-In response to the selection of the two final candidates for the head of the first high-ranking public officials criminal investigation office (public prosecution office), the request for suspension of execution of the administrative lawsuit filed by the opposition nominating committee members was rejected.
The Seoul Administrative Court’s first administrative department (presiding judge Ahn Jong-hwa) rejected a request for suspension of execution for the “recommendation resolution and invalidation of the recommendation for airlifter candidates” filed by lawyer Lee Heon and Han Seok-hoon, professor at Sungkyunkwan University Law School, against the Airlift Candidate Recommendation Committee. decided.
Dismissal is a disposition to reject the party’s request without having to conduct a main case hearing if the legal requirements are defective or inappropriate.
The judge first saw that attorney Lee and others were not eligible for the plaintiff to seek invalidity of the decision to recommend a candidate for the Minister of Public Transport. The judge said, “The decision of the recommendation decision by the Airborne Candidate Recommendation Committee plays a role in determining the number of candidates to be appointed by the President from among the persons subject to the evaluation.” There is room to see, but the applicants such as this attorney are third parties that are not related to the subject of the review, so it cannot be considered that any rights were violated by the decision to recommend. He added, “Even if the applicant’s sense of honor and responsibility is violated by the decision to recommend this case, it is difficult to regard it as an individual, direct, specific benefit protected by the Airborne Act.”
The judge also said, “Applicants were commissioned by the chairman of the National Assembly to act as members of the nomination committee, which is a national agency under the Airlift Act, and acted as members of the nomination committee.” “The’ownership’ alleging that the applicants were violated is the law and its mandate. He explained that it is a’public law authority’ that is granted according to the rules on the operation of the Commission on Candidate Recommendations for the Chief of Crime Investigation for Senior Officials.”
He then explained that “the authority under the public law is irrelevant to the individual and subjective rights or interests of the applicants,” and that it is not the basis for the eligibility of the plaintiff in the lawsuit.
The Justice Department said, “Even if the applicants as members of the recommendation committee have been infringed upon the authority granted by the Airlift Act, this cannot be regarded as an’infringement of legal interests’ as a requirement for the plaintiff’s eligibility.”
The court also determined that the recommendation decision by the Airborne Candidate Recommendation Committee does not fall under the’disposition’ that is the subject of the appeal suit.
The Ministry of Justice said, “The act of recommending candidates by the Recommendation Committee is only one of the internal decision-making processes between state agencies, and it is difficult to see that any change in the rights and obligations of the people will be caused immediately.”
He added, “According to the procedure for the appointment of the Minister of Public Service, the time when it is decided whether or not the judges will obtain the public office as the Minister of Public Service or will be excluded from the position to obtain the office is after the president’s right to appoint is invoked.”
The judge said, “The decision to recommend this case is scheduled for the nomination and appointment procedure thereafter, and the time interval until the follow-up procedure proceeds will not be long.” “In fact, the nomination of the president within two days after the decision to recommend this case, etc. Considering the circumstances under which the follow-up procedure of the candidate was underway, there is no need to resolve the dispute early and effectively, considering the decision to recommend a candidate as a disposition.”
In the end, he concluded, “In the end, the main lawsuit filed by the applicants is unsuitable, and the request for suspension of execution is also unsuitable because the requirement for suspension of execution is’the original request must be legitimate’.”
On the 28th of last month, the Candidate Recommendation Committee selected Kim Jin-wook, a senior researcher at the Constitutional Court, and Lee Kun-ri, vice-chairman of the National Rights Committee, as the first candidates for the Minister of Public Transport.
At the time, a professor asked for an opportunity to recommend a new candidate, but the committee did not accept Han’s request. Accordingly, two recommending members of the opposition party, including Professor Han and Attorney Lee, left without participating in the vote.
On the 30th of last month, Professor Han and Lee attorney filed an administrative lawsuit and an application for suspension of execution against the recommendation committee.
On this day, the administrative court decided that not only the request for suspension of execution but also the main lawsuit filed by Lee and others was unsuitable, and the procedure for appointment of the head of the airlift is expected to proceed as scheduled for the time being.
(Seoul = News 1)
Copyright by dongA.com All rights reserved.
—
–
