Constitutional Court postpones ruling on Acting President's partial bench appointment

In other news.

Will the Constitutional Court's final ruling with regard to President Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment trial include eight or nine justices?

Now that is the question as the court next week shares its verdict on a related matter.

Our correspondent Oh Soo-young explains.

The Constitutional Court has postponed its verdict on whether Acting President Choi Sang-mok should have appointed a third judge to fill the court bench's remaining seat a crucial ruling as the bench deliberates on President Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment trial.

On Monday, the 8-member bench was set to convene at 2 PM to issue a ruling on a competence dispute filed by National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-shik against the Acting President's decision to appoint only two out of the three candidates recommended by the Assembly.

Lawyer Kim Jung-hwan also filed a complaint, arguing that Choi's appointment was unconstitutional.

However, the Court announced it would hold a hearing on the competence dispute one week later on February 10th, while indefinitely postponing a ruling on Kim's petition.

Under pressure from both ends of the political spectrum, Choi in late December chose to instate two candidates one recommended by the ruling party and one by the opposition party.

But he omitted left-leaning judge Ma Eun-hyuk, saying there should be bipartisan agreement on the third candidate.

The Assembly's resolution to appoint the judges was forced through by the majority-holding opposition party, which recommended two progressive candidates.

The Speaker, who comes from the opposition party, claims Choi has disregarded the parliament's decision, by only partially enacting the resolution.

The ruling People Power Party, however, has called for the case to be scrapped and says the Speaker's competence dispute bypassed a formal vote at the National Assembly.

"The Court's composition is a particularly sensitive issue, as it comes amid President Yoon's trial, which requires a two-thirds majority vote or six justices to uphold his impeachment."

The ruling party and Yoon's supporters have raised concerns about the political orientation of the bench, which is already deemed to have four left-leaning judges.

Experts say the Court has likely postponed the decision as Ma's appointment would mean the bench's verdict on Yoon's impeachment could look politically driven, giving rise to further controversy.

"In the impeachment trial of former President Park Geun-hye, the ruling was unanimous eight-to-zero, including even conservative justices. This led the public to accept the decision as a legal judgment rather than a political one. However, if President Yoon's impeachment results in a split decision -such as a five-to-four -it could be seen as purely political. If the justices' votes align perfectly along political lines, the public may lose trust in the Court's impartiality."

At the same time, if the Court finds Choi Sang-mok's partial appointment unconstitutional, there would be significant pressure on the Acting President to appoint Ma Eun-hyuk as the ninth justice to the bench.

Press Officer Cheon Jaehyeon said Monday that while the Court's verdict would not be mandatory, ignoring it would amount to a violation of the Constitution and the law.

As the decision is not legally binding,.. observers say it is likely Choi would sustain the eight-member bench until a compromise is reached between the ruling and opposition parties.

Oh Soo-young, Arirang News.