Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won said he would examine whether the People Power Party meets the requirements for dissolution once he takes office, drawing an immediate clash between the rival parties. The People Power Party pushed back sharply, saying, "Go ahead and try." With the confirmation hearing for Kim one day away, the question of dissolving a political party has become another flashpoint, intensifying the exchange between the two sides.
According to written answers Kim submitted to the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee on the 14th, Kim responded to a question from Rep. Kim Yong-min of the Democratic Party of Korea about plans to seek the People Power Party's dissolution by saying he would "closely examine the intent of the Constitutional Court's decision and the progress of related cases to review whether the requirements are met." Kim also cited the Constitutional Court's finding that strict requirements are needed because dissolving a party restricts the freedom of party activity. But the controversy grew as a ministerial nominee said directly that he would review the possibility of dissolving the main opposition party.
The People Power Party objected immediately. Rep. Yoon Sang-hyun said, "Does it make any sense to say you will even review dissolving the main opposition party?" and added, "Go ahead and try." He went on to criticize the move, saying, "This system was not created so that a government could pressure an opposition party it dislikes or brand its political opponents as targets for dissolution."
Kim also took a cautious line on abolishing the system that allows prosecutors to withdraw an indictment. Asked by Rep. Kwak Kyu-taek of the People Power Party for his view on scrapping the system itself, Kim said, "There may be a need to withdraw an indictment when changed circumstances after the indictment make maintaining it unnecessary or impossible," adding, "I believe abolishing the system itself requires careful review after gathering views from various quarters."
Partisan exchanges also continued at the confirmation hearing held the same day for Supreme Court Justice nominee Kim Sung-soo. On the gift tax dispute that arose over his living in an apartment owned by his brother-in-law, Kim Sung-soo said, "As a legal professional, not knowing that falls short of the public's expectations, and I am sorry," adding, "After a review by a tax accountant, I am proceeding with payment for the taxable portion."
On how President Lee's alleged violation of the Public Official Election Act was handled, Kim Sung-soo offered an answer suggesting the process had been somewhat out of the ordinary. Asked about the Supreme Court disposing of the case in just nine days, he said, "It could be said that the procedural handling was somewhat unusual." He stopped short of going further, however, saying it was difficult to judge whether the procedure had been appropriate in a specific case.
In the dispute over the renomination of Supreme Court justices, judicial independence emerged as the central issue. When Rep. Joo Jin-woo of the People Power Party asked whether "the chief justice is a subordinate of the president," Kim Sung-soo replied that the two sides are in a relationship requiring "mutual respect." Asked whether a president's infringement on judicial independence could constitute grounds for impeachment, he said, "It is difficult to generalize, but in principle, yes."
Meanwhile, the National Assembly began its confirmation process in earnest with Kim Sung-soo's hearing that day. On the 15th, Kim Seung-won will appear along with Lee Hyoung-il, nominee for deputy prime minister and minister of economy and finance, and Lee So-young, nominee for minister of SMEs and startups. On the 16th, Kang Shin-chul, nominee for defense minister, and Hong Ji-sun, nominee for land, infrastructure and transport minister, will face review. A hearing for Choi Gil-soo, nominee for special inspector general, is set for the 18th.
