(Yonhap News)
A prosecutor criticized a group of judges for questioning the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement and seeking to create a task force of judges to study it, calling their actions “overstepping their authority.”
Pundits are not waiting to see whether the accusation will spark a fresh turf war between the judiciary and prosecution, which have clashed several times in the past.
On Sunday afternoon, Kim Yong-nam, a mid-ranking prosecutor of Suwon Prosecutors’ Office, posted an article on their intranet charging that the recent moves by the judges over the FTA were unacceptable.
“In all circumstances it is impossible to understand why judges would want to make suggestions about the pact under the wings of the Supreme Court. It violates the constitutional principle of the separation of the legal, administrative, and judicial powers,” he wrote.
He said that the administration is empowered to propose such agreements and National Assembly to ratify them, and that the judges’ interference into the process shows serious disrespect for the process.
“The creation (of a task force) disregards … people who expect judges to make a fair and unbiased decision in court,” he said.
“I cannot believe that a judge of 16 years, experience has come up with such a dangerous idea.
“The judge jumped to the conclusion that the Investor-State Dispute settlement clause in the agreement is very likely to be detrimental to Korea just because foreign investors could sue the Korean government through a third-party court. There are many international courts dealing with such cases, but no one claims it is an infringement on a country’s sovereignty. On the contrary, it is perceived to be fair,” he said.
Kim’s claims came days after Judge Kim Ha-neul of the Incheon District Court announced his plan to urge Supreme Court Chief Justice Yang Sung-tae to allow the establishment of a U.S. FTA task force to examine the pact in the Supreme Court because the pact seems to favor the U.S.
His appeal has won the support of 175 fellow judges despite Yang’s warning to refrain from expressing personal opinions on politically or socially divisive issues.
Several years ago, the two sides slammed one other after the judiciary decided to adopt a court-oriented tribunal system, which put more emphasis on trial testimony than prosecution reports. The prosecution also criticized the court for being lenient with suspects, as the court rejected more arrest warrant requests.
Kim said in an interview with a local daily that he had no intention of bashing the whole judiciary.
“I spoke my thoughts about what is right and wrong on a certain issue,” he said.
By Bae Ji-sook (
baejisook@heraldcorp.com)
