Cho Hee-dae Provoked the Impeachment Crisis. Here Is Why He Should Not Be Impeached

South Korea’s Supreme Court has once again moved to the center of political conflict. Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae bypassed the president and submitted a written recommendation for a new Supreme Court justice, after President Lee Jae-myung asked him to nominate a replacement for former Justice Roh Tae-ak again.

The People Power Party has treated Lee’s demand as grounds for impeachment. Party leader Jang Dong-hyuk accused Lee’s administration and the Democratic Party of tearing the Constitution apart for political advantage. Floor leader Jeong Jeom-sik said the Democratic Party was threatening further action if Cho refused to attend a parliamentary hearing, asking whether impeachment would be the next step.

“

The chief justice’s recommendation power over Supreme Court justices is a lower authority than the president’s appointment power.

The commentary rejects the claim that the chief justice’s recommendation power outranks the president’s appointment authority. Article 104 of the Constitution says Supreme Court justices are appointed by the president with the National Assembly’s consent, following a recommendation by the chief justice. Recommendation, it argues, means formally asking a higher authority or official body to appoint a candidate. The final appointment power belongs to the president.

“

These are the people who tear the Constitution apart and attach its pieces as it suits them. The Lee Jae-myung administration and the Democratic Party are the forces destroying the Constitution.

Lim Ji-bong, a professor at Sogang University’s law school and former president of the Korean Constitutional Law Association, said the recommendation power supports the president’s appointment authority. He said presidents and chief justices had traditionally agreed on candidates before formal recommendations were made. The unusual feature of the current dispute, he said, was Cho’s decision to submit a recommendation without sufficient consultation with the presidential office.

The commentary also recalls a conflict during the Yoon Suk Yeol administration. Reports that the presidential office might reject two female candidates emerged before then-Chief Justice Kim Myeong-su formally recommended them. Kim eventually proposed other candidates, who became justices. The article says critics at the time did not accuse Yoon of violating the Constitution because they recognized that appointment authority was superior to recommendation authority.

“

Is impeachment the next step? If you want to try it, go ahead.

It takes the opposite view of Cho’s conduct. The nomination committee announced its candidates seven months before Cho made a recommendation, and Roh Tae-ak’s term ended five months earlier. The article describes the delay as a failure to perform a constitutional duty, followed by a surprise recommendation of two candidates after another vacancy emerged. Former Justice Ministry inspector general Ryu Hyeok called the move potentially provocative.

“

I think this may actually be a provocation.