Potency of national judges’ meeting?

[Anchor]

Amid ongoing controversies surrounding the judiciary, a nationwide meeting of judges' representative will be held tomorrow (May 26).

The topics will focus on judicial independence and public trust in the judiciary, particularly sparked by the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the election law case involving candidate Lee Jae-myung, drawing significant attention to what positions will be taken.

Lee Ho-jun reports.

[Report]

An extraordinary meeting of representatives from South Korea's courts will take place tomorrow (May 26) at the Judicial Research and Training Institute in Goyang, Gyeonggi Province.

Two agenda items have been publicly disclosed, presented by the chairperson, Chief Judge Kim Ye-young of the Seoul Southern District Court.

One is that 'judicial independence' must be absolutely guaranteed, and the other related to discussions about recent concerns regarding 'public trust in the judiciary'.

The convening of this extraordinary meeting was decided on the 9th after a vote, following the Supreme Court's overturning of candidate Lee Jae-myung's election law case on the 1st.

This came after criticisms that the Supreme Court had unusually expedited the hearing and ruling of Lee's election law case.

As discussions arose in the political arena of impeaching the Chief Justice, calls were also made to include issues regarding the independence of the judiciary.

Therefore, it is expected that such issues will be broadly discussed at the special meeting.

For the meeting to be valid, a majority of the 126 members must be present, and a majority of those present must agree on any proposed resolutions.

However, it remains uncertain whether any specific agenda will actually be resolved.

This is because, from the beginning, 70 judges opposed holding the meeting.

The situation has also changed significantly compared to 3-4 weeks ago, which adds another variable.

The controversy over 'pushing forward with cases', which was one of the biggest factors for convening the meeting, has subsided, as ongoing trials have been postponed until after the presidential election.

Additionally, with the presidential election approaching, there are cautious opinions questioning whether it is necessary for the judges' representative meeting to express an opinion at this time.

In the legal community, there are also suggestions that the judges' representative meeting may consider reconvening after the presidential election, taking political influences into account.

This is KBS News, Lee Ho-jun.