Cheong Wa Dae Issues Third Rebuttal to Cho Hee-dae's Refusal to Comply with Request for Re-recommendation: "Understand It from the Perspective of an Ordinary Citizen"

[Financial News] Cheong Wa Dae issued its third rebuttal on the 23rd after Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae reaffirmed that he would not comply with the request to re-recommend a Supreme Court Justice candidate, saying, "The Chief Justice should understand the official letter from the perspective of an ordinary citizen with sound common sense."
Cheong Wa Dae made the statement in a media notice that day, adding, "We ask that you promptly take follow-up measures so that the people's right to a trial is not violated."
It also emphasized, "The official letter plainly shows, to anyone who reads it, that the President has refused the appointment. The letter's statement that a confirmation motion for Son Bong-gi will not be submitted to the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea means that, by declining to carry out the procedures necessary for the appointment, the President has clearly expressed an intent not to appoint him." It added, "This is the reason we requested re-recommendation as a follow-up procedure."
It further pointed out, "Submitting a confirmation motion to the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea for a candidate whom the President will not appoint is contradictory and does not demonstrate respect for the National Assembly."
Cheong Wa Dae also criticized the Supreme Court's explanation that Chief Justice Cho's reference the previous day to the requirement that the President's official acts under national law be documented and countersigned by the prime minister and relevant State Council members was not intended to point out a formal defect.
Cheong Wa Dae stated, "Yesterday, the Chief Justice distorted the official letter requesting the re-recommendation of a Supreme Court Justice candidate as though it contained a defect involving the constitutional principles of written documentation and countersignature. Today, he backed away, saying it was merely a general statement."
It continued, "Today, despite the fact that the official letter plainly shows, to anyone who reads it, that the President has refused the appointment and that this is the reason for requesting re-recommendation as a follow-up procedure, he is misleading the public by claiming that the reason for the request is unclear."
Cheong Wa Dae also rejected Chief Justice Cho's claim that there were no procedural defects in the recommendation process. It argued, "Although four candidates were lawfully recommended by the Committee of Recommendation of Supreme Court Justice Candidates in accordance with the Court Organization Act, contacting the candidates individually and asking whether they intended to resign in order to restart the recommendation process without any statutory basis constitutes a serious procedural defect."
It added, "The attempt to exclude lawfully recommended candidates from consideration for recommendation is precisely what undermines the fairness of the process."
Earlier that day, the Supreme Court of Korea issued an additional statement, explaining that Chief Justice Cho's reference the previous day to the principle of written documentation was not intended to suggest that the official letter requesting re-recommendation, dated the 28th of last month, contained a formal defect. However, it maintained its refusal to comply with the request for re-recommendation, saying it was difficult to accept the claims that the letter did not clearly state the reason for the request and that there were procedural defects in the recommendation process.
Cheong Wa Dae stated, "If the Chief Justice views the President's power to appoint Supreme Court Justices as merely a formal authority under which the President must simply follow whenever a particular candidate is recommended, it would be difficult to accept the President's refusal to appoint and request for re-recommendation at face value."
[email protected] Seong Seok-woo Reporter