Back to article list
PoliticsVerifiedKorea

Korea

Korean originalEnglish translation unavailable

청와대, 대법관 재제청 촉구…조희대는 사법부 독립 강조

청와대가 대법관 재제청 절차를 서둘러 달라고 요구했다. 조희대 대법원장은 법원이 다른 국가기관이나 정치권력의 부당한 간섭을 받지 않아야 한다는 입장을 밝혔다.

청와대가 대법원에 대법관 재제청 절차를 신속히 진행해 달라고 촉구했다. 강유정 청와대 수석대변인은 11일 브리핑에서 대법관 장기 공석으로 국민의 재판받을 권리가 침해되지 않도록 후보추천위원회의 추천 내용을 존중해 재제청해 달라고 밝혔다.

청와대는 지난달 28일 노태악 전 대법관의 후임으로 제청된 손봉기 대구지법 부장판사의 임명동의안을 국회에 제출하지 않기로 했다. 다른 후보를 제청해 달라는 요청 이후 2주 넘게 대법원 입장이 나오지 않자, 지난 1월 추천위가 추천한 후보 가운데 손 후보자를 제외한 3명 중 한 명을 다시 제청하라고 요구했다.

조 대법원장은 이날 서울 서초구 대법원에서 열린 제12회 대한민국 법원의 날 기념식에서 사법권 독립이 압력과 간섭 속에 시험받아 왔다고 말했다. 법원이 국가기관과 정치권력, 사회 세력, 소송 당사자의 부당한 영향을 받지 않고 헌법과 법률에 따라 공정하게 재판해야 국민의 권리를 보장할 수 있다고 강조했다.

Connected coverage

Related stories in one view

Continue in chronological order.

Politics ·

Democratic Party criticizes Cho's nomination refusal, signals leadership talks on impeachment

Lawmakers from the Democratic Party of Korea, Rebuilding Korea Party and Progressive Party on the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee criticized Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae on the 22nd for refusing a request to nominate a Supreme Court justice again. The Democratic Party side said it intended to discuss with the party leadership whether to pursue impeachment.

Lawmakers presenting their position at a podium in the National Assembly's Communication Hall, with a sign language interpreter
Seo Young-kyo, chair of the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee, and Democratic Party lawmakers present a joint position on Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae's refusal to renominate a Supreme Court justice candidate at the National Assembly's Communication Hall on the 22nd.

Lawmakers from the Democratic Party of Korea, Rebuilding Korea Party and Progressive Party on the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee criticized Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae on the 22nd for refusing a request to nominate a Supreme Court justice again. They called it a political act violating the judiciary's duty of political neutrality, while the Democratic Party side said it intended to discuss with party leaders whether to pursue impeachment.

The lawmakers cited Article 104(2) of the Constitution, which provides for nomination by the chief justice, parliamentary consent and appointment by the president. They argued that requesting a new nominee was a legitimate exercise of presidential appointment power, rebutting Cho's position that there were no constitutional grounds or reasons to justify it.

The Democratic Party requested that Cho appear as a witness at the judiciary committee's parliamentary audit in October. The lawmakers also said they intended to establish the facts of the matter during the audit.

Community discussion

View board →

Loading discussions…

Open story permalink ↗

Politics ·

Ahn urges halt to Supreme Court nominations until president pledges noninterference

People Power Party lawmaker Ahn Cheol-soo called on Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae to suspend Supreme Court justice nominations until President Lee Jae-myung declares that he will not intervene in the nomination process.

People Power Party lawmaker Ahn Cheol-soo speaking in a National Assembly meeting room
People Power Party lawmaker Ahn Cheol-soo attends a party general meeting at the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul, on August 26, 2026.

People Power Party lawmaker Ahn Cheol-soo called on Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae to halt Supreme Court justice nominations. Ahn said no justice should be nominated until President Lee Jae-myung declares that he will not intervene in the nomination process.

In a social media post on the 23rd, Ahn said the formation of the Supreme Court Justice Candidate Recommendation Committee and all candidate recommendation procedures should also stop. He argued that the halt he was seeking would protect the separation of powers and South Korea's democracy.

Chief Justice Cho said the previous day that he would not comply with the presidential office's request to submit a new Supreme Court nominee. He said he could find no specific constitutional basis or grounds to justify the request. The presidential office countered that his position undermined the president's appointment authority and reflected a view contrary to the Constitution.

Community discussion

View board →

Loading discussions…

Open story permalink ↗