Lee’s comment on top court stirs controversy

Democratic Party presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung is under fire for saying he heard that the Supreme Court intended to quickly dismiss his appeal in an election law violation case. On June 2, Lee said on a YouTube program, “From what I’ve heard, people in the Supreme Court said, ‘Let’s wrap this up quickly, dismiss it cleanly.’” He added, “They didn’t contact me directly, but some communication was going on.” Lee also criticized the court’s decision, saying, “It was absurd to see the Supreme Court overturn and remand the case just two days after the ruling date was announced.”

The ruling People Power Party (PPP) accused Lee of implying that someone in the Supreme Court leaked the verdict in advance. PPP presidential candidate Kim Moon-soo wrote on social media, “This is shocking. Is he admitting there’s a mole in the Supreme Court?” and added, “If true, it would be a serious breakdown of constitutional order and a judicial scandal.” Interim party chair Kim Yong-tae also asked, “Who gave him internal court information? When and through what channel? Does the Democratic Party make deals with the judiciary every time the party or its members are on trial?” With just one day left until the election, Lee’s remarks have become a hot-button issue in the final stretch of the campaign.

There can be no disagreement that deliberations by a court panel must remain strictly confidential before a verdict is delivered. If the content of a ruling is leaked in advance, it opens the door to outside influence and casts doubt on the fairness of the verdict. For this reason, the Court Organization Act explicitly states that “deliberations on judgments shall not be disclosed.” If someone within the Supreme Court did pass information to Lee’s camp before the ruling in a high-profile case involving a major presidential candidate, it would constitute a grave breach of judicial neutrality.

In response to the PPP’s criticism, Lee said, “It’s better to stick to facts. Fabrication and distortion are wrong,” suggesting that the party is exaggerating his comments for political gain. The Democratic Party also defended him, stating, “Lee clearly said he did not hear anything directly from the Supreme Court.” But even if a court official did not contact Lee personally, any interaction with someone close to him would still be a serious matter. Both Lee and the Democratic Party must thoroughly explain how the information was obtained, and the Supreme Court must also clarify the facts.