[ad_1]
Seok-Yeol Yoon, the judicial interrogation concerned about political interpretation is not present
On the 1st of next month, the Inspection Commission of the Ministry of Justice → the 2nd Disciplinary Commission
Discussing the feasibility of the inspection results for three consecutive days … ‘A week of destination’
Justice Minister Chu Miae (left) and Attorney General Yoon Seok-yeol. Hankook Ilbo Data Photo
The ‘week of fate’ that will determine the career of Attorney General Yoon Seok-yeol has begun. Starting with a judicial review (30 days) to determine whether Justice Minister Choo Mi-ae’s disposition to exclude President Yun has been suspended (30 days), a discussion on the validity of the inspection process and the results (the committee inspection, on the 1st of the following month) and the disciplinary decision (disciplinary committee), on the 2nd of the following month) The procedure continues for three consecutive days. Amid the conflict between Minister Chu and President Yun, who have clashed in the case, as the climax is heading towards the climax, it is hoped that the other party will not be able to retain the seat if a conclusion is reached that raises unilaterally one hand. For both, there will be three consecutive ‘Decision of Death’ matches.
According to law enforcement officials on the 29th, the Seoul Administrative Court will set a date for questioning on the case of a request to stay the execution of an exclusion order issued by Yoon against Minister Chu at 11 am on the 30th. It is a trial that decides whether to temporarily suspend the effect and execution of the provision before the judgment of the main claim, the claim for annulment of the provision of suspension of functions, and the judgment of the court may be made from the afternoon of the day.
Yoon’s court attendance, which was a concern of the United States, was ultimately decided as “no attendance”. Attorney Wan-gyu Lee, who served as President Yoon’s legal representative, said that day, “There is no special reason, because it is a defense-oriented defense.” Consequently, only attorneys Lee Wan-kyu and Lee Seok-woong plan to attend, and Yoon reportedly agreed with this decision as well. He also seems to have taken into account that if President Yoon shows up in person, it can be interpreted as a power struggle or political action.
The question of the trial for stay of execution is whether or not there will be “damage that is difficult to recover if the exclusion of functions continues”, rather than the case of the supervision of President Yun. In addition to the fact that if the main lawsuit is prolonged, △ The Ministry of Justice did not properly inform the indictments, etc. It is also planned to emphasize that procedural illegality is great. In response, Minister Chu is expected to argue that “the misconduct charges revealed so far are very serious.”
The main calendar related to the exclusion and discipline of Attorney General Yoon Seok-yeol. Graphic = Reporter Song Jeong-geun
The following day, at 10:00 am on the 1st of next month, the supervisory committee of the Ministry of Justice will be summoned to act as an adviser on the discipline of prosecutors. Initially, the Ministry of Justice “passed” the oversight committee, made up mostly of outsiders, and called the disciplinary committee. While the opinion of the supervisory commission has only recommended effect, if the supervisory commission, consisting of the commission of the Minister of Justice, is of the opinion that ‘the supervision of President Yoon is unfair’, it would be a severe blow to Minister Chu.
More than six people (including the chair), who are the meeting’s quorum, are said to be present on the supervisory committee, and most of them are in a position to “consider the adequacy of Mr. Yoon’s supervision.” In particular, the Ministry of Justice has established mandatory provisions related to advising the supervisory commission prior to the disciplinary action of Mr. Yun. It is highly likely that the fact that it has been changed to an “arbitrary clause” and that President Yoon’s request for disciplinary action was not reported in advance will be put on the deliberation agenda.
The disciplinary committee of the prosecution office of the Ministry of Justice, which is the final version of ‘Chu-Yoon Daejeon’, will be held on the 2nd of next month. On this day, there is a high possibility that Yoon will also appear in person. This is because the vocation or active attitude of the disciplinary part has a significant influence on the disciplinary status and level. In 2013, when he was referred to the disciplinary committee in connection with the investigation of the NIS comment case, Yoon was present.
However, there is no obligation to attend the disciplinary commission. The prosecutor’s disciplinary law only states that “if disciplinary action is requested of the president, he or she may set a date for the disciplinary review and order the attendance of the disciplinary suspect.” Furthermore, it is reported that Minister Chu did not specify the date of the disciplinary deliberation and ordered him to attend. In the absence of President Yoon, there is a possibility that the ‘disciplinary resolution’ will not be taken on the day of the event.
The prosecutor’s disciplinary action is decided with the consent of the majority of the members. When severe disciplinary action is imposed, such as dismissal, firing, or suspension, President Moon Jae-in directly orders the disciplinary action at the request of Minister Chu. Of course, even in this case, Yoon is sure to take legal action against the disciplinary order.
Choi dongsoon reporter [email protected]
Subscribe to the Hankook Ilbo News Naver channel
Balance to see the world, the Hankook Ilbo Copyright © Hankookilbo
[ad_2]
