 |
|
Yang Seung-tae, former Supreme Court chief justice, exits the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office on Jan. 11 at midnight after being questioned on his involvement in judicial misconduct. (Baek So-ah, staff photographer)
|
Speculations abounds over whether Supreme Court will follow convention and protect their own
Jan. 11, Yang Seung-tae, 71, became the first former chief justice of South Korea’s Supreme Court to be called in for questioning by the prosecutors, and it’s only a matter of time before he stands as a defendant before one of his former subordinate judges to state his name and his resident registration number. The big question for the legal community is whether Yang will have to attend a hearing for an arrest warrant before his case goes to trial. During the first round of questioning by the prosecutors, Yang stuck to a strategy of feigning ignorance or pretending not to remember anything about the major charges, which are supported by substantial evidence, both direct and circumstantial. The dominant view is that this leaves the prosecutors with no choice but to request an arrest warrant. But opinions differ about whether a court will actually issue an arrest warrant for the previous chief justice of the Supreme Court, whose term only ended one year and four months earlier. Prior to this, the courts have demonstrated a reluctance to put former Supreme Court justices behind bars. While the prosecutors had been confident about the arrest warrants they requested for former justices Park Byeong-dae and Koh Yeong-han early last month, the court slapped down the request and raised questions about whether they had even been party to a conspiracy. On Jan. 11, Yang’s questioning by the prosecutors lasted from 9:30 am until 8:40 pm. After that, Yang spent more than three hours meticulously reading the report that prosecutors had drafted, remaining at the prosecutors’ office until 11:55 pm. When Yang left the office, he ignored the reporters clustered outside, just as when he’d arrived. Defying expectations, Yang returned to the prosecutors’ office the next day at 2 pm, where he remained until after midnight. He reportedly spent that time continuing his review of the questioning report, which he hadn’t managed to finish the previous day. In effect, Yang spent more time reviewing the questioning report (13 hours) than in the actual questioning (11 hours). The team at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors Office in charge of investigating the judicial scandal (under Han Dong-hun, a senior prosecutor), which has said that subsequent rounds of questioning would be kept confidential, announced on Jan. 13 that Yang Seung-tae had returned to the office on the afternoon of Jan. 12 to finish his review of the questioning report and that no further questioning had taken place at that time. During Yang’s questioning, the prosecutors reportedly focused until late in the afternoon on the charge that Yang cut a deal with the previous administration about a lawsuit filed by victims of forced labor during the Japanese colonial period. After that, the prosecutors apparently questioned Yang about the alleged composition and implementation of a “judicial blacklist” in which judges with certain tendencies had been discriminated against in personnel assignments. These are the charges that the prosecutors are most eager to prove. Yang reportedly responded to these questions by flatly denying the charges, claiming not to remember what had happened and pleading ignorance about what his staff had done. When reviewing the questioning report, suspects typically verify that their responses to the prosecutors’ questions or presentation of evidence have been recorded correctly and make corrections as needed. It’s typical for this review to wrap up on the day of the questioning or early the next morning. While the prosecutors’ declaration that they wouldn’t question Yang after midnight likely played a role here, it was unusual for his review of the report to last for two days. Yang’s stint as the highest judge in the country gives him unparalleled knowledge of legal matters, and he presumably scrutinized each question and answer with a fine-tooth comb in order to ensure his responses hadn’t exposed any legal weaknesses. Prosecutors feel there’s a good chance Yang’s arrest warrant will be issued Yang’s unusual decision to spend two days reviewing the questioning report can be seen as an attempt to prepare for the prosecutors’ arrest warrant, on the assumption that they will request one. Yang was the boss of Im Jong-heon, former vice director of the National Court Administration and the only figure implicated in the judicial scandal who has been detained prior to trial, and the two figures both share a significant number of the charges. In the prosecutors’ framing of the investigation, Yang is the person ultimately responsible for the judicial scandal. Since the prosecutors have said their questioning is nearly halfway over, they’re likely to question Yang once or twice more before requesting the arrest warrant. The mood among prosecutors is that there’s a better chance of a warrant being issued for Yang than for the two former justices whose arrest warrants were rejected because of doubts about the conspiracy. The prosecutors’ confidence is based on the fair amount of direct and circumstantial evidence they’ve turned up showing that Yang gave direct orders to the key staff members in the scandal. Yang’s complete denial of the charges is also thought to increase the likelihood of an arrest warrant being issued. “Denying the charges in the face of clear physical evidence raises concerns about the destruction of evidence and makes it more likely that a warrant will be issued,” said a former judge currently working as a lawyer. During the course of the prosecutors’ questioning, Yang would have learned which former and current judges have given testimony that’s unfavorable to him, and he could then put pressure on those individuals. Another factor that could work against Yang is his controversial choice to hold a press conference in front of the Supreme Court, which caused his public support to plummet. But others expect that the court will once again protect its own, just as when a judge rejected arrest warrants for two other former Supreme Court justices. “The very fact that a former Supreme Court chief justice held a press conference in front of the Supreme Court sends a rallying cry to the judges who support him. The arrest warrant could be turned down if Yang’s symbolic status as former chief justice triggers an unusually strong version of the respect customarily given to former judges,” one lawyer said. By Lim Jae-woo and Kim Yang-jin, staff reporters Please direct comments or questions to [english@hani.co.kr]
