Supreme Court Chief Justice Jo Hee-de declined to take the witness oath or give testimony at a National Assembly Legislation and Judiciary Committee audit on the 6th, yet remained in his seat and answered lawmakers' questions directly. It was the first time in South Korea's constitutional history that a sitting chief justice has responded to lawmakers' questions at a parliamentary audit. Jo argued in particular, regarding President Lee Jae-myung's authority over Supreme Court justice appointments, that "the National Assembly and the president cannot intervene at all in the chief justice's nomination."
When Rep. Kim Ki-pyo of the Democratic Party of Korea asked why Jo would not take the oath or answer questions despite having been designated a general witness, the chief justice pulled out a prepared document and continued his explanation. "Just as the chief justice cannot intervene at all in the National Assembly's consent procedure or the president's appointment procedure, the National Assembly and the president cannot intervene at all in the chief justice's nomination," he said. "Interfering with the chief justice's nomination is an unconstitutional measure that runs counter to the division of powers among institutions expressly set out in the Constitution and to judicial independence."
Jo also drew a line on prior consultation with the president over justice nominations, saying it is not a constitutional obligation. "There is no constitutional problem whatsoever if the chief justice does not consult with the president," he said, adding that "successive presidents have, as a result, respected the chief justice's nomination authority." He also said there is "no constitutional restriction on nominating justices in writing, and once the chief justice makes the nomination, his constitutional authority and duty are complete."
Jo directly rebutted allegations that the court cooperated with the declaration of emergency martial law. "The Supreme Court stated before any other institution that the emergency martial law was unconstitutional," he said. "The martial law command repeatedly requested that we dispatch personnel or submit lists of names, but I instructed that they absolutely not be sent because it was an unconstitutional act." When Rep. Son Sol of the Progressive Party asked whether he was "wearing judicial robes while practicing politics, dreaming of becoming a second Yoon Suk-yeol," Jo replied that it was "deeply insulting and a sad thing."
He also personally addressed allegations over his use of official expense accounts. When Rep. Lee Sung-yoon of the Democratic Party presented records of wine purchases and raised questions about drinking at the official residence, Jo said, "I do not drink a single drop of alcohol." Asked whether he had purchased gifts, he stressed, "The heads of the three branches of government do not buy alcohol themselves. I have never even seen the card."
Jo meanwhile stayed in his seat rather than leaving after the customary opening remarks by an agency head. With Legislation and Judiciary Committee Chair Seo Young-kyo declining to permit his departure, he remained in the audit room until the recess at 12:40 p.m. and answered some of the lawmakers' questions himself. That marked a change from last year's audit, when he stayed in his seat after his opening remarks but did not answer lawmakers' questions. Looking across all past parliamentary audits, it was the first time since the founding of the Republic that a sitting chief justice has directly answered lawmakers' questions beyond opening remarks.
