Judge prepares to file petition for KORUS FTA task force
Hankyoreh, Seoul
Judge prepares to file petition for KORUS FTA task force
Other judges have slowly begun to follow suit, openly posting messages on the internal court bulletin board
By Kim Jeong-pil
5 December 2011
Incheon District Court Senior Judge Kim Ha-neul plans to finish drafting a petition for the establish of a judiciary task force on the South Korea-United States Free Trade Agreement and submit it to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as early as Tuesday, sources reported.
According to accounts from court observers Sunday, Kim, 43, spent the weekend drafting the petition after connecting the names of 175 judges who expressed agreement with the post on the internal court bulletin board Court Net.
Observers within the judiciary are calling the judges’ active agreement with Kim’s proposal highly unusual, saying it contrasts sharply with the previous taboo among judges on open participation on socially contentious issues.
The development is especially disconcerting for the Supreme Court after Chief Justice Yang Sung-tae indirectly requested that judges exercise restraint on this issue on three occasions since Nov. 29, including a Dec. 1 appointment ceremony for new judges based on career experience and a Dec. 2 meeting of the National Conference of Court Presidents.
Kim’s message on Court Net had over 1,700 views within a day of its posting on Dec. 1, indicating that it was read by fully 70% of the country’s 2,400 judges.
One judge sent a message of support to Kim’s personal email to ensure anonymity, only to openly express an opinion through a reply to Kim’s message. In the reply, the judge reported debating for a day whether or not to express an opinion openly after sending the email to Kim, before finally concluding that there was nothing wrong with the statement of opinion. The judge reported feeling “cowed” and said they were stating the opinion again in the form of a reply because there was no reason to feel that way.
Another judge who posted an opinion on Court Net during the controversy was requested to refrain from doing so by the president of their court, who said the expression of opinion “seemed excessive.” The judge delicately rejected the request, calling the situation “an issue of freedom of expression for judges,” a source reported.
Meanwhile, a sitting chief prosecutor drew attention by posting a message against the judiciary’s petition on the prosecutors’ internal bulletin board.
