Supreme Court Chief Justice Jo Hee-de said on the 28th that he would explain his position on rejecting a request to renominate a Supreme Court justice "through the parliamentary audit."
Speaking to reporters on his way to work that morning, Jo said he had heard that reporters had many questions because his official position had been delivered only as a conclusion. He added that he would pass along anything essential through the court's public relations officer.
The parliamentary audit of the Supreme Court and its National Court Administration begins on Oct. 6. Jo attended the Legislation and Judiciary Committee's audit of the Supreme Court last October but, as is customary, read only opening remarks. He had planned to leave afterward but was denied permission to do so by Choo Mi-ae, then chair of the committee. He remained for more than an hour, staring straight ahead and keeping his mouth firmly shut as Democratic Party lawmakers posed questions.
On Aug. 18, Jo nominated Son Bong-gi, a senior judge at the Daegu District Court, to succeed former Supreme Court Justice Roh Tae-ak. But on Aug. 28, the presidential office requested a renomination, saying the nomination had been submitted in writing without substantive consultation between the president and the chief justice.
On Sept. 22, Jo said he would not comply with the renomination request, arguing that he could find no specific constitutional grounds or reasons to justify it. The presidential office responded that day with a second statement, again criticizing Jo for what it called a position that distorted the facts by suggesting the president's renomination request was flawed for failing to observe the constitutional principles of written form and countersignature.
On Sept. 23, Jo added a more detailed explanation of his position through a further notice to the press, saying his point was not that the Aug. 28 official document contained a procedural defect. Clear grounds and reasons must be presented in the wording of the document, he said, so that its validity is not in dispute and procedures under the Constitution and the law can proceed.
With the presidential office and the Supreme Court clashing over the selection of a successor, the vacancy on the Supreme Court bench has persisted since Roh stepped down in March.
Meanwhile, the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee planned to hold an emergency session of questioning that day to discuss the renomination issue and other matters.
