Is the ruling party misreading public sentiment on Jo's impeachment?
Democratic Party (DP) leader Kim Min-seok formally raised the possibility of impeaching Chief Justice Jo Hee-de on Friday, saying the party had begun discussing "all possible methods and avenues."
Having repeatedly pressured Jo to resign voluntarily, Kim has now played his final card. Raising the prospect of impeaching the head of the judiciary, an extraordinary step in Korea's constitutional history, raises serious questions about whether the ruling party understands public sentiment.
Hard-liners within the DP have floated Jo's impeachment several times but refrained from acting, apparently fearing political backlash. Now they argue that grounds for impeachment are abundant.
They cite his refusal to renominate a Supreme Court justice, his refusal to take an oath as a witness during a parliamentary audit and alleged misuse of official expenses.
An impeachment motion against the chief justice requires approval from a majority of all National Assembly members. The DP has enough seats to pass it alone.
Jo would then be suspended from duty pending a Constitutional Court ruling. But whether the court would uphold his impeachment is another matter.
Impeachment requires a serious violation of the Constitution or law. Many legal scholars and practitioners question whether refusing to recommend a new nominee for justice meets that threshold. Some also dispute the constitutional basis for requesting renomination.
It would be even more inappropriate if the move were intended to overcome internal divisions over the nomination of Kim Ji-yong to head the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency and rally the party's supporters.
The party leader should first confront the DP's political difficulties. Recent opinion polls show the party trailing the opposition People Power Party, reflecting growing public dissatisfaction.
The party has repeatedly shifted direction on major policies, including housing and comprehensive farmland inspections. Its leadership has failed to prevent these reversals from undermining public confidence.
If the impeachment initiative goes beyond pressuring Jo to resign and aims to suspend him through a parliamentary vote, it would be an especially dangerous undertaking.
Who would take responsibility for the institutional damage caused by leaving the judiciary without its chief justice?
DP leader Kim should immediately withdraw this impeachment initiative, which threatens constitutional order and judicial independence.
Rather than attempting to overcome declining approval ratings through increasingly confrontational measures, the ruling party should demonstrate its value by delivering tangible improvements in people's lives.
The consequences would extend beyond a confrontation between the government and the courts. An impeachment pursued without convincing constitutional grounds could deepen political polarization and weaken confidence in the institutions meant to check executive and legislative power.
(END)