Chief justice calls presidential intervention in Supreme Court nominations unconstitutional

Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae said Tuesday in Seoul that President Lee Jae Myung has no constitutional authority to intervene in his recommendation of Supreme Court justice candidates. Speaking during a parliamentary audit, Cho rejected Cheong Wa Dae’s demand for another nominee and said presidential intervention would undermine the separation of powers and judicial independence. The dispute has left one Supreme Court seat vacant for more than seven months.

Article 104 of the Constitution provides for a 10-member recommendation committee to select at least three candidates, after which the chief justice recommends one for a National Assembly confirmation hearing and presidential appointment.

Cho recommended Sohn Bong-ki, a senior judge at the Daegu District Court, on Aug. 18 to fill the seat left vacant by former Justice Rho Tae-ak’s retirement on March 3.

Cheong Wa Dae requested another candidate on Aug. 28, and Cho rejected the request on Sept. 22 because it did not specify reasons or constitutional grounds.

Cho said consultations between the chief justice and president before recommendations are customary and voluntary rather than constitutional requirements.

Kim Sung-soo took office on Sept. 21 after parliamentary approval and presidential endorsement, becoming the first Supreme Court justice appointed under the Lee administration.

Published Oct 6, 2026 4:21 pm KST

Updated Oct 6, 2026 4:29 pm KST

Cho stresses division of powers in top court's justice recommendation

Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae speaks during a parliamentary audit of the Supreme Court at the National Assembly in Seoul, Tuesday. Yonhap

Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae said Tuesday that the president has no authority to intervene when he recommends candidates for justices of the top court, escalating a dispute with President Lee Jae Myung over the selection of a new justice.

Cho made the remarks during a parliamentary audit of the Supreme Court, where he strongly defended his constitutional authority and criticized Cheong Wa Dae's demand that he nominate another candidate.

"Just as the chief justice cannot interfere in the National Assembly's approval process or the president's appointment process, neither the National Assembly nor the president can interfere in the chief justice's recommendation," Cho said.

He argued that such intervention would violate the constitutional division of powers among state institutions and undermine judicial independence.

His remarks followed a clash between Lee and the chief justice over the justice selection that has lasted more than a month.

Under Article 104 of the Constitution, a 10-member recommendation committee selects at least three candidates for Supreme Court justice. The chief justice then recommends one to undergo a confirmation hearing at the National Assembly. If the Assembly approves, the president appoints the candidate.

It has been customary that the top court and Cheong Wa Dae talk in advance to narrow down the candidates before the chief justice's final recommendation. However, Cho did not undertake the normal consultation process when he recommended Sohn Bong-ki, a senior judge at the Daegu District Court, on Aug. 18 for the position that was left vacant after former Justice Rho Tae-ak's retirement on March 3.

Cheong Wa Dae demanded another candidate on Aug. 28, arguing that Cho had failed to hold sufficient consultations with the presidential office before making his choice.

Cho rejected the request on Sept. 22, saying the presidential office had failed to provide specific reasons or constitutional grounds for demanding another candidate.

Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae remains seated without taking the oath as a witness during a parliamentary audit of the Supreme Court at the National Assembly in Seoul, Tuesday. Cho cited judicial independence and the separation of powers amid a dispute with President Lee Jae Myung over the nomination of a new Supreme Court justice. Newsis

During Tuesday's audit, Cho reiterated his objections.

"The request from Cheong Wa Dae did not clearly specify the reasons for seeking another recommendation or the constitutional grounds for doing so," he said.

Cho stressed that a chief justice's consultations with the president before recommending candidates were only customary and voluntary arrangements intended to facilitate appointments rather than constitutional requirements.

Cho further argued that previous presidents had ultimately respected the chief justice's authority to select candidates.

The standoff has left the justice position vacant for more than seven months, raising concerns about the prolonged shortage of justices at the nation's highest court.

Cho acknowledged public concerns over the vacancy and pledged to work toward resolving the issue.

The confrontation comes amid strained relations between Cho and Lee dating back to May 2025, when the Supreme Court overturned Lee's acquittal in an election law violation case just weeks before the June presidential election.

During Tuesday's parliamentary audit, Cho initially refused to take an oath or testify as a witness, citing the separation of powers and judicial independence.

However, he later gave his remarks by reading a prepared statement.

Meanwhile, Kim Sung-soo, whom Cho recommended on Aug. 18 to replace another retiring justice, Lee Heung-gu, took office on Sept. 21 after receiving parliamentary approval and Lee's endorsement. Kim became the first Supreme Court justice appointed under the Lee administration.

韩国最高法院首席大法官赵熙大周二在首尔表示，总统李在明无权干预他对最高法院大法官候选人的推荐。赵熙大在国会审计期间驳回了青瓦台提出的更换候选人的要求，并表示总统干预将破坏权力分立和司法独立。这场争议已导致最高法院一个席位空缺超过七个月。

宪法第104条规定，由10名成员组成的推荐委员会选出至少三名候选人，之后由首席大法官推荐其中一人提交国民议会确认听证会，并由总统任命。

8月18日，赵推荐大邱地方法院资深法官孙奉基填补前法官卢泰岳于3月3日退休后留下的空缺。

青瓦台于 8 月 28 日要求提名另一位候选人，但赵立坚于 9 月 22 日以未说明理由或宪法依据为由驳回了该要求。

赵表示，首席大法官和总统在提出建议前进行磋商是惯例和自愿行为，而不是宪法要求。

金成洙在获得国会批准和总统认可后于9月21日就职，成为李在镕政府任命的第一位最高法院大法官。

发布于2026年10月6日下午4:21（韩国标准时间）

更新于2026年10月6日下午4:29（韩国标准时间）

赵立坚在最高法院的司法建议中强调权力分立

周二，韩国最高法院首席大法官赵熙大在首尔国会出席最高法院听证会并发表讲话。（韩联社）

最高法院首席大法官赵熙大周二表示，总统无权干预最高法院大法官的提名人选，这加剧了与总统李在明之间关于新大法官人选的争议。

赵显龙是在国会审查最高法院时发表上述言论的，他在审查中强烈捍卫了自己的宪法权力，并批评了青瓦台要求他提名另一位候选人的要求。

“正如首席大法官不能干预国会的批准程序或总统的任命程序一样，国会和总统也不能干预首席大法官的建议，”赵说。

他认为，这种干预将违反宪法规定的国家机构间权力划分，并损害司法独立。

此前，李和首席大法官就大法官人选问题发生冲突，这场冲突已经持续了一个多月。

根据宪法第104条，一个由10名成员组成的推荐委员会至少选出三名最高法院大法官候选人。首席大法官随后推荐其中一人，提交国民议会进行确认听证。如果国民议会批准，总统将任命该候选人。

按照惯例，最高法院和青瓦台会在首席大法官最终推荐人选前进行磋商，以缩小候选人范围。然而，赵立坚在8月18日推荐大邱地方法院资深法官孙奉基接替3月3日退休的卢泰岳大法官后留下的空缺时，并未遵循正常的磋商程序。

青瓦台于 8 月 28 日要求推出另一位候选人，理由是赵立坚在做出选择前没有与总统府进行充分的磋商。

9月22日，赵承熙驳回了这一请求，称总统府未能提供要求更换候选人的具体理由或宪法依据。

周二，在首尔国会举行的最高法院听证会上，最高法院首席大法官赵熙大拒绝宣誓作证，仍留在原地。此前，赵熙大与总统李在明就最高法院新任大法官的提名问题发生争执，他援引了司法独立和权力分立原则作为其证人理由。

在周二的审计中，Cho重申了他的反对意见。

他说：“青瓦台的请求没有明确说明寻求另一项建议的理由，也没有说明这样做的宪法依据。”

赵强调，首席大法官在推荐候选人之前与总统进行磋商只是惯例和自愿安排，旨在方便任命，而不是宪法要求。

赵承熙进一步辩称，前几任总统最终都尊重了首席大法官挑选候选人的权力。

这场僵局导致大法官职位空缺超过七个月，引发了人们对美国最高法院大法官长期短缺的担忧。

赵承认公众对这一空缺表示担忧，并承诺努力解决该问题。

此次冲突发生在赵立坚和李健熙关系紧张之际，双方关系可以追溯到 2025 年 5 月，当时最高法院推翻了李健熙在选举法违规案件中的无罪判决，而此时距离 6 月的总统大选仅剩几周时间。

在周二的国会审计中，赵立坚最初以权力分立和司法独立为由，拒绝宣誓或作证。

然而，他后来宣读了一份事先准备好的声明，发表了讲话。

与此同时，赵镛于8月18日推荐金成洙接替即将退休的另一位大法官李兴九，在获得国会批准和李兴九的认可后，于9月21日正式就职。金成洙成为李兴九政府任命的首位最高法院大法官。