Chief justice calls “second Yoon Suk-yeol” question insulting at court audit
Version 3: Follow-up coverage added Chief Justice Cho’s direct rebuttals of the allegations about cash incentives to justices and about cooperation with the Dec. 3 martial law, the background of the Supreme Court appointment dispute, and detail of the shouting in the committee room, including the suspension of a People Power Party lawmaker’s speaking rights.
In short
Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae appeared at the National Assembly’s Supreme Court audit on Oct. 6 but refused to take the witness oath or testify on the dispute over the re-recommendation of a Supreme Court justice. Asked by Justice Party lawmaker Son Sol whether he dreams of becoming “a second Yoon Suk-yeol”, Cho said the remark was “insulting and saddening”. People Power Party lawmakers shouted at Son and the committee chair suspended one of them, while Cho rebutted allegations about cash incentives to justices and about cooperation with the Dec. 3 martial law.
Read the full story 3 min read
The National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee held its Supreme Court audit in Seoul on Oct. 6. Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae appeared but refused to take the witness oath: when chair Seo Young-kyo began the oath, court administration chief Noh Kyung-pil and other agency heads stood and took it while Cho stayed seated, NoCut News reported. Cho had been adopted by the Democratic Party-led committee as a general witness, and People Power Party lawmakers argued he should give his greetings and then leave, as former chief justices did. Maeil Business reported that Cho had planned to leave after his greeting and stayed nearly two hours. [ 12 , 14 , 16 , 20 ]
During questioning, Justice Party lawmaker Son Sol said the prolonged vacancy of Supreme Court justice posts was unprecedented in constitutional history and asked whether Cho was “dreaming of becoming a second Yoon Suk-yeol”, saying many citizens ask whether he is “practising politics in judicial robes”. Cho, who had not answered most questions, moved toward the microphone and replied that such a remark was “insulting and saddening”, Newsis, Dong-A Ilbo and Maeil Business reported. [ 8 , 9 , 12 , 14 , 16 , 20 ]
The exchange drew a shout from People Power Party lawmakers. Maeil Business reported that lawmaker Kim Tae-gyu told Son “what is your level — be a human being” and aimed another remark at Democratic Party lawmaker Kim Yong-min; chair Seo Young-kyo called the remark unfit to be spoken and suspended his speaking rights, and People Power Party lawmakers Park Hyung-su and Kwak Kyu-taek protested. Dong-A Ilbo reported that the two sides clashed strongly again. [ 9 , 20 ]
In his greeting, Cho said that requiring him to testify about the recommendation of Supreme Court justices could undermine the separation of powers and judicial independence, and he declined to answer questions on the re-recommendation dispute, saying he had already stated he could not take the oath or testify, according to Newsis and Hankook Ilbo. He rebutted other allegations: he said he had never asked the National Assembly to keep reporters away, that the chief justice was “not involved at all” in cash incentives paid to justices because a separate spending officer handles them, and that he had told the martial law command it would be unconstitutional to hand over court personnel lists, adding that he had “never cooperated with the emergency martial law”. [ 8 , 12 , 16 , 20 ]
Seoul Economic Daily set out the background. In January the Supreme Court Justice Candidate Recommendation Committee recommended four judges to succeed former justice Noh Tae-ak; the Blue House and the judiciary failed to narrow differences on the final nominee, and in August Cho recommended Son Bong-ki without Blue House agreement, breaking with practice. The Blue House then demanded a re-recommendation, citing a lack of procedural completeness, which Cho refused, saying the request did not clearly state its reasons and constitutional basis. In his greeting Cho said the document’s content alone made its intent hard to understand, and that his position followed the principle that the chief justice’s recommendation right, the National Assembly’s consent right and the president’s appointment right should each be respected under the constitution. [ 11 , 12 , 16 ]
The session followed a week of dispute over whether Cho should appear. The committee adopted him as a general witness on Sept. 28 in a Democratic Party-led vote from which People Power Party lawmakers walked out, Newsis and Yonhap reported. On Oct. 5, People Power Party floor leader Chung Jeom-sik posted a Facebook message titled “Seven reasons Cho Hee-dae cannot attend the National Assembly audit as a witness”, calling the summons a breach of the separation of powers and the National Assembly’s “high-handedness and abuse of power”, while Democratic Party floor spokesperson Lee Ju-hui said “even the chief justice is no exception” and that refusal to attend without just cause is subject to criminal punishment. [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ]
Why it matters
The session put a sitting chief justice in the witness seat over the judiciary’s standoff with the Blue House on a Supreme Court appointment, a dispute in which the Democratic Party says refusal to attend or testify without just cause is punishable and the People Power Party says there is no precedent for the summons and that it breaches the separation of powers. The hearing ended in shouting and a suspension of speaking rights, suggesting the confrontation will run on through the audit period.
Key facts
- The Legislation and Judiciary Committee adopted Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae as a general witness on Sept. 28 in a Democratic Party-led vote from which People Power Party lawmakers walked out. [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ]
- Cho appeared at the Oct. 6 Supreme Court audit but refused to take the witness oath; court administration chief Noh Kyung-pil and other agency heads stood and took the oath while Cho remained seated. [ 8 , 12 , 16 ]
- Justice Party lawmaker Son Sol asked Cho whether he dreams of becoming “a second Yoon Suk-yeol” and said many citizens ask whether he is practising politics in judicial robes; Cho replied that such a remark was “insulting and saddening”. [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 17 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]
- Cho declined to answer questions on the re-recommendation dispute, saying he had already stated that he could not take the oath or testify. [ 8 , 12 , 16 ]
- Cho said the chief justice was “not involved at all” in cash incentives paid to Supreme Court justices, saying a separate spending officer handles such payments. [ 12 , 20 ]
- Cho said he had told the martial law command that handing over court personnel lists would be unconstitutional, and that he had “never cooperated with the emergency martial law”. [ 12 , 15 ]
- People Power Party floor leader Chung Jeom-sik posted a Facebook message on Oct. 5 titled “Seven reasons Cho Hee-dae cannot attend the National Assembly audit as a witness”, calling the summons a breach of the separation of powers and the National Assembly’s “high-handedness and abuse of power”. [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ]
- In January the Supreme Court Justice Candidate Recommendation Committee recommended four judges to succeed former justice Noh Tae-ak; after the Blue House and the judiciary failed to agree on a final nominee, Cho recommended Son Bong-ki in August without Blue House agreement, and refused the Blue House’s demand for a re-recommendation. [ 11 ]
Confirmed by several sources
- The Legislation and Judiciary Committee adopted Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae as a general witness on Sept. 28 in a Democratic Party-led vote from which People Power Party lawmakers walked out. [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ]
- Cho appeared at the Oct. 6 Supreme Court audit and refused to take the witness oath, while other agency heads, including court administration chief Noh Kyung-pil, took it. [ 8 , 12 , 16 ]
- Justice Party lawmaker Son Sol asked Cho whether he dreams of becoming “a second Yoon Suk-yeol”; Cho called the remark insulting and saddening. [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 17 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]
- Cho refused to testify on the re-recommendation dispute, citing his stated position that he could not take the oath or testify. [ 8 , 12 , 16 ]
- People Power Party floor leader Chung Jeom-sik published a Facebook post on Oct. 5 arguing that Cho must not attend the audit, citing the absence of legitimacy in the summons, the separation of powers and the lack of precedent. [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ]
Still unclear
- Whether Chief Justice Cho attended the audit as the head of an agency or as a general witness. Kyunghyang Shinmun describes him as attending as an agency head, while other outlets say he was adopted as a general witness and that Democratic Party lawmakers insisted he stay in the room; the documents do not resolve the difference.
- Whether Cho answered the audit’s questions in his closing remarks. NoCut News reports that he said he would answer the points raised in a closing statement; no document reports such a statement.
- What the Blue House’s re-recommendation request document actually said. The documents give only Cho’s account that it did not clearly state specific reasons and a constitutional basis.
- Whether the witness adoption ignored an agreement between the parties. The People Power Party says the adoption was unilateral and ignored an inter-party agreement; the Democratic Party describes it as a lawful general-witness summons, and no document settles the point.
- The full scope of the cash incentive allegation against the Supreme Court. Reports describe only the question put to Cho and his denial, without setting out the audit findings behind it.
- Democratic Party floor spokesperson Lee Ju-hui said in a written briefing on Oct. 5 that “even the chief justice is no exception”, that Cho was summoned as a general witness, and that refusal to attend or testify without just cause is subject to criminal punishment. Reported by a single source so far
What local media are saying
Timeline, local time
- Seoul Shinmun reports the opposition urging the Democratic Party to stop humiliating and intimidating Chief Justice Cho in the witness seat (Oct. 4). [ 1 ]
- Newsis reports the People Power Party describing the handling of Cho’s non-attendance as “intimidation politics, not verification” (Oct. 4). [ 2 ]
- People Power Party floor leader Chung Jeom-sik posts his “seven reasons” message on Facebook arguing Cho must not attend the audit (Oct. 5). [ 3 ]
- Yonhap reports the People Power Party’s defence of Cho, including remarks by lawmaker Yoon Sang-hyun and Supreme Council member Shin Dong-wook (Oct. 5). [ 4 ]
- NoCut News reports the Democratic Party’s written briefing demanding Cho appear and answer all allegations (Oct. 5). [ 6 ]
- Newsis reports that Cho, seated in the committee room, answered Son Sol’s “second Yoon Suk-yeol” question by calling it “insulting and saddening”, after refusing to take the oath or answer other questions (Oct. 6). [ 8 ]
- Hankook Ilbo reports the committee clash over whether Cho should leave, his refusal of the witness oath, and his rebuttals of the martial law complicity and cash incentive allegations (Oct. 6). [ 12 ]
- Kyunghyang Shinmun reports Cho saying he told the court not to cooperate with the “unconstitutional” Dec. 3 martial law (Oct. 6). [ 15 ]
- Maeil Business reports that, after People Power Party lawmaker Kim Tae-gyu’s remarks drew a rebuke from chair Seo Young-kyo and a suspension of his speaking rights, Cho denied involvement in the payment of incentives to Supreme Court justices (Oct. 6). [ 20 ]