The chief justice said he could not comply with the presidential office's request to renominate a Supreme Court justice, citing the absence of specific reasons or constitutional grounds in the request. The office replied that this nullified the appointment power of a president elected by the people. The vacancy on the bench has now run past 200 days.
Chief Justice Cho Hee-de said on the 22nd that he could not comply with the presidential office's request that he put forward a different nominee for a Supreme Court vacancy. The court cited the absence of specific reasons, or constitutional grounds supporting them, in the request.
광고 문의 · 300×250The presidential office pushed back at once, saying the refusal nullified the appointment power of a president elected by the people and expressing deep regret. The two sides exchanged statements twice in a single day.
The dispute traces back to early this year. After the nominating committee recommended four candidates to succeed former Justice Roh Tae-ak, the presidential office and the chief justice failed to agree on a final pick. As the vacancy lengthened, the chief justice formally nominated Son Bong-gi, a senior judge of the Daegu District Court, on the 18th of last month; ten days later the office asked for a different name.
The seat has now been empty for more than 200 days. The Supreme Court continues to hear cases, including before its full bench, one member short.
The Gap Between Nomination and Appointment
The constitution provides that justices are appointed by the president on the chief justice's nomination, with the National Assembly's consent. Nomination and appointment thus sit in different institutions, but the text does not spell out what happens when a president declines to appoint a nominated candidate.
The episode therefore exposes territory that custom has been carrying. Such matters have been settled by prior consultation, and situations demanding explicit rules have been rare. Some in the legal community raise the possibility of a Constitutional Court ruling through a competence dispute, though others note that who would file it, and against whom, is unclear.
What Is Left for Those Awaiting Judgment
Beyond the institutional argument lie court calendars. A single vacancy affects the composition of panels and the allocation of cases, and shifts the arithmetic in full-bench deliberations. For parties awaiting a final appeal, that time is simply waiting.
For Chinese residents and other foreign nationals in Korea, the final appeal is where residency status, inheritance and property disputes are settled for good. Where an institution stalls, those waiting in the queue always feel it first.
