0
Ma Eun-hyuk, justice of the Constitutional Court, delivers his inaugural address during a ceremony at the Constitutional Court in Jongno-gu, Seoul, on April 9. / Source: Yonhap News

Justice Ma Eun-hyuk of South Korea’s Constitutional Court has been assigned to oversee a high-profile case questioning whether Acting President and Prime Minister Han Duck-soo had the authority to nominate two Constitutional Court justices, a decision typically reserved for the sitting president.

According to legal sources on April 10, the case was randomly allocated to Justice Ma through an electronic lottery system. This marks the first major case for Ma since his inauguration the previous day.

During his swearing-in ceremony, Ma acknowledged the scrutiny surrounding his appointment and pledged to uphold fairness in his rulings. Observers are closely watching how he will adjudicate in this politically sensitive matter.

The controversy stems from Han’s April 8 nomination of Legal Affairs Minister Lee Wan-kyu and Seoul High Court Judge Ham Sang-hoon to replace outgoing justices Moon Hyung-bae and Lee Mi-sun, whose terms end on April 18.

The Lawyers for a Democratic Society (Minbyun), law firm Duksu, and attorney Kim Jung-hwan filed both a constitutional petition and an injunction, arguing that the nominations exceed the authority of an acting president.

Should the court fast-track deliberations, a decision on the injunction could come within days. A Constitutional Court official stated that “injunction decisions can be made within three to four days.”

In a previous case, the court ruled in favor of an injunction within four days when Broadcast Communications Commission Chair Lee Jin-sook filed a challenge after three justices retired mid-hearing in her impeachment case, threatening to halt proceedings.

If the injunction is granted, Han’s nominations would be suspended until the court delivers a final ruling on the constitutional challenge. If rejected, however, there would be no legal barrier preventing Han from proceeding with the appointments. A majority of at least five out of the nine justices must vote in favor for the injunction to be upheld.