Courts battered by storm of judicial reform laws under Lee government

By Yang Geun-hyuk, The Herald Business

The judiciary has undergone unprecedented upheaval during the first year of the Lee Jae Myung administration. The Democratic Party of Korea, now the ruling party, made judicial reform its top priority and moved at speed. Two court decisions served as the spark: a court's order in March last year to lift the detention of former President Yoon Suk Yeol before the new government took office, and the Supreme Court's May ruling that year overturning and remanding the Public Official Election Act violation case against Lee, who was then the Democratic Party's presidential candidate. Together, they fueled the ruling party's push for three judicial reform laws — criminalizing judicial distortion, introducing constitutional court petitions against final rulings, and expanding the number of Supreme Court justices.

Courts repeatedly voiced concern that the legislation was being rushed through without adequate deliberation, but the three reform laws cleared the National Assembly in February this year under Democratic Party leadership and were promulgated and took effect in March. Some analysts say the laws amount to legislation designed to strip the Supreme Court of its authority, and they are already bearing down heavily on judges handling trials at the front line. Courts are busy drawing up countermeasures, but observers say the turmoil surrounding the judiciary is unlikely to subside.

According to legal circles, the Supreme Court's Court Administration Office established a "Duty Litigation Support Center," which has been in operation since May 20. The center was set up in response to a growing wave of criminal complaints filed against judges presiding over criminal cases — a trend that has intensified since the introduction of the judicial distortion offense and deepened avoidance of criminal court assignments. It handles three areas: rapid identification and management of threats to court personnel; comprehensive support for protecting personal safety and private information; and systematic assistance for judges and court staff facing duty-related criminal complaints.

The enforcement of the judicial distortion offense under the revised Criminal Act places a particularly direct burden on judges at the front line, some analysts say. Legal circles had repeatedly warned before the law took effect that it could be abused as a tool to challenge judicial decisions. Particular concern centered on the possibility that cases involving prominent politicians could be turned into criminal matters against the judges themselves, depending on the political climate — a prospect many feared would have a chilling effect on judicial work. The Korean National Police Agency said as of May 6 that 242 judges had been reported to police under the judicial distortion offense.

To address the judicial distortion offense, the Court Administration Office overhauled its internal rules on support for judges and court civil servants facing improper litigation, renaming and revising the regulations to cover duty-related litigation more broadly. Under the revised rules, when a judge or court civil servant faces a duty-related criminal complaint, the court will cover attorney fees of up to 10 million won (approximately $6,620) during the investigation stage before indictment, and up to 20 million won each for the first, second and third trial stages after indictment. Before the revision, support during the investigation stage was capped at 5 million won.

The constitutional court petition system introduced under the revised Constitutional Court Act has also been described by some analysts as part of a broader weakening of judicial authority. The system allows final court rulings to be brought before the Constitutional Court for review and potentially annulled. Courts had strongly opposed the measure, calling it the effective introduction of a four-tier judicial system. Since the system took effect, more than 700 petitions have been filed, of which five have cleared the preliminary screening threshold and been referred to the full bench of nine constitutional justices.

Legislation expanding the number of Supreme Court justices, including the chief justice, from 14 to 26 passed the National Assembly under ruling party leadership amid controversy over potential infringement on judicial independence. Under the revised Court Organization Act, four new justices will be added each year for three years starting in 2028. As a result, President Lee will appoint a total of 22 Supreme Court justices during his term — 12 through the expansion and 10 as successors to incumbent justices.

The judiciary also faced the unprecedented establishment of a dedicated insurrection court this year. The specialized bench was set up at the Seoul High Court under a special procedure act for insurrection, foreign aggression and rebellion cases, passed by the ruling party-led National Assembly in December last year, and has been in operation since February. It handles only insurrection, foreign aggression and rebellion cases — or related matters — deemed of national significance. It is currently hearing multiple trials stemming from the Dec. 3 emergency martial law incident. Judges have repeatedly been cited as facing an increased workload due to the so-called "6-3-3 principle" under the special prosecutor act, which requires appellate sentencing to be completed within three months of the first-instance sentencing date.

Some analysts say the tensions between the ruling camp and the judiciary — heightened by the three reform laws and the creation of the insurrection court — have manifested in a prolonged vacancy on the Supreme Court bench. The nomination of a successor to former Justice Noh Tae-ak, who retired in early March, has gone unmade for more than 100 days. Chief Justice Jo received four candidates from the recommendation committee on Jan. 21 but has yet to formally recommend any of them to President Lee for appointment. Under the current process, the chief justice nominates a final candidate, who is then appointed by the president with the consent of the National Assembly.