Thursday , July 29 2021

The self-help policy of the Central District Court of Seoul is to increase the number of three departments of criminal consensus.

The Central District Court in Seoul said it would increase the court's decision to eliminate the impartiality of the trial of Justice Farmers' accusers, but it is said that it is not enough to resolve the dispute. The court did not explicitly state in what criteria the new judges were elected. There is also a view that the contact with these and the suspects of the judicial property is not fully verified.

The Central District Court in Seoul said on October 9 that it will expand the number of criminal consensus departments from December 12 to operate 16 judges. This is because judges belonging to the six judges of the 13 existing criminal consensus offices have worked alongside the suspects of court farmers and the administration office of the court or have been prosecuted as a referral or victims. Political circles say "the trial can not be done fairly."

It is not known whether the Central District Court of Seoul will be free of impartiality. The court said: "We saw the judges in the new court taking into account the various matters of the civil courts in charge after the internal decision." They did not reveal specific selection criteria. A member of the Central District Court in Seoul said on November 11: "We are not allowed to disclose the discussions, but we know that we have taken into account work experience and the relationship with the main suspects."

The political circles do not seek suspicion. In addition, the Democratic Party legislator said that "the lawsuit is not enough to say that it completely eliminated the concern," he said. "We have to examine whether they are judicial selection criteria and judges that are not related to judicial exploitation." Park initiated the bill to introduce a special court.

The court said that it considered the previous work experience so that it did not become a problem with regard to the related judgment. However, Judge Song In-kwon (Acting Director of the Institute for Judicial Research and Training), who was appointed to serve as Judge 34 of the Ministry of Justice, reported that he worked with deputy director Lim Jong-hun and the Central District Court of Seoul from 2000 until the beginning of 2001. A lawyer said: "There are so many judges involved in this case that, even if there are no direct reports, there may be indirect pressure."

Seo Gi-ho, a former judge who is a former judge, said: "This case is not one or two personal injustices, so it can not be free of influence except for judges under the guise." "We must present a special court to allow a fair trial."

Seo attended the prosecutor's office regarding the process of rejection of a judge's re-election at the time the Supreme Court Head of Justice.

A reporter Dae Yong [email protected]

Source link