(The Korea Times): President Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment trial has concluded with the Constitutional Court's final argument. The court's decision will determine whether or not he will permanently leave office as a result of his proclamation of martial law on December 3.
On December 14, the National Assembly voted to fire him, and they have now carried out their decision 73 days later. "In simpler terms, he was placed on leave for the time when the House was in session to decide on the validity of the impeachment motion," according to Yoon's attorney.
According to Yoon's defense team, his imposition of martial law was a legitimate government action that did not violate the Constitution. They insisted that it was ever necessary and within the scope of his presidential authority as it occurred.
Attorneys representing Yoon and those of the National Assembly, also prosecution for the trial, presented their arguments during the final hearing.
Despite testimony from MPs and witnesses who said they were barred from accessing the National Assembly property on the night of the declaration of martial law, the defense denied claims that security agents had barricaded the area.
Yoon’s lawyers also questioned the reliability of a memo written by former National Intelligence Service (NIS) Deputy Director Hong Jang-won, which alleged that Yoon had ordered the arrest of key political figures.
On the other hand, the National Assembly’s impeachment panel accused Yoon of breaching the Constitution by declaring martial law without a national emergency and bypassing required procedures such as holding a Cabinet meeting and notifying the Assembly.
A lawyer representing the Assembly, Lee Kwang-beom, argued that Yoon had undermined the democratic and constitutional order that citizens had fought to protect. He claimed the president disregarded opposition voices, sought to eliminate political rivals, and was fixated on the idea that his party’s election loss was due to fraud.
Further irritating the prosecution was the fact that this kind of rallying for support was bound to heighten the political instability in the country. There would also be no assuring that the government would not impose martial law once more in case his reinstatement was successful.
Another attorney for the Assembly, Kim Nam-joon, emphasized how crucial the Constitutional Court is to maintaining democracy. He said he was confident the court, which was dedicated to upholding democratic values, would ultimately rule that Yoon should be removed from office.
About 200 of Yoon's followers demonstrated outside the courthouse, some brandishing placards that said "Stop the Steal," a reference to the deceptive allegations of electoral fraud made by former US President Donald Trump. Others had slogans such as "Freedom is Not Free."
Taking into account the timetables of previous impeachment proceedings, the Constitutional Court is anticipated to render its decision by the middle of March. In the trial of former President Roh Moo-hyun, the court issued its verdict 14 days after final arguments, while the decision in former President Park Geun-hye’s case came after 11 days.
If the court upholds the impeachment, a new presidential election must take place within 60 days to elect a successor.
Meanwhile, the court is also set to rule on the legality of acting President Choi Sang-mok’s decision to delay the appointment of a ninth justice to the Constitutional Court.
Choi had appointed two justices in December but postponed the appointment of Ma Eun-hyuk, who was nominated by the opposition, citing a lack of consensus between rival political parties.
The appointment of Ma would complete the panel of judges who will decide Yoon’s impeachment case.
According to legal requirements, at least six out of the nine justices must vote in favor of impeachment for it to be upheld. The addition of another justice could influence the outcome of the trial.
