Nearly four months after the National Assembly passed a bill calling for the impeachment of South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol for his failed attempt to control the country through martial law, the Constitutional Court upheld Yoon’s impeachment unanimously on April 4. With the decision, Yoon has been removed from office permanently and is the second South Korean president to be impeached by the Constitutional Court. Yoon also has the dubious accolade of being the first sitting president to be charged with treason in South Korea’s history.
At 11:00 a.m. local time, Moon Hyung-bae, the acting chief of the Constitutional Court, read the eight justices’ decision on Yoon’s impeachment case. Over 22 minutes, Moon elaborated one by one the issues raised by both the National Assembly and Yoon.
According to the verdict delivered by Moon, Yoon’s declaration of martial law was illegal as there were flaws in the cabinet meeting he called to justify the declaration. The justices did not accept the claims of Yoon’s lawyers that the country was in an emergency situation due to the opposition Democratic Party (DP)’s repeated impeachment of Yoon’s cabinet members, saying that an emergency situation, the severity of which can be deemed as a kind of state of war did, not occur “realistically.” The court’s decision characterized Yoon’s declaration of martial law as being based on his subjective view of the political deadlock with the DP — which is illegitimate under the constitution.
The court also said Yoon’s order to deploy troops to the National Assembly and to arrest politicians and former justices were illegal. Yoon had denied the allegations that he ordered the martial law troops to arrest political figures, mostly opposition lawmakers, and to impede the National Assembly’s immediate moves to lift martial law. However, the court accepted the claims of commanders and military officers who were involved in the operations at the National Assembly. They testified that they were directly ordered by their superiors and Yoon to drag out lawmakers who were gathered at the plenary chamber to vote for lifting martial law. Also, as the public watched the scenes of martial law troops and special military forces breaking windows to enter the National Assembly building on TV and on site, Yoon’s claim that the mobilization of the troops to the parliament was for maintaining the order was deemed uncompelling.
Yoon’s defense lawyers repeatedly said there were procedural flaws in the impeachment trials in order to persuade the justices to dismiss the case. However, none of their arguments were accepted by the justices.
The seizure and search of the National Election Commission by martial law troops without a warrant was also found to be illegal, even though Yoon claimed that it was for checking the computer systems. The martial law decree restricting political activities was also illegitimate as it significantly violated the basic rights of Korean citizens.
Consequently, every move made by Yoon on December 3 was illegal and was serious enough for him to be impeached, according to Moon and the court.
The Reaction from Yoon and the People Power Party (PPP)
According to local media reports, Yoon encouraged his party leadership — gathered in his presidential residence for the reading of the verdict — to unite to win the upcoming snap presidential election.
He apologized that he failed to meet the public’s standards, according to reports, despite the fact that he has for months consistently tried to avoid political and legal responsibilities stemming from his martial law attempt.
Political analysts question whether the PPP should field a candidate for the presidential election at all, as both impeached presidents in South Korea’s history are from the conservative party.
Kwon Young-se, the chairman of the People Power Party’s Emergency Response Committee, said his party modestly accepts the verdict while apologizing to the public that it failed to perform the role of a ruling party successfully. However, Kwon Seon-dong, the floor leader of the PPP, said his party should win the upcoming election, apparently taking no responsibility for his efforts to impede Yoon’s impeachment and to pressure the Constitutional Court to dismiss his impeachment in the past few months.
Lee Jae-myung, the leader of the main opposition Democratic Party who appears as the most likely successor of Yoon in the upcoming snap presidential election, expressed respect and appreciation to the public who defended the country’s democratic system. Lee also called the court’s verdict on Yoon a national tragedy since the country has impeached two presidents in eight years.
The opposition welcomed the court’s ruling on Yoon, saying it was a widely expected decision given Yoon’s actions. However, Yoon’s lawyers have called the decision political, and some fear that pro-Yoon supporters may riot as they did when the Seoul Western District Court issued an arrest warrant against Yoon on January 19.
Considering the timeline for previous presidential impeachment cases in 2004 and 2017, the Constitutional Court was expected to deliver its verdict around March 14. However, as it delayed the verdict, PPP lawmakers raised the possibility of Yoon returning to office. The court’s March 24 decision to reject the impeachment of Prime Minister Han Duck-soo — who was impeached by the opposition-controlled National Assembly for his refusal to approve the appointments of three justices for the Constitutional Court — stirred up the PPP’s hopes for a similar rejection in the Yoon case. Also, as Yoon was released from prison in early March due to the court’s acceptance of his defense lawyers’ claims that there was procedural violation over his detention, pro-Yoon lawmakers within the PPP showed confidence that the Constitutional Court would dismiss his impeachment case.
Among the eight justices presently in the Constitutional Court, three justices are deemed to be conservatives, engendering hopes among pro-Yoon supporters and the PPP that they would reject the impeachment and help Yoon return to office. However, that did not happen.
The justices are believed to have delayed their verdict in order to reach a consensus in light of the deep polarization in South Korea that came to a head with Yoon’s illegal martial law declaration.
What Comes Next?
Yoon cannot appeal the verdict of the Constitutional Court. He is no longer president of South Korea. He is facing charges of treason, but more charges may unfold against him as many allegations were made against him and his wife over the past three years. The presidency protected him from prosecution for crimes other than treason; he no longer has the protection.
Per the constitution, South Korea needs to hold a snap presidential election within 60 days.
The snap election will likely be held on June 3, though the date has not been officially announced yet. The special presidential election in 2017 was held on May 9; the Constitutional Court had upheld Park Geun-hye’s impeachment on March 10.
Lee, the DP leader who was the contender against Yoon in the 2022 presidential election, will likely be the next president of the country.
There is no contender against Lee within the DP at present. Lee’s defeat by Yoon in the 2022 presidential election was by a margin of only 0.7 percent. There are ongoing trials against Lee too but they may not impact his viability as a candidate. Lee’s supporters view the prosecutions against him, which occurred after his 2022 defeat, as politically motivated. Yoon was a career prosecutor and prosecutor-general before running for the presidency in 2022. In this context, the public has seen Yoon as having the strong backing of prosecutors, to the punishment of his foes.
There are some potential presidential candidates, including Kim Moon-soo, the minister of Employment and Labor, within the PPP, but given the circumstances, their chances of success are slim. Kim is a frontrunner among the PPP’s presidential candidates but he is deemed a far-right extremist by the opposition, meaning his nomination as the PPP’s presidential candidate will make the special presidential election even more favorable for Lee to win.
Acting President Han Duck-soo said he will faithfully honor the public’s will and will do his best to manage the presidential election while reiterating the government’s “no tolerance” policy on those who commit violence in the wake of the ruling. However, as pro-Yoon supporters and far-right extremists have already indicated that they will not follow the verdict, the country’s polarization and division will likely be aggravated even, or especially, if Lee wins the upcoming election.