[Editorial] Authority of Judiciary should be respected.

It is customary that like the President, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court do not stand before the National Assembly for an inquiry in inspection of the administration. Departing from that custom, however, the Judiciary Committee of the National Assembly has decided to call them a witness for the Parliamentary inspection of the government. But whether the National Assembly can establish its authority in this way is questionable.

If the Assembly cites the establishment of its authority for its decision, where is the authority of the Judiciary, which functions as the last resort for civil rights by applying the Constitution and laws? The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court are symbols of independence of the Judiciary. Calling them to witness in the inspection of the administration runs counter to the principle of check and balance among the three branches of government, which is stated in the Constitution.

According to the law on parliamentary inspection of the administration, the Assembly shall not inspect cases pending in court or cases under investigation. This is a device designed to protect independence of the Judiciary from unfair interference of the Assembly. It is enough that Minister of Court Administration with the Supreme Court or Secretary General of the Department of Court Administration with the Constitutional Court stand before the National Assembly and answer the inquiry. Though they have more knowledge of cases, the Chief Justices should be quiet about contents of cases.

There is no precedent in other countries that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court takes an oath and responds to an inquiry in parliamentary inspection of the administration. In fact, there is not such an inspection in the first place in foreign countries. In Korean history, only two Chief Justices of the Supreme Court stood before the Assembly – Chief Justice Cho Jin-man in 1968 and Chief Justice Min Bok-gi in 1970. But they went there for inauguration or retirement speech. Since 1981 when parliamentary inspection was reinstated, it has been customary that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court just takes a vow to the head of the inspection team and leaves the session.

If the Assembly is to drop the long-honored practice, which was made in order to respect independence of the Judiciary, it should decide it through a thorough discussion. It is not the easy matter, which will de decided only by the chairman of the National Assembly Judiciary Committee and two committee members.