Chief Justice Jo's written nomination breaks protocol, drawing impeachment calls

The fallout is growing over Chief Justice Jo Hee-dae's decision to formally recommend two Supreme Court justice candidates to President Lee Jae Myung in writing, without a face-to-face meeting — breaking with longstanding convention. The Democratic Party of Korea has gone so far as to call the move grounds for impeaching Jo, while concerns are mounting that the standoff between the ruling party and the judiciary could delay the confirmation process in the National Assembly and prolong a vacancy on the court.

Jo declined to answer reporters' questions Wednesday morning as he arrived at the Supreme Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul. Asked why he had notified Cheong Wa Dae of the nominees in writing, and whether coordination with the presidential office had broken down, he walked past without comment. Jo had submitted the nominations to President Lee on Tuesday — recommending Son Bong-gi, a senior judge at the Daegu District Court, to succeed former Justice Noh Tae-ak, who retired in March, and Kim Seong-su, a senior judge at the Seoul High Court, to succeed Justice Lee Heung-gu, who is set to retire next month.

The nomination was unusual in that Jo did not meet with the president in person. Convention has long held that the Supreme Court and Cheong Wa Dae align on candidates before the chief justice formally recommends them to the president in a direct meeting. The Constitution and the Court Organization Act stipulate that Supreme Court justices are appointed by the president upon the recommendation of the chief justice and with the consent of the National Assembly. This time, however, Jo submitted the recommendation in writing without visiting Cheong Wa Dae.

The written submission came after months of deadlock between Cheong Wa Dae and the Supreme Court over a successor to Justice Noh, and analysts say the episode has brought their tensions into the open. A judicial nomination committee had narrowed the field to four candidates in January and forwarded them to Jo, but no nomination followed. The two sides are said to have favored different candidates and been unable to reach agreement. With Justice Lee Heung-gu's retirement now imminent, Jo is believed to have made the abrupt decision to nominate both successors at once — concluding that the court vacancy could no longer be left unresolved while the dispute over Justice Noh's replacement remained at an impasse.

The already strained relationship between the ruling party and the judiciary is expected to deteriorate further. The Democratic Party and the Supreme Court have repeatedly clashed over the court's ruling that overturned President Lee's conviction under the Public Official Election Act and remanded the case, as well as over the party's push for what it calls three judicial reform bills — introducing a constitutional complaint mechanism against court rulings, expanding the number of Supreme Court justices, and creating a new offense of judicial distortion. The nomination dispute adds another flashpoint, raising the prospect that the Assembly could block the confirmation of the nominees.

Criticism of Jo erupted within the ruling party as soon as the written nomination became known. Democratic Party lawmaker Song Yeong-gil wrote on social media Tuesday that Jo "is not pursuing judicial independence but inviting judicial isolation," adding: "I have already called for the impeachment of Chief Justice Jo Hee-dae. Wednesday, there is one more reason." Fellow party lawmaker Lee Geon-tae said the nomination without consultation with Cheong Wa Dae "breaks established convention and is a challenge to the president's appointment authority," and argued that even if the president submits the confirmation requests to the Assembly, the Democratic Party "must reject the nominees, as they were recommended in a manner that in effect encroaches on the president's appointment power."

If the ruling party's opposition translates into an actual rejection, vacancies on the Supreme Court could persist for an extended period — covering both the seat left by Justice Noh's retirement and the additional seat that will open when Justice Lee Heung-gu steps down. Once the president submits a confirmation request to the Assembly, nominees undergo a confirmation hearing before a full floor vote. President Lee could signal effective rejection by simply not forwarding the requests, or the Democratic Party could vote them down even if the process proceeds normally. Confirmation requires a majority of registered Assembly members to be present and a majority of those present to vote in favor. With the Democratic Party holding 161 seats, its opposition would make passage of any confirmation vote all but impossible.