SOUTH KOREA-UNITED STATES BEEF SCANDAL.
A probe was officially launched yesterday into allegations that one of the nation’s top judges attempted to influence junior judges over last year’s trials of anti-U.S. beef protesters.
Supreme Court Justice Shin Young-cheol, then head of the Seoul Central District Court, stands accused of pressuring junior judges via e-mail to speedily conclude trials against protesters arrested on charges of initiating illegal street demonstrations.
At the time, prosecutors indicted more than 1,000 for violating the nation’s laws on demonstrations, which bar outdoor protests at night. Amid the ongoing trials, one judge at the court asked the Constitutional Court in October last year to rule on the legitimacy of the ban. It prompted a fellow judge to suspend his trial until the constitutionality ruling.
Shin is suspected of sending e-mails to junior judges urging them to quickly rule on the cases, applying laws that were in force at the time.
A team of six investigators led by Supreme Court Justice Kim Yong-dam, who also heads the Ministry of Court Administration, yesterday began an investigation into Shin’s alleged attempt to influence the trials.
"The most senior judges of the Seoul High Court and Seoul Central Court were appointed as investigators," said Oh Seok-jun, public affairs officer of the Supreme Court. "It’s our goal to conclude the probe by the middle of next week. Two judges from the Supreme Court’s ethics and audit office will support the probe."
The key issue is whether Shin’s e-mails should be considered as undue pressure, or simply administrative guidelines for the court. "It’s a sensitive issue, so the investigation will be based on the judges’ common sense, accepted social norms and the general opinion of the judiciary," Oh said.. Shin and 10 junior judges who received the e-mails will be questioned, Oh said.
Since Shin mentioned in one of his letters that he had received a message from Supreme Court Chief Justice Lee Yong-hoon, Lee may also be questioned, said a source at the court.
"What I told Shin was the general principle that a judge’s independence in ruling on a case must be protected and that a judge must rule based on his or her own beliefs," Lee told reporters yesterday.
"I told him that a judge’s constitutionality petition should be respected, while other judges’ opinion that the ban was constitutional should also be respected," Lee said. "If a judge thinks there is a constitutionality debate, he should seek a constitutionality ruling. If it is constitutional, then the trial must go on.
"I think it is inappropriate to regard one judge’s opinion as the position of the entire court. I think the opinion of each and every individual judge must be respected," Lee said.
Lee said the matter is very delicate because the trials involved concern the disputed candlelight demonstrations. "If it were just an ordinary civil case, judges wouldn’t feel pressured by a senior judge to rule quickly," Lee said. "That’s why the investigation must be thorough and meticulous. It’s even a difficult matter for me."