[ad_1]
[앵커]
Prior to the disciplinary committee’s second deliberation against Attorney General Yoon Seok-yeol, a controversy arose over the qualifications of the president’s official representative. President Yoon’s side repeatedly asked the Constitutional Court to quickly halt the disciplinary committee proceedings, saying that Professor Han-jung Jeong, who served as the president’s representative, was not eligible for membership. The disciplinary committee of the Ministry of Justice immediately opposed this. Connect with reporters. Reporter Lee Jong-won! Isn’t it Yun’s position that the decision to request an interim injunction from the Constitutional Court should be made before the second disciplinary committee date takes place? Yes, special counsel Yoon Seok-yeol sent a statement to reporters yesterday afternoon. It indicates that it has submitted additional documents to the Constitutional Court, requesting an expedited decision on the provisional amparo case. On the 4th, President Yoon filed a constitutional complaint saying that the Disciplinary Law of the Prosecutor’s Office was unconstitutional, and he also filed an injunction requesting that the disciplinary committee act before the decision. It is argued that it is unconstitutional because the Minister of Justice files a disciplinary complaint against the Attorney General and the composition of the disciplinary committee is also the responsibility of the Minister. Of course, if the Constitutional Constitution accepts the request for an interim injunction, the disciplinary committee process against President Yoon will stop. Currently, the case is referred to the all-inclusive court in which the nine constitutional judges participate. As the second due date is approaching three days in advance, time is physically tight and it is unclear if a decision will be made before then. Yoon’s side also submitted additional documents to the constitution yesterday. They are known to have denounced the illegality of the composition of the disciplinary committee. In particular, he argued that he did not have membership qualifications, and opposed the appointment process of Han-Jung Jung, a professor at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, who served as president. When a member of the disciplinary committee resigned after being charged with disciplinary action against President Yoon, Minister Choo Mi-ae appointed Professor Chung as a new member, which is allegedly illegal. According to the Disciplinary Law of the Prosecutor’s Office, a member of the predetermined preliminary committee must participate in the deliberation if a designated member “cannot fulfill his duty”, which means that a new commission has violated the procedure. Consequently, President Yoon’s lawyer said that he would re-file an appeal against Professor Jeong Han-jung, the president’s official representative. Furthermore, it is policy to submit an evasion request to Professor Jeong the day after tomorrow for Vice Minister of Justice Lee Yong-gu. So what is the position of the Department of Justice Disciplinary Committee? The Ministry of Justice also issued a rebuttal statement last night. I dismissed it as a legal start-up process. The reason for the appointment of Professor Han-jung Jeong is that the existing disciplinary committee members are not “when they cannot fulfill their duties.” Since it became a “vacancy by resignation”, he refuted that it is a legitimate procedure to appoint a new member rather than to appoint a reserve member. However, when the second disciplinary committee deadline opens on the 15th, when General Yoon’s side pulls the challenge card again, it is expected that before a full-scale deliberation, it will be discussed whether or not to request the challenge again. . I am YTN Jong-won Lee from the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office. ※ ‘Your report becomes news’ YTN awaits your valuable report.
[카카오톡] Search YTN to add a channel [전화] 02-398-8585 [메일] [email protected] [온라인 제보] www.ytn.co.kr
