[ad_1]
[앵커]
Attorney General Yoon Seok-yeol said the prosecution’s disciplinary law was unconstitutional and this time he filed a constitutional petition. It was unconstitutional for the Minister of Justice to make a disciplinary claim and form a disciplinary commission, but the request for temporary protection to suspend the effect also emerged as another variable of mine. Reporter Kang Hee-kyung reports. Attorney General Yoon Seok-yeol, who responded to Justice Minister Choo Mi-ae’s order to suspend his duties in an administrative lawsuit, knocked on the door of the Constitutional Court this time. They filed a constitutional petition claiming that article 5, paragraph 2, no. 2 and no. 3 of the Disciplinary Law of the Prosecutor, which stipulated the composition of the prosecutor’s disciplinary commission, is contrary to the Constitution. In accordance with this provision, the disciplinary committee is made up of the Minister of Justice and the Vice Minister of Justice, the president of the disciplinary committee, two prosecutors appointed by the Minister, and three external experts commissioned by the Minister. Yoon said that the Minister of Justice, who is the attorney general’s disciplinary plaintiff, must appoint and appoint the majority of the disciplinary members, so there is no guarantee of justice at all. They also argued that it exceeded the legislative limit of restrictions on basic rights under the constitution by allowing the attorney general to de facto deprive him of the right to serve in public service. Yoon’s side also requested a temporary court order to suspend the validity of the provisions, requesting that the provisions be suspended until a decision is made on the constitutional appeal. Specifically, after Minister Chu requested disciplinary action from President Yun, he requested that the appointment or appointment of a disciplinary commissioner be suspended in accordance with the provisions of this law. Taking into account that the mandate of the external disciplinary committee is three years, it can be interpreted as directed at the disciplinary prosecutors who are expected to be appointed by Minister Chu. In the midst of this, Vice Justice Minister Lee Yong-gu, who is also a member of the disciplinary committee, was caught answering the question of whether there would be any impact on the disciplinary committee in a group chat room, replying that it was the squeeze of President Yoon’s hands. There was controversy when the name of Detective Chief Lee Jong-geun, an executive in the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office, was caught among conversation partners, but the Justice Ministry drew a line that the name was used by his wife, Park Eun-jung, the prosecutor for the Department of Justice. It is known that it normally takes more than two weeks for the result of a request for a temporary injunction to suspend the constitution. It’s likely to be after the disciplinary committee scheduled for the 10th, but if the constitution cites a provisional injunction before that, the composition of the disciplinary committee itself can be difficult. General Yoon’s position is that the disciplinary committee should not be held until the outcome of the interim injunction is reached, but as the Ministry of Justice is expected to proceed with the schedule, it appears that if the Constitutional Court will rush to reach a conclusion will be an important variable. This is YTN Kang Hee-kyung. ## Kang Heekyung[[email protected]]
※ ‘Your report becomes news’ YTN is waiting for your valuable report.
[카카오톡] Search YTN to add a channel [전화] 02-398-8585 [메일] [email protected] [온라인 제보] www.ytn.co.kr
