🚨 Judicial Reform Plan

Today Korean Social News for Beginners | 2025.09.14

0️⃣ Increasing Supreme Court Justices and Strengthening Judiciary Transparency

📌 Controversy Over 4 Key Reform Plans to Restore Trust in the Judiciary

💬 The government and ruling party are pushing for major reform plans to strengthen transparency and independence of the judiciary. The key points are: increasing the current 14 Supreme Court justices to 26 over 3 years, including members from the Judges' Representative Assembly and local bar associations in the nomination committee, strengthening external evaluation systems for judges, and establishing special courts dedicated to treason cases. However, the judiciary strongly opposes these plans, citing concerns about damage to judicial independence and political pressure. There is intense debate between the reform effort to restore public trust lost due to judicial scandals and the need to guarantee judicial independence.

💡 Summary

• Judicial reform plans are system improvement measures to strengthen judiciary transparency and independence.
• Key elements include increasing Supreme Court justices, reforming nomination committees, making judge evaluations public, and establishing special treason courts.
• Finding the right balance between restoring trust in the judiciary and guaranteeing judicial independence is crucial.

1️⃣ Definition

Judicial reform plan means a series of system changes aimed at improving the current court system and judge-related systems to strengthen transparency, independence, and fairness of the judiciary. It is being promoted to modernize the judicial system that has remained largely unchanged since the 1987 constitutional revision and restore public trust.

The background of this reform plan includes restoring public trust in the judiciary that was greatly damaged by judicial scandals and judge corruption, effectively responding to increasing court workloads, and building a more transparent and democratic judicial system.

💡 Why is this important?

• The judiciary is one pillar of the separation of powers and a core institution of democracy.
• It serves as the last resort to protect citizens' rights through fair trials.
• Public trust in the judiciary is the foundation of rule of law and social stability.
• A transparent and independent judicial system is essential for democratic development.

2️⃣ Main Reform Plan Contents and Issues

📕 Need for and Concerns About Increasing Supreme Court Justices

• The need for more justices due to increasing caseload is being raised. The main situation is as follows:

  • Since 1987, the number of Supreme Court justices has been fixed at 14, but appeal cases have continuously increased.
  • With annual appeal cases exceeding 10,000, considerable time is required for case processing.
  • As complex and specialized cases increase, more personnel are needed for sufficient deliberation and judgment.
  • They plan to add 12 justices over 3 years to expand to 26, improving both trial quality and speed.

• Concerns and opposing arguments about the increase are also significant. Main issues include:

  • Rapid personnel increases could make coordination between judges more difficult.
  • There is a risk of excessive expansion of political influence by the president who appoints Supreme Court justices.
  • The experience and expertise of newly appointed justices may not be verified.
  • There are counterarguments that expanding first and second instance courts is more urgent than higher courts.

📕 Reform of Supreme Court Justice Nomination Committee and Expanding External Participation

• Limitations of the current nomination system are being pointed out. Main problems include:

  • Currently, the Chief Justice forms and operates the nomination committee, creating possibility for unilateral decisions.
  • Being composed only of legal profession insiders limits diverse opinion gathering.
  • The nomination process and criteria are opaque, raising questions about fairness.
  • It's difficult for civil society or academic opinions to be reflected in the structure.

• The reform plan has core contents and expected effects. Main changes include:

  • Including members recommended by the Judges' Representative Assembly and local bar associations in the committee.
  • Expanding participation of external members such as civil society representatives and academic experts.
  • Clarifying nomination criteria and procedures and transparently disclosing the process.
  • Recommending people with diverse backgrounds as Supreme Court justices to ensure multi-faceted perspectives in trials.

💡 Main Issues in Judicial Reform Plans

1. Independence vs Transparency: Balance between guaranteeing judicial independence and external oversight mechanisms
2. Speed vs Caution: Harmony between improving case processing speed and ensuring sufficient deliberation
3. Expertise vs Representation: Appropriate ratio between legal experts and citizen representation
4. Political Neutrality: Concerns about possible changes in judiciary composition with government changes
5. System Stability: Considering side effects that radical reforms might have on the judicial system

3️⃣ Judge Evaluation System and Special Treason Court

✅ Direction for Judge Evaluation System Reform

• Lack of transparency in the current evaluation system is pointed out as a problem. Main limitations include:

  • Judge evaluations are conducted only internally, so the public cannot know the results.
  • Evaluation criteria and methods are unclear, raising questions about fairness.
  • They have decisive influence on promotions and assignments but lack oversight mechanisms.
  • The structure makes it difficult to objectively measure judges' expertise and ethics.

• Strengthening transparency and objectivity through reform plans is being promoted. Main improvement directions include:

  • Including external experts and citizen representatives in evaluation committees to reflect diverse perspectives.
  • Partially disclosing evaluation results to guarantee the public's right to know.
  • Establishing clear evaluation criteria and procedures to increase predictability.
  • Promoting judges' expertise improvement through regular education and feedback.

✅ Background and Controversy Over Establishing Special Treason Court

• The need for securing expertise in the special nature of treason cases is raised. Main grounds include:

  • Treason-related cases are serious crimes directly connected to national survival, requiring special expertise.
  • Judges well-versed in constitutional and national security-related legal principles are needed rather than general trial courts.
  • National confusion should be minimized through swift and accurate trials.
  • Transparent and fair trial proceedings are important given the concentrated public attention.

• Debate over the composition and operation of special courts is fierce. Main issues include:

  • A plan to compose courts with members recommended by the National Assembly, courts, and bar associations is being considered.
  • There are concerns about the impact of establishing separate courts for specific cases on judicial independence and judge tenure security.
  • Issues of adjusting authority and jurisdiction with general courts are complexly intertwined.
  • If temporary special courts become institutionalized, their ripple effects on the entire judicial system are difficult to predict.

4️⃣ Related Terms Explanation

🔎 Judicial Independence

• Judicial independence is a core principle of democracy.
  • Judicial independence means the right and duty of courts and judges to make decisions based only on law and conscience without interference from the legislative or executive branches. This is specified in Article 103 of the Constitution: "Judges rule independently according to their conscience in accordance with the Constitution and laws."
  • Core elements of judicial independence include: First, personnel independence where judges' appointments, promotions, and disciplinary actions should not be influenced by external pressure. Second, economic independence guaranteeing that judges' salaries will not be reduced during their tenure. Third, judicial independence where no interference is allowed in individual case judgments. Fourth, administrative independence where court operations and judicial administration should be separated from other powers.
  • The biggest issue in judicial reform plans is the balance between strengthening transparency and guaranteeing independence. While expanding external participation and disclosing evaluations help with judicial oversight and transparency, if excessive, they could lead to external pressure and expansion of political influence, requiring careful approach.

🔎 Appeal Court System

• Appeal courts are the highest level that guarantees unity in legal judgments.
  • Appeal court refers to the procedure of requesting retrial from the Supreme Court in disagreement with High Court (appellate court) decisions. Its main function is examining the appropriateness of legal interpretation and application rather than reviewing factual relationships. The Supreme Court plays a role in unifying legal interpretations of courts nationwide and making final legal judgments.
  • Characteristics of appeal courts include: First, only appeals based on legal violations are possible, and simple factual disputes do not constitute grounds for appeal. Second, only legally important cases are heard through the appeal permission system. Third, trials are conducted by full bench or partial bench of Supreme Court justices. Fourth, precedents provide trial standards for lower courts.
  • Currently, with annual appeal cases exceeding 10,000, considerable time is required for case processing. This is the main basis for increasing Supreme Court justices, and balancing case processing speed with trial quality is a challenge.

🔎 Judicial Scandal

• Judicial scandal is an incident that greatly damaged public trust in the judiciary.
  • Judicial scandal refers to the improper trial interference and judge personnel manipulation incident within the judiciary revealed in 2017. During former Chief Justice Yang Seung-tae's term, it was revealed that the Supreme Court Administration interfered with trials based on political considerations and influenced judges' promotions and assignments.
  • Major incident contents include: First, there were attempts to delay trials and manipulate verdicts in politically sensitive cases (Sewol ferry, comfort women, etc.). Second, creation of 'blacklists' classifying judges' tendencies and giving them disadvantages was confirmed. Third, circumstances of using trials as tools for deals with the executive branch were revealed. Fourth, they attempted to suppress internal opposing opinions and systematically cover up.
  • This incident greatly damaged public trust in the judiciary and strongly raised the need for judicial reform. Strengthening transparency, establishing external oversight mechanisms, and distributing judicial administrative power emerged as reform tasks and serve as the main background for currently promoted judicial reform plans.

5️⃣ Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q: Will trials improve if Supreme Court justices increase to 26?

A: Case processing speed may increase, but overall trial quality depends on various factors.

• Positive effects of increasing Supreme Court justices include: First, more cases can be processed simultaneously, alleviating trial delay problems. Second, more sufficient time can be devoted to each case, enabling in-depth deliberation. Third, participation of judges from various specialized fields can increase expertise. Fourth, distributed workload can solve individual judges' overwork problems. However, there are also concerns. With more personnel, opinion coordination may become difficult, potentially causing problems in forming consistent precedents. Also, newly appointed justices' lack of experience could actually lower trial quality initially.
• The most important thing is not simply increasing numbers but selecting excellent talent and securing expertise through systematic education and support.

Q: Is it good for external members to participate in judge nomination and evaluation?

A: It helps secure transparency and diversity, but requires careful approach in terms of expertise and independence.

• Advantages of external participation include: First, it can reflect various perspectives beyond internal practices and prejudices of the legal profession. Second, it can create a judiciary closer to the people by gathering civil society opinions. Third, the nomination and evaluation process becomes transparent, increasing public trust in fairness. Fourth, judges perform their duties more carefully and responsibly. However, concerns are also significant. If external members lacking legal expertise participate, there's risk of inappropriate judgments. Also, if members representing political tendencies or specific interests participate, the judiciary's political neutrality could be damaged.
• The key is to be strict about external participants' qualifications and selection methods, and compose them with people who have both expertise and neutrality. Starting with gradual and limited participation rather than complete openness would be realistic.

Table of Contents

• Go to Guide