New Chief Justice Yang Seung-tae has a very good idea about removing the worst blot in Korea’s legal system, the favoritism between incumbent judges and prosecutors and their retired ex-colleagues who practice law. Yang, who took office late September, told a TV interview that the best way to cut the corrupt tradition is to establish a “life-long judge system.”
Yang did not have time to elaborate on this particular issue while he was outlining his opinion on the judicial reform, but he said that the key is to prohibit judges from practicing law as soon as leaving the bench. He also suggested the adoption of what the local jurists call the “unified legal careers system,” which means selecting judges from experienced lawyers and prosecutors.
What Yang has in mind ― and many reformists agree with ― is reversing the present process of appointing judges that has existed since the Japanese colonial rule. Judges and prosecutors have been recruited through annual state judiciary exams. These officers can retire any time they want and practice law, which usually provides a high income.
“Guilty without money, innocent with money” is the sarcastic maxim in Korean society to indicate the role of lawyers in criminal procedures. The common thinking is that the wealthy can afford lawyers who were top judges, who then use their influence to secure a light sentence, probation or a not guilty verdict. In civil suits, former Supreme Court judges win suits at stunningly higher rates than others.
Records show that Yang’s immediate predecessor, Lee Yong-hoon, earned 2.2 billion won while practicing law during the five years from his retirement as a Supreme Court justice and his appointment as the chief justice in 2005. These kind of enormous incomes and the fierce competition among larger law firms to employ former high-ranking judges as partners show how highly these individuals are valued in the legal profession.
Judicial reforms pushed by the National Assembly and the court itself have so far introduced only minor corrections. Under the latest measures, ex-judge lawyers cannot handle cases which are being tried in the courts where they last served. An earlier reform step had prohibited judges and prosecutors from practicing law in the area of their last assignments for a year, but this rule was abolished after a few years.
In their resistance to such reforms, bar associations have cited the constitutional freedom of occupation. If the new chief justice takes determined steps to translate his belief into action with a general ban on judges from moving into law practice, he will face opposition from all sides. Those enforcing the status quo include National Assembly members who have lawyers’ licenses.
A sort of cronyism has existed among judges, prosecutors and lawyers, who have all qualified through the single channel of a state examination for legal officers. Changes will come when the state exam is abolished in a few years and the graduates of Korea’s first law schools are appointed to courts and prosecutors’ offices. But the new recruitment system does not necessarily promise an end to the tradition.
Chief Justice Yang draws many expectations from inside and outside the court, chiefly from the fact that he did not practice law after his retirement from the Supreme Court last February. A chief justice alone cannot achieve many reforms but he can start meaningful actions and continue to oversee and spur efforts toward cutting the ties of favoritism in court.
The number of lawyers has grown rapidly and the “worth” of ex-senior judges has increased accordingly. This brings shame to our legal system, and we hope visible improvement will be made during the six years of Chief Justice Yang’s tenure.
