Democratic Party to handle plan for parliamentary probe into Chief Justice Cho at next month's plenary session

The Democratic Party has officially announced it will process the plan for a parliamentary probe into Chief Justice Cho Hee-de over suspicions of his alignment with the Dec. 3 emergency martial law at next month's National Assembly plenary session.

Park Sung-jun, chief spokesperson of the Democratic Party of Korea, told reporters after the party's Supreme Council meeting on the 30th that the probe plan, focused on suspicions that Chief Justice Cho went along with the emergency martial law, would be handled at the November plenary session. A parliamentary investigation is a system under which the National Assembly forms an investigative panel to uncover the truth of a specific matter, allowing it to hear witnesses and demand the submission of documents. With the ruling party having secured the quorum to pass the measure on its own, passage is expected to be procedurally smooth.

The probe focuses on the chief justice's 'alignment with martial law'

The focus of the Democratic Party's probe plan is Chief Justice Cho's conduct during the Dec. 3 emergency martial law. The plan is known to include as subjects of investigation what judgments and directives the chief justice issued regarding the judiciary's chain of command when martial law was declared, and whether there are signs that, as head of a constitutional institution, he cooperated with the martial law or failed to resist it. The chief spokesperson explained that the purpose and scope of the probe had been clearly limited to his conduct at the time of the martial law.

Behind this lies the situation in which suspicions about the head of the judiciary have moved from the realm of legal judgment into that of political scrutiny. As special prosecutor investigations expand, including the election commission special probe followed by a comprehensive special probe, the National Assembly intends to directly address issues of abuse of power and dereliction of duty concerning the chief justice that special prosecutors cannot handle.

Political battle: 'parliamentary probe' vs. 'political violence'

The People Power Party pushed back immediately. The opposition party characterized the probe as "low-grade political violence" and criticized it as an attempt to undermine judicial independence. The chief justice is a constitutional official with criminal immunity except through impeachment, and it is pointed out that a legal dispute over the scope of documents and witness responses that can be compelled through a parliamentary probe is inevitable.

The Democratic Party has long emphasized the need for scrutiny of the judiciary. The opposition is likely to take issue with the fact that some aspects of the special prosecutor investigations ended with no charges. The ruling party's argument is that, separate from the special prosecutors' no-charge decisions, the truth about the conduct at the time of the martial law itself must be established. Some civic groups and legal experts have also raised concerns that overuse of parliamentary probes against constitutional institutions could degenerate into a tool of political pressure on the judiciary.

Schedule and issues ahead

Procedurally, once the probe plan is processed through next month's National Assembly Steering Committee and plenary session, the investigation will proceed within 60 days and a report will be compiled. With the ruling party announcing unilateral processing at the plenary session, passage is effectively a done deal. The real issue comes after passage. Whether the chief justice will comply with demands to appear as a witness or submit documents, and whether enforcement measures under the Parliamentary Investigation Act would be effective if he does not, are expected to be the true test.

The chief justice's term and the smooth operation of the judiciary are also variables. Observations suggest that a prolonged investigation could affect the Supreme Court's administrative work or the gathering of majority opinions. With the November plenary handling as a starting point, a full-scale legal and political battle between the ruling and opposition parties is expected over the boundaries of scrutiny of constitutional institutions.