DISPUTE OVER JUDICIAL REFORM PLAN

[Anchor Lead]

Korean political parties are split once again as the court refused to issue an arrest warrant for Justice Minister Cho Kuk's brother. The ruling Democratic Party said that it is now time for the parliament to approve the judicial reform plan, while the main opposition Liberty Korea Party said the warrant dismissal would be remembered as the disgrace of the judicial branch.

[Pkg]

The Democratic Party took issue with the prosecution's investigation of Kim Gyeong-rok. He is the asset manager for Justice Minister Cho Kuk's wife, Professor Chung Kyung-shim of Dongyang University. The ruling party claims Kim was grilled until 11 PM on the very day that a prosecution reform plan which prohibits late-night questioning was announced. The Democratic Party's special committee on prosecution reform even called for the fast-tracked judicial reform plan to be tabled at the regular parliamentary session slated for the end of this month.

[Soundbite] PARK JOO-MIN(CO-CHAIR, DEMOCRATIC PARTY'S SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON PROSECUTION REFORM) : "We need to pull party resources together to table this bill at the general session at the end of October."

The Democratic Party claims that since the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee oversees all matters pertaining to the judicial reform bill, it can be presented at the general session on the 30th of this month, 180 days after the bill was put on fast track. Meanwhile, the Liberty Korea Party says 90 more days are needed for a subcommittee to review the bill, making January 30th of next year the earliest date for bill introduction. As for the court denying the arrest warrant for Minister Cho's brother, the main opposition party blasted the court, pointing out the person who delivered the money is detained while the recipient remains free.

[Soundbite] LEE CHANG-SOO(LIBERTY KOREA PARTY SPOKESMAN(Oct. 9)) : "Today's decision will be remembered as a disgraceful moment for the judicial branch."

The conservative bloc also claimed that a report by the progressive Institute for Democracy which mentioned judiciary reform served as a guideline for the court's decision to refuse warrant.