would also introduce a constitutional complaint procedure allowing the Constitutional Court to overturn Supreme Court rulings and create legal grounds to penalize judges for alleged distortion of the law. Critics argue that previous institutional changes have already produced a fragmented investigative structure among the police, the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials and a proposed new major crimes agency.

Opposition figures claim the changes are intended to reduce the president’s legal risks. The reassignment of prosecutors involved in presidential investigations and public efforts by ruling party lawmakers to seek dismissal of indictments have reinforced such concerns.

Beyond the president, the broader political implications are also being debated. Several high-profile cases involving ruling party figures remain unresolved or under appeal, raising questions about whether the reforms could have wider effects.

The Supreme Court building in Seocho District, Seoul [YONHAP]

Supporters argue that structural change is needed to correct long-standing problems in the justice system. Critics counter that rapid institutional redesign risks undermining legal stability and public confidence. With the ruling party holding a legislative majority, the likelihood of reversal appears limited.

Some observers warn that the cumulative effect could be the emergence of a de facto class shielded from legal accountability. Prolonged investigations and delayed trials have already imposed burdens on many defendants and victims alike. Park warned that reforms pursued without sufficient caution could ultimately disrupt the lives of ordinary citizens.

Whether these concerns prove justified remains uncertain, but the pace and scope of change have intensified debate over the balance between reform and the preservation of judicial independence.

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.