A senior official at South Korea's Court Administration Office expressed strong opposition to a proposed law allowing appeals to the Constitutional Court against final court decisions, arguing it will burden litigants and undermine legal stability.
In a recent meeting of the National Assembly's Legislative Judiciary Committee, Ki Woo-jong, the deputy head of South Korea's Court Administration Office, voiced his firm opposition to a proposed law that would allow parties to appeal definitive court decisions to the Constitutional Court. This initiative, led by the ruling Democratic Party, has sparked significant debate, with advocates suggesting it would offer a vital constitutional check on judicial outcomes. However, Ki emphasized the potential negative implications of such a system, categorizing it as costly, inefficient, and a source of unwarranted stress for litigants, who may find their lives disrupted by prolonged legal battles.
Ki expressed concerns that allowing constitutional appeals would effectively introduce a fourth level of litigation, reminiscent of a fourth instance in legal proceedings. He criticized the notion that all judicial disputes could be framed as constitutional in nature, a perspective held by the proponents of the appeal law. He referred to comparative evidence from Germany, where appeals to the Federal Constitutional Court have an acceptance rate near 0%, to bolster his argument that such mechanisms serve only to prolong disputes and waste resources without producing beneficial outcomes. He cautioned that the introduction of the constitutional appeal could lead to an escalation of legal conflicts, particularly impacting smaller enterprises engaged in patent disputes with larger corporations.
Furthermore, Ki warned that the dynamics of legal battles would be skewed in favor of wealthier individuals or corporations, who could leverage this new system to exhaust their opponents in litigation. With real-world examples illustrating how lengthy legal processes could hinder smaller companies from sustaining their operations, Ki argued that the proposed law could ultimately lead to increased economic distress for these businesses. He concluded with a poignant reminder of the severe personal toll that drawn-out legal processes can take on individuals, suggesting that a continued judicial quarrel could devastate the lives and livelihoods of those involuntarily caught up in it.
