Goyang: A meeting of judges nationwide ended Monday without issuing a response to the controversy surrounding presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung's election law violation case. The extraordinary meeting of the National Council of Judges was held at the Judicial Research and Training Institute in Goyang, northwest of Seoul, with 87 to 90 of the 126 members attending in person or virtually.
According to Yonhap News Agency, a council official noted that the meeting concluded with plans to resume at a later date. The next meeting is scheduled to be held virtually after the June 3 presidential election, on a date yet to be determined. Discussions at the forthcoming meeting will focus on additional debates about agenda items, which will then be put to a vote.
The meeting was convened following controversy over the Supreme Court's swift decision earlier this month to send Lee's case back to the Seoul High Court for a retrial. The Supreme Court had cited errors in the lower court's decision to acquit Lee, a presidential front-runner, of charges related to false statements during the 2021 presidential race.
Lee's Democratic Party criticized the ruling as an interference in the upcoming presidential election, noting that a guilty verdict could disqualify him from the race. The meeting addressed seven agenda items, including affirmations of the unconditional independence of trials and the serious perception of undermining judicial confidence.
A split opinion emerged among the judges on whether to release a public statement affirming trial fairness and addressing concerns about judicial independence. Instead, they opted to reconvene, with a vote of 54 to 34 in favor of holding another meeting.
It is unusual for the council to decide to extend debates to subsequent meetings. A council official remarked on the growing concerns within and outside the judiciary that expressing a position through a council vote could impact the election. Consequently, the decision was made to schedule another meeting following an internal proposal and subsequent vote.
The council comprises 126 delegates representing judges across all court levels, and a majority attendance is required to convene a meeting. Agenda items are approved with the majority consent of attendees.