President rejects Supreme Court nominee, citing diversity concerns and procedural issues

President Lee Jae-myung has rejected a Supreme Court nominee put forward by Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae, a move that breaks with established practice and signals a dispute over judicial appointments. The President's office announced on August 28 that it would not submit the nomination of Chief Judge Son Bong-ki to the National Assembly for approval, citing procedural irregularities and concerns about diversity.

Presidential spokesperson Kang Yoo-jung stated that the nomination "did not fully meet procedural completeness." Furthermore, Kang questioned whether Chief Judge Son's nomination aligned with the "public's request for diversity in the composition of the Supreme Court." Reports indicate that President Lee had previously favored a more progressive female candidate, Judge Kim Min-ki of the Seoul High Court, for the vacancy left by former Supreme Court Justice Noh Tae-hak.

“

This nomination for the successor to former Supreme Court Justice Noh Tae-hak did not fully meet procedural completeness.

This decision comes amid criticism that the Supreme Court, with its current nine justices all appointed during the Yoon Suk-yeol administration, lacks social diversity. The number of female justices has also decreased to three, down from four during the Moon Jae-in administration. The Chief Justice had reportedly delayed the nomination process for nearly seven months without providing a clear reason. While a justification offered by the court was that Judge Kim's spouse is a sitting Constitutional Court justice, which is not a disqualifying factor according to the Court Administration official Noh Kyung-pil, this delay is interpreted by some as an attempt to maintain the court's conservative composition.

The controversy deepens when considering Chief Justice Cho's previous nomination of conservative Chief Judge Kim Sung-soo to replace Justice Lee Heung-goo, who, along with Justice Oh Kyung-mi, represented the court's more progressive viewpoints. The addition of Chief Judge Son, also seen as conservative, would further solidify the court's conservative leanings. The Constitution outlines a process where the Chief Justice nominates justices, who are then appointed by the President with the National Assembly's consent, intended to prevent any single branch from monopolizing judicial appointments. The presidential office views its engagement in the nomination process, including suggesting candidates to avoid ideological and gender imbalances, as a constitutional check and balance, not an infringement on judicial independence.

“

It is also questionable whether the nomination of Chief Judge Son aligns with the public's request for diversity in the composition of the Supreme Court.