The Supreme Court’s decision on the 18th to establish a new standard for the establishment of a court dedicated to nationally important cases, such as civil war, appears to have been influenced by the judgment that the amendment to the court specializing in civil war, currently being promoted by the Democratic Party of Korea, is also unconstitutional.
Dae-yeop Cheon, Director of the Court Administration of the Supreme Court (who also serves as a Supreme Court Justice), attended the plenary session of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee of the National Assembly on the evening of the announcement of the enactment of the regulations and criticized the Democratic Party’s amendment bill, saying, “There are still unconstitutional elements.”
Director Cheon said, “I feel desperate,” and appealed, “Just as the National Assembly lifted the constitutional distortion caused by the abnormal and unconstitutional December 3 martial law through constitutional and normal procedures, the judiciary now has the responsibility to end it through trials through constitutional and normal procedures.”
Director Cheon said, “From the perspective of eliminating factors of anxiety, such as requests for unconstitutionality trials or non-compliance with trial by the parties involved in the trial, the so-called ‘revision of the Insurrection Trial Act’ has several problems that we cannot overlook.” The following is a summary and reorganization of Director Cheon’s remarks at the meeting in which he presented six problems with the Democratic Party’s amendment.
Director Cheon reiterated, “Just as the 12.3 martial law situation was overcome through the constitutional and normal procedures of the National Assembly, I sincerely hope that the conclusion will be completed through constitutional and normal procedures so that there will be no procedural objections.”
However, members of the Democratic Party’s judiciary committee strongly opposed Director Cheon, including by disparaging him or suddenly raising their voices and shouting.
Choo Mi-ae, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, asked, “Is the dispositive law unconstitutional?” and said, “The people came out to the Capitol Street and helped the National Assembly to lift martial law, and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the Director of the National Court Administration convened a meeting in a comfortable luxury car at that time.”
He then held up the paper with the Supreme Court’s rules written on it with one hand and eloquently said, “But are we going to avoid this with just one rule? Will judicial justice be restored with this!”
Chairman Chu also suddenly raised suspicions, saying, “If this drags on for another year, the people will not remember. The special investigation is over, so are you waiting for that time? What will you do next when it goes to the Supreme Court? Are you going to dismiss the appeal, saying, ‘The original trial’s judgment that there is a dispute about illegality is correct…’? Is it all planned out?”
In addition, while arguing with opposition party members, he shouted at the Democratic Party’s amendments, “No matter how hard you look at them, there is no possibility of unconstitutionality!” and “There is no unconstitutionality!” He also scolded some People Power Party lawmakers, including Rep. Kwak Gyu-taek, in a casual tone, saying, “If the chairman speaks well, just study.”
I would like to subscribe to this article.
+1,000 won added
+10,000 won added
-Add 1,000 won
-Additional 10,000 won
343601-04-082252 [예금주 프레시안협동조합(후원금)]Account transfer is also possible.
