Top court refuses to hand over ex-OCA head computer
Ko Young-han, left, the former head of Office of Court Administration, speaks at the National Assmemly audit of the Supreme Court in July 2018. Ko later resigned over his alleged deep involvement in creating a "blacklist of judges.” Korea Times photos by Bae Woo-han
By Lee Kyung-min
The Supreme Court refused prosecutors' request to hand over computer hard drives used by Justice Ko Young-han who resigned as Office of Court Administration (OCA) head over his alleged deep involvement in creating the so-called “blacklist of judges.” Managing the list was among many measures allegedly orchestrated by the top court's administrative body which has been embroiled in a “judiciary abuse” scandal. Former Chief Justice Yang Sung-tae allegedly sought to trade “friendly verdicts” to suit the then conservative Park Geun-hye administration for “support” from Cheong Wa Dae in setting up what would have been a de facto “Second Supreme Court.”
Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office believes a review of the hard drives allegedly containing “heavily implicating material” stored in pass-code locked files will help uncover the truth about allegations that Yang sought to scale down an academic forum for judges. The forum has raised questions since August 2015 about whether judges are able to make independent rulings free of pressure from the top court justice, or other personnel affairs. Judicial reform was a key agenda item.
Ko under the direction of Yang is alleged to have sought to suppress critical voices within the judiciary by creating and managing the blacklist. The OCA is alleged to have conducted “surveillance” of many judges who attended the forum, and also checked on their personal wealth, family background and personal relationships within the judiciary. Ko is among the top-ranking court figures alleged to have been deeply involved in the scandal alongside Yang, then-second-in-command Lim Chong-heon and his immediate superior Park Byoung-dae, the former OCA head who doubled as a top court justice.
Prosecutors consider the review of the hard drives will largely uncover the command hierarchy, thereby enabling effective accountability for the figures involved, including Yang. However, the top court maintains that it cannot cooperate with the confiscation of the devices because it is still in Ko's possession as a sitting justice. The rejection could result in a forcible search and seizure of relevant materials by the prosecution as allowed by law.
The OCA said it had implemented new protocols governing the use of electronic devices within the judiciary, under which the hard disks used by court justices will be irretrievably destroyed through degaussing, a guaranteed form of hard drive erasure through which all data in a computer is destroyed.
Meanwhile, a top court-supervised committee recommended that the OCA be stripped of its powerful discretion in policy making and personnel affairs. This is a major revision to the status quo, where the OCA oversees comprehensive judicial affairs including budget allocation and accounting. The administrative office has been known to have only a small number of elite judges working there, and those with experience are granted a “guaranteed” prospect of promotion within the judiciary.