[단독] National Assembly “Trump is also judged after retirement… Im Seong-geun can also be impeached”

On the 8th, the delegation of the National Assembly submitted a written opinion to the Constitutional Court stating that “There is no legal provision stating that impeachment of an expired judge cannot be impeached by the deputy of the National Assembly to the former deputy chief judge of the Busan High Court, who is being tried for the first time in the history of the constitution.” Confirmed. In fact, it has expressed its position that retroactive impeachment (destruction) is also possible.

The former chief judge, who retired due to the expiration of his term of office on the 28th of last month, refuted this after submitting an opinion to the constitution stating, “Because there is no right to be dismissed, there is no real benefit of the referee and must be dismissed without judgment on the original case.” Before the full-scale trial begins, both sides are fighting fiercely over whether an impeachment trial for a judge who has already retired is possible.

Senior Judge Im Seong-geun. yunhap news.

On the 1st of last month, Democratic Party lawmakers Ryu Ho-jeong and Justice Party lawmaker Lee Tan-hee, as well as Democrats, Kang Min-jung, Open Democratic Party, and Basic Income Party lawmakers Yong Hye-in, hold a press conference at the National Assembly Communication Hall to initiate the impeachment prosecution of Judge Im Seong-geun. Reporter Oh Jong-taek

The delegation of the National Assembly said on the day, “I submitted a written opinion to the Constitution on the 5th, stating that the’impeachment trial for Impeachment should be conducted’.” The delegation was heard on the grounds that there is no statutory prescription that impeachment is possible for a certain period after the offense is committed in the domestic Constitution, the National Assembly Act, and the Constitutional Court Act.

The deputy of the National Assembly said, “The case of the Impeachment Chief Judge is the case where the term of office of the judge has expired after the impeachment was legally prosecuted by the National Assembly during the term of office, and the circumstances have changed.” “Since there is no prestigious provision for this, the constitution is the essential meaning of the impeachment system. It is a matter of deciding (whether or not to be impeached) in consideration of the like, and it is inappropriate to dismiss the impeachment trial case immediately,” he said in a written opinion.

President Trump listens at the White House on the 6th of last month (local time) at the Washington Post with his rejection of his impeachment bill. [AP=연합뉴스]

The delegation also mentioned a case in which the US Congress conducted an impeachment trial even though former President Donald Trump retired due to the expiration of his term on January 20. In January of this year, when he was in office, former President Trump was on the charge of instigating a civil war by encouraging supporters to riot in the Capitol.

At the time, Trump’s lawyers insisted on dismissing the hearing against the former president, saying it violates the constitution, but the impeachment bill passed through the House of Representatives and was rejected without obtaining 67 votes necessary for approval at the Senate impeachment trial on the 13th of last month. In the case of Germany and the Czech Republic, even if the term of office of the respondent expires after the impeachment prosecution, it is also included in the opinion that it is stipulated in the Constitutional Court Act that there is no effect on the proceeding of the judgment.

The delegation also insisted that the impeachment trial should screen whether he has committed any serious constitutional or legal violations before considering whether the former vice-president Judge Im had the position to be expelled. At the time of the last judgment on the impeachment of former President Park Geun-hye, the constitution separately masked whether he committed serious offenses and whether it was appropriate to dismiss the presidential office.

Until now, there has been no precedent for the subject’s term of office to expire after the impeachment prosecution, so this is expected to be the first judgment of the constitution. A representative from the delegation said, “As there are no related regulations and the impeachment of a judge is the first in the history of the constitution, separate from the final order, a’constitutional clarification’ is stated in the decision to see if the constitution is an unconstitutional act. I will have to pay,” he insisted.

Regarding this, former deputy judge Lim said, “Comparing to the case of President Trump, the governing actions of the president and the performance of the judges cannot be put on the same line, and the regulations for this are different from country to country.” “Even in the case of former President Park Geun-hye, before the impeachment trial, If it had to be done, it would have been controversial over whether it would be subject to impeachment judgment.”

Reporter Dr. Ra [email protected]