By Yi Whan-woo
The Supreme Court has called on the National Assembly to promptly hold confirmation hearings for four justice nominees, expressing concerns that any further delay may disrupt the function of the top court.
Comprised of 13 justices, it warned Tuesday of an imminent paralysis on trials following parliament’s failure to hold the hearing since the Assembly launched its new term on May 30.
The complaint comes after President Lee Myung-bak notified the Assembly of the nomination of the candidates to replace the four retiring justices whose term will end on July 10.
The court is concerned that the Assembly may further delay the hearing process amid a political deadlock between the ruling and opposition parties.
“The possible vacancy of the justices will eventually force the court to suspend its operation. We are asking lawmakers to take prompt action,” the court said in a statement.
The top court, headed by Chief Justice Yang Seung-tae, is comprised of three divisions that have four justices each.
One of the three divisions includes two retiring justices, Kim Nueng-hwan, 60, and Ahn Dae-hee, 57. Both will complete their six-year term next month and their absence will make it impossible for their division to carry out trials on its own.
Two other divisions each have a retiring justice too with Jeon Soo-ahn, 49, and Park Il-hwan, 51 departing. The vacancies will cause each division an increased number of trials as well as more work related to them, the Supreme Court said.
“Such a workload will result in the delay of lawsuits, with an estimated average of 50.4 cases every day,” an official said. “And by the end of a month, we’ll have 1,500 cases desperately awaiting a ruling.”
The court also is concerned about the 13-man panel that is convened when a case deals with extreme disputes concerning social issues.
The panel requires more than two thirds of the justices to convene, though the Supreme Court could still meet even without the four retiring justices. The court, however, says with a reduced number of members the panel will be “meaningless.”
“The panel reflects the idea of democracy, discussing and hearing various opinions, including the pros and cons of a case that can provoke sensitive reactions from the public,” the official said.
“While we can form the panel with nine justices, we won’t be able to exchange our ideas as actively as we did with 13. And this is one reason we want the National Assembly’s prompt approval of the four candidates.”