Jeong Cheong-rae (left), leader of the Democratic Party, and Kim Byeong-gi, floor leader, are in discussion at a Supreme Council meeting held at the National Assembly on December 15. Yonhap News

Late at night on December 3rd of this year, the same day that the '12/3 State of Emergency' was declared last year, the 'Special Act on the Establishment of a Court Specializing in Sedition Trials' passed the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee, spearheaded by the ruling Democratic Party. The Legislation and Judiciary Committee held a plenary session on this day and passed this bill along with the 'Law Distorting Act' and the 'Act on the Amendment of the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials Act,' while lawmakers from the People Power Party protested the bill's passage and left their seats.

The 'Special Act on the Establishment of a Court Specializing in Sedition Trials' is a special act that aims to establish a separate court to exclusively handle cases of sedition and foreign aggression related to the declaration of a state of emergency, as well as major special prosecutor cases. This bill, which the Democratic Party has been pushing forward forcefully, had already undergone one revision due to controversies surrounding judicial power infringement and unconstitutionality.

The original bill was proposed by Rep. Park Chan-dae of the Democratic Party on July 8th, and it was titled the 'Special Act on Follow-up Measures for the 12/3 State of Emergency and Protection of Whistleblowers,' which aimed to establish a special court exclusively for sedition cases related to the 12/3 State of Emergency, restrict pardons and restoration of rights for those convicted of sedition, and halt state subsidies to political parties that produce individuals convicted of sedition.

Regarding this bill, the judiciary, including the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court Administration Office, strongly opposed it, pointing out its potential unconstitutionality, stating, "The establishment of a court specifically for a particular case by the National Assembly infringes upon the independence of the judiciary." Consequently, the 'Act on the Establishment of a Court Specializing in Sedition Trials,' which supplemented the issues of unconstitutionality, was re-proposed through Rep. Lee Seong-yun and others in September.

However, it is pointed out that the revised bill still retains the fundamental idea of political circles managing and controlling the judiciary.

The Democratic Party has proposed a revised amendment to entrust cases related to sedition that are currently undergoing trial to the specialized court from the second trial stage, abandoning the first trial application. This is being evaluated as an admission that the original bill was essentially an 'enacted law' targeting specific cases and individuals.

The Democratic Party stated that they have partially revised the content by deleting clauses concerning external intervention in the court's formation, which was the biggest controversy, and ensuring that the Supreme Court President appoints judges after deliberation by the Conference of Supreme Court Justices, thereby granting the judiciary full recommendation authority. However, this is also difficult to escape criticism for "only removing the ostensible unconstitutional elements."

Park Soo-hyun, the chief spokesperson for the Democratic Party, explained, "We revised it after gathering opinions from legal circles and going through public deliberation," but from a conservative perspective, the mere act of pushing forward a bill with clear unconstitutional elements from the outset is considered legislative recklessness and judicial intimidation.

As controversy arose even regarding the revised bill that passed the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, the Democratic Party, through a general meeting of lawmakers on the 16th, further amended the bill by deleting 'Yoon Seok-yeol' from the bill's title and applying the court's establishment from the second trial stage, and confirmed the revised bill for the 'Sedition Trial Court Act' as the party's official stance.

Regarding the change in the bill's title from "Yoon Seok-yeol 12/3 State of Emergency" to "Special Act on Special Courts for Sedition and Foreign Aggression," the Democratic Party stated it was "generalized." However, the legal community's prevailing assessment is that "simply changing the name does not eliminate the nature of a political trial."

Considering the public statement by Woo Sang-ho, Senior Presidential Secretary for Political Affairs, that "applying the sedition court from the second trial is the President's intention," it is also interpreted that this revised bill is a political retreat aimed at blocking public backlash and unconstitutionality claims rather than securing legal legitimacy. This suggests that the Democratic Party is choosing an indirect route to avoid controversies that would disadvantage them, rather than abandoning the intention itself.

The Democratic Party plans to submit the re-revised bill to the plenary session for processing on the 21st or 22nd. However, fundamental criticism continues, with the argument that the act of political circles pressuring the judiciary to change the trial structure itself goes against the basic principles of democracy.

Hanmi Shiron