Seoul: A vague statute and a de facto fourth appeal risk paralyzing the legal system. Following the introduction of the "distortion of law" offense and a constitutional complaint mechanism for court rulings, the feared side effects are rapidly becoming a reality. On March 12, the law's first day in force, a complaint was filed against Chief Justice Jo Hee-de, accusing him of "distortion of law." The complaint contends that, in May last year, the Supreme Court cut corners -- failing to print and review some 70,000 pages of records -- when it remanded the then presidential candidate Lee Jae Myung's election-law case with a guilty finding.
According to Yonhap News Agency, the complaint came from a lawyer unconnected to the case, who has lately appeared on a string of progressive-leaning YouTube channels. It was widely expected that those aligned with the ruling Democratic Party of Korea would weaponize the new "distortion of law" offense. That expectation has now been borne out, as a sitting presiding judge has been sued. Last month, in a stock-manipulation case at first instance, the presiding judge handed down a three-year sentence, far short of the 15 years sought by prosecutors. On March 14, a representative of the affected shareholders sued the judge, alleging that the sentence resulted from a deliberate distortion of the law.
Rather than appeal, the aggrieved party went straight to filing a criminal complaint against the judge. On this logic, virtually any judgment could trigger a criminal complaint alleging "distortion of law." If this continues, there would be no need for a three-tier court system, nor any reason for the existence of the High Courts or the Supreme Court. The confusion was anticipated from the moment the ruling party rammed the bill through. Critics have consistently argued that the very concept of "punishing acts that distort the law" is too vague, but the Democratic Party has turned a deaf ear.
The same is true of the constitutional complaint system for court rulings, which would effectively create a fourth level of appeals. If the Constitutional Court deems a ruling unconstitutional, it can revoke the ruling, and the court must retry the case in line with its decision. On March 12, the first day the system took effect, the Supreme Court finalized the conviction of Democratic Party lawmaker Yang Moon-seok, who had been indicted for obtaining a fraudulent loan to purchase a high-priced apartment. The ruling confirmed the forfeiture of his parliamentary seat. However, shortly after the Supreme Court's decision, he said he would seek a judgment from the Constitutional Court if any fundamental rights had been overlooked.
Concerns that lawmakers could abuse the constitutional complaint system to extend their tenure showed signs of materializing from day one. A YouTuber whose three-year prison sentence was finalized for extorting tens of millions of won by threatening mukbang YouTuber Tzuyang said through his lawyer that he plans to file a constitutional complaint. Even Cho Ju-bin, serving a 47-year and four-month prison term for producing and distributing sexually exploitative content on Telegram, reportedly expressed support for the constitutional complaint system in a blog post written on his behalf.
It is feared that, should parties dissatisfied with final court rulings begin filing constitutional complaints en masse, the caseload could rise to unmanageable levels. The Constitutional Court said on March 16 that 44 constitutional complaints were filed from March 12 to 15, averaging about 10 a day. It internally projects that introducing the constitutional complaint system would add more than 10,000 cases a year, pushing the total to nearly four times the current level. Last year, the Constitutional Court received 3,092 cases.
Such a surge in constitutional complaints would overload the Constitutional Court and inevitably delay the final resolution of cases. Perpetrators could attempt to overturn court rulings through constitutional complaints while simultaneously accusing judges, prosecutors, and police of "law distortion," effectively forcing the judicial process to start over. Meanwhile, victims would have to bear extended psychological and financial harm as proceedings drag on or are effectively repeated. South Korea's judicial system is sliding into disarray following the Democratic Party's passage of hastily drafted legislation aimed at the.