Cheon Gi Heung, new president of the Korean Bar Association (KBA), has come out opposed to current reform efforts saying, "judicial reform that is done by a particular political party for reasons of mass popularity is not reform, it is a change for the worse." He was chosen as the bar association's new president on Monday, and already he says he is opposed to having civic groups participate in the nomination of justices for the Supreme Court. His comments are disappointing in that they go against the times.
The work of judicial reform has been going on for around a year. Five major reform ideas are being drafted and are in the final stages where they are being pursued in concrete terms, ideas that include changes in how the country's legal professionals are trained and popular participation in the judicial process. The proposal on judicial reform has been accused of being centered on the supplier and not the consumer of legal services, and for being weak in Supreme Court reform. But overall it should be recognized for setting a major stepping-stone in changing the judicial system, which has been close to untouched for 50 years and making it fit with the new climate. Of course the Korean Bar Association also participated in the drafting process, and spoke up about the issue.
Debating the merits of the judicial reform proposal and issuing specific opinions is fine, but it goes against reason and it is not well thought out to say something is for a specific political party when the proposal has been worked on hard by judicial officials, academia, and civic groups. It makes no sense to say the idea about adopting "law schools" has a "hidden agenda," but that you will not opposed the idea of quotas are not increased. "Law schools" are needed to bring normalcy to law education and to get rid of the test takers who look like the living dead as they prepare for the state bar. It was decided that law schools would be adopted as a replacement for the previous system in order to produce the country's legal professionals through fostering growth not selecting them though tests. That is why it is a problem to have the head of the KBA eager to speak up for lawyers' rights without standing alongside the law and justice.
Civic society's argument that the Supreme Court needs to reflect diverse social values and embrace the weak is persuasive. It cannot be achieved by selecting Supreme Court justices according to rank and seniority. Civic society's calls should not be dismissed. We hope to see the president of the KBA faithfully work to increase the quality of legal services and enforce lawyer ethics.
The Hankyoreh, 22 February 2005.
[Translations by Seoul Selection (PMS)]
[Editorial] Worrisome KBA President Speech |
