[Editorial] Legal Sector Cooperation

Chief Justice Lee Yong-hun visited the Seoul High Court and Seoul District Court yesterday as the last phase of his round of visits to courts and made an apology about his recent comment which provoked the prosecution and the lawyer organizations. But he added, “I have not changed my thought that the prosecution, lawyers, and the court should be strictly differentiated.” By saying so, he reaffirmed that his conviction on the court-supremacy is firm and unaltered. Especially his new comment that he saw a new ray of light and thought he had done a remarkable job for court gives rise to concerns of additional conflicts.

The prosecution has notified that it would expand the separate presentation of evidence system against the court-supremacy. Even though this system has been effective for some time now, the notification can be interpreted as an attempt to show that it accepts the challenge. It is inevitable that the judges and the lawyers feel pressured when the prosecution does not present the investigation records and the list of evidences in a lump in the indictment stage and rather hands them in step by step. It becomes difficult for the judges to have a clear understanding of the case before the trial begins and for lawyers to set up strategies for the offence and defense in the court.

Under court-supremacy, the trial is carried out based more on the court testimonies of the parties than on documents. The judges cannot but go through hardships in proceeding with the trial. The picture of the judges passively observing the give and take of both sides as a third party will become a part of the past memory. In particular, it is expected that the objections by the prosecution and evidence forgery will happen more in abundance if the ability of the written evidence of the prosecution as a proof is received poorly. The job of identifying forged evidences will act as another pressure. When the trial is delayed there will be no way of preventing the criticism that the rights of the victims of crimes are being neglected.

Moreover, the system of ‘trial participated by citizens’ that combines the jury system and the court of lay assessor system will be test run beginning from next year. This system will cover 100-200 cases each year, mainly the heavy crimes such as murder. The number of judges and courts should be drastically increased and the time taken should be expanded to a great extent. Some people even argue that the number of judges, which is around 2,000, should become ten times bigger. This is not the time for the three legal circles to fight against one another. They should focus on making thorough preparations based on sufficient agreements, discussions and opinion gathering. In particular, the forcibleness and the obtrusiveness of the judiciary do not help at all.