The debate over Supreme Court reform has escalated sharply in South Korea. Consequently, the ruling Democratic Party of Korea is pushing to expand the bench, while critics warn of a threat to judicial independence and balance of power.
Moreover, the proposal would nearly double the size of the court. Lawmakers argue the change is needed to address an overwhelming case backlog. For example, last year alone, nearly 30,000 cases reached the Supreme Court, with each justice handling more than 2,000.
In addition, the amendment to the Court Organization Act seeks to raise the number of justices from 14 to 26 by 2029. The plan adds four new seats each year, starting after a one-year grace period. As a result, this timeline ensures President Lee Jae Myung could appoint up to 22 of the justices.
Supporters therefore argue the reform will ease bottlenecks and protect the right to fair trials. The Korean Bar Association endorsed the proposal, calling it the most direct way to reduce delays in the appeals system.
However, critics see deeper political risks. For instance, law professor Cha Jin-a from Korea University warned that allowing the president to appoint all 16 new justices undermines neutrality. She further emphasized that improving trial quality in lower courts should come first.
Meanwhile, the controversy has grown more intense with a parliamentary move to summon Chief Justice Jo Hee-de. Specifically, lawmakers scheduled a September 30 hearing to question him over alleged interference in President Lee’s election case.
Furthermore, the Democratic Party accuses Jo of manipulating rulings to hurt Lee’s candidacy before the June presidential vote. Party leaders also demand Jo’s resignation and claim he has already lost legitimacy. Nevertheless, Jo firmly denied the allegations, stressing he never discussed the case with outsiders.
On the other hand, the conservative People Power Party condemned the summons. Its leaders described the motion as an attack on the separation of powers. In particular, Floor leader Song Eon-seog warned that September 30 could mark the death of judicial independence.
Overall, observers see the confrontation as a defining moment for Supreme Court reform. Judges’ councils are also set to debate the issue further, while the amendment awaits a plenary vote in the National Assembly.
Ultimately, the outcome will shape the court’s future role, the pace of appeals, and political trust in the judiciary. As both parties escalate their attacks, the struggle over Supreme Court reform therefore appears certain to dominate Korea’s political landscape in the months ahead.
