The shortlist of candidates to replace four outgoing Supreme Court justices, which were recommended by Chief Justice Yang Sung-tae to President Lee Myung-bak on Tuesday, appears to add to the conservative tendency of the top court rather than altering it.

All of the four candidates -- three high-ranking judges and a senior prosecutor – are men in their 50s and thought to be conservative to some extent.

The selection naturally drew a negative response from opposition lawmakers and civic group members, who had called for more women and liberal figures in the 14-member Supreme Court.

The chief justice appears to have tried to make the best possible choices from a list of 13 candidates suggested to him by a recommendation committee last week.

His nominees come from various regional backgrounds, with one of them having a reputation for ruling in favor of minority groups.

He also excluded some controversial figures shunned by the opposition.

The new composure of the Supreme Court, however, seems still far from dispersing public concerns over the increasing uniformity of its members’ ideological tendency, academic and career backgrounds, gender and age.

When the four nominees join the top court after getting a parliamentary approval, there will be only one female justice and a handful of justices with a proven liberal track record.

Except for the 64-year-old chief justice, all of the Supreme Court members are in their 50s and 12 of them are graduates from Seoul National University.

Yang, whose principled rulings against violations of the social order were said to have led President Lee to nominate him, has advocated stability and balance in heading the judicature for the past year.

It is a common view that the primary task of the Supreme Court should be keeping social stability and integration through a final and balanced interpretation of laws. In carrying out its role, the top court should also embrace social change to move closer to the public sentiment.

The new composure of the top court might leave the public with some concerns over whether it could ensure a balanced approach toward changes.

Yang and other justices are required to pay more heed to this worrying voice and try to keep a better balance in coordinating increasingly complicated conflicts of interests in society.

The upcoming parliamentary approval process for the justice nominees is expected to be rough as the main opposition Democratic United Party, which had earlier called for a reselection of the candidates, pledges to make a thorough screening.

Opposition lawmakers seem to have some grounds for their argument against Yang’s selection. Nevertheless, they should stop short of transforming the approval process into another political offensive that could cripple the operation of the judiciary.