The Supreme Court building in Seocho District, southern Seoul.NEWS1
Ko Jung-ae
The author is the editor-in-chief at the JoongAng Sunday.
In early April, I wrote a column titled “Should spouses serve together on top courts?” President Lee Jae Myung has so far appointed two Constitutional Court justices, including its president. One is Justice Oh Young-joon, while the person Lee wants to appoint as his first Supreme Court justice, succeeding Roh Tae-ak, is Oh’s wife, Judge Kim Min-ki. A married couple simultaneously serving on Korea’s two highest courts would be unprecedented and defy common sense. I hoped a third compromise candidate would emerge.
That issue lies at the root of the confrontation between the Blue House and the ruling Democratic Party (DP) on one side and Supreme Court Chief Justice Jo Hee-de on the other. Behind the Blue House’s objections to Jo’s written recommendation and the DP’s efforts to revise the Supreme Court justice recommendation committee, the same intention is clearly visible: The Blue House insists on Kim.
The first question is why Kim, who arguably should have withdrawn, made the four-person shortlist. Supreme Court justices are appointed by the president with the National Assembly's consent upon the recommendation of the chief justice. A committee typically first selects four candidates.
A lawyer familiar with the process described factions within the judiciary that shape the atmosphere, while others prefer not to make trouble. He said influential figures strongly backed Kim while others acquiesced.
He was referring to the Society for the Study of Modern Society and Sexual Crimes, founded in 2021. Its first two presidents, Oh Kyeong-mi and Jeong Gye-seon, became a Supreme Court justice and Constitutional Court justice, respectively. The group reportedly backed Kim as well. Judge Kim Ye-young, another member, was also among the candidates to succeed Supreme Court Justice Lee Heung-gu.
“There are other female judges,” the lawyer said. “But this group has become an internal force, so people cannot speak up. If it turns against you, even the chief justice’s confidence will not get you past the recommendation committee.”
The chief justice, the president and the National Assembly all have roles in judicial appointments. Traditionally, differences are coordinated and compromised behind the scenes. This time, however, the Blue House held firm on Kim. It reportedly began by saying it preferred a female judge, then quickly settled on her.
A presidential office asking the chief justice to recommend a particular person is abnormal. Former liberal Chief Justice Lee Yong-hoon once resisted pressure from the Lee Myung-bak administration, saying that simply accepting the Blue House’s preferred candidate could undermine the chief justice’s nomination authority and judicial independence. When former President Yoon Suk Yeol expressed opposition to two specific candidates, the DP protested that it violated the separation of powers.
Yet the Blue House has remained unmoved. Kim’s background in the progressive Society for Research on Our Law may not be the only reason. Reform Party lawyer Kim Jeong-cheol pointed to the first acquittal handed down last April in the Daejang-dong case, on whose panel Kim served as an associate judge.
“The ruling itself must be respected,” Kim Jeong-cheol said. But if a judge involved in a ruling favorable to a politician soon becomes a candidate for higher office appointed by that political power, he added, “the public will begin to suspect the appointment before the ruling.”
If the Blue House would not retreat, neither could the chief justice. Jo’s written recommendation emerged from that deadlock. It was unilateral, but hardly unforeseeable. What was unexpected was the Blue House’s public protest.
A senior presidential aide called it an “unprecedented constitutional situation departing from established practice,” saying Jo had bypassed consultation and failed to respect the president’s appointment authority. Yet the Blue House itself had departed from convention and failed to respect the chief justice’s recommendation authority. Its own shadow now hangs heavily over the dispute.
The puzzling question remains. President Lee will appoint 22 of the 26 Supreme Court justices serving during his term. Jo retires next June. The Blue House will soon find it much easier to shape the court.
So why force the issue now? Is Kim truly so indispensable? If so, is she really the right person for the Supreme Court? Why is this administration exercising power with so little patience?
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.
