Democratic Party Lawmaker Criticizes Oppositions Claims on Constitutional Appeal Process
Lawmaker Jeon Yong-ki from the Democratic Party of Korea criticized fellow lawmaker Joo Jin-woo from the People Power Party for labeling their ongoing constitutional appeals initiative as K-evidence destruction. Jeon pointed out on Facebook on the 23rd that Joos claims reveal a lack of common sense in addressing constitutional order. Jeon stated, Joos assertions distort the essence of the constitutional trial system and demonstrate a profound misunderstanding of constitutional order. He emphasized that the constitutional appeal is a mechanism to minimally review whether there have been any violations of the constitution and laws during investigations or trials. This system is designed to ensure that everyone has the right to a fair trial and to protect citizens rights from the abuse of state power, serving as a constitutional safeguard.
Jeon further remarked, To define such a system as evidence destruction implies that Joo presupposes there have been constitutional violations in the investigation or trial processes, or it reflects an attitude of resistance to such oversight. He also noted that it is concerning that someone who has served as a prosecutor for an extended period would express such views, interpreting them as indicative of an institutional perspective that sees constitutional oversight as obstruction of prosecutorial authority.
Jeon concluded by stating, One could argue that Joos remarks serve as a compelling testament to the necessity of prosecutorial reform. Moreover, the Constitutional Court has clearly stated that the essence of the constitutional appeal is constitutional review. I hope further political claims are restrained. He added, Joos involvement in this matter proves that the constitutional appeal system is indeed a necessary mechanism.
The Democratic Party has been accelerating its push for constitutional appeals as part of its recent judicial reform agenda, which aims to make court trials subject to constitutional review.
Jeon further remarked, To define such a system as evidence destruction implies that Joo presupposes there have been constitutional violations in the investigation or trial processes, or it reflects an attitude of resistance to such oversight. He also noted that it is concerning that someone who has served as a prosecutor for an extended period would express such views, interpreting them as indicative of an institutional perspective that sees constitutional oversight as obstruction of prosecutorial authority.
Jeon concluded by stating, One could argue that Joos remarks serve as a compelling testament to the necessity of prosecutorial reform. Moreover, the Constitutional Court has clearly stated that the essence of the constitutional appeal is constitutional review. I hope further political claims are restrained. He added, Joos involvement in this matter proves that the constitutional appeal system is indeed a necessary mechanism.
The Democratic Party has been accelerating its push for constitutional appeals as part of its recent judicial reform agenda, which aims to make court trials subject to constitutional review.
Like
0
Upvote0
- PrevKorean Lawmaker Criticizes Governments Soft Stance on Chinas Illegal Activities
- NextPresident Lee Jae-myung Condemns Abuse of Power by Law Enforcement Agencies
이동*
정말 최고예요!
홍한*
이런 소식 정말 좋아요.
김샛*
정말이지 이런뉴스는 올리지 말아주세요.
No comments yet.
