Judge under fire for post critical of FTA railroad
Hankyoreh, Seoul
Judge under fire for post critical of FTA railroad
The Chosun Ilbo has led the charge, also itself incurring criticism for "thought policing"
By Kim Jeong-pil
26 November 2011
Controversy is expected following a Supreme Court decision to deliberate in its public officials’ ethics committee over the appropriateness of a sitting associate judge’s Facebook post critical of the railroading of the South Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA).
The decision came after the Chosun Ilbo attacked the post as a violation of the duty of political neutrality. The judge in question argued that the post was not in violation of political neutrality or fairness in the discharge of duties.
The newspaper decried the Facebook post in a front-page story in its Friday edition. The district court judge, identified as “C,” posted the message just after the National Assembly passed the ratification on Tuesday, writing, “November 22, 2011, a day when a pro-US-to-his-core president and trade officials sold out the working class and the national economy. I will never forget.”
The Chosun Ilbo reported that C is an official with the Uri Law Study Association, a group of progressive judges, and quoted an attorney as saying that “it is a violation of the duty of political neutrality for a judge to post something strongly political.”
The Supreme Court said it planned to examine whether the expression and content of C’s post was within the scope permitted by ethics norms for judges during a meeting of its public official ethics committee on Nov. 29.
C posted another Facebook message Friday morning to counter the Chosun Ilbo report.
“It seems to me that conservatives who saw a judge on SNS expressing ‘awkward views in their eyes’ on a particular social issue thought they needed to produce a chilling effect,” C said of the newspaper’s report.
C said that as South Korean citizens, public servants are able to freely express personal views.
“Public officials are entrusted to enforce the values aspired to by the community, and [judges in particular] are ordered by the people to serve the community and protect the vulnerable and minorities from the majority,” C explained.
C added, “When an organization does something that goes against the legitimate values the community should be pursuing, we have an obligation to bring this into public discussion and ensure that democracy operates within that organization and society through debate and expression of opinion.”
An attorney and former prosecutor identified as “G” posted a Facebook message calling the Chosun Ilbo’s mention of C’s affiliation with the Uri Law Study Association as “an attempt at thought policing.”
“What connection is there between being a member of the Uri Law Study Association and the message [C] posted?” G asked.
“It is extremely disappointing to see them responding to someone saying something they do not agree with by checking out their group affiliations and using that to attack them,” G added.
