With South Korea in Crisis, Eight judges will decide the fate of the president

For six weeks, South Korea has been going through its worst political crisis in decades, calling into question the resilience of the country’s democracy. On Tuesday, it takes the biggest step towards a resolution, when the Constitutional Court begins the deliberation to remove or reinstate the impeached president of the country.

The eight judges on the court will be the final arbiters on the fate of President Yoon Suk Yeol, who was accused and suspended from office on December 14 by the National Assembly for his recent statement martial law 11 days before.

The stakes are high. Rival citizen groups have been rallying for weeks, some in court, both calling for Mr. Yoon’s ouster and demanding his return to office. Hardliners on both sides have warned of “civil war” if the court does not rule in their favor.

If Mr. Yoon is removed, it will be another crushing blow to the country’s conservative camp: he will be the third conservative president in a row to be ousted, jailed, or both before or after the end of his term.

But if the deeply unpopular leader is allowed to return to office, it could set a precedent for future leaders to use martial law as a political tool, said Ha Sang-eung, a political science professor at Sogang University. in Seoul.

“I wonder what other democracies around the world think about what’s happening in South Korea,” Mr. Ha said.

Mr. Yoon promised to win at the Constitutional Court. But his lawyers said he would not attend the first hearing on Tuesday, citing fears that criminal investigators could try to arrest him for questioning on sedition charges if he leaves. his fortified residence in downtown Seoul. His absence is expected to cut short Tuesday’s hearing. But the court can proceed with its deliberations from the second hearing, set for Thursday – with or without him.

“President Yoon will defend himself in court as often as necessary,” said his lawyer, Yoon Kab-keun.

Mr. Yoon’s martial law it only lasted six hours after being voted down by MPs in the opposition-led National Assembly. But his attempt to bring South Korea under military rule for the first time in four decades has sparked prolonged political uncertainty in a key US ally, which has expressed concern about Mr Yoon’s move.

As Mr Yoon faces a parallel criminal investigation on charges of insurrection, attention to resolving his presidency now turns to the Constitutional Court: its decision could help dispel some of that uncertainty, or it could add to the turmoil if his decision angers the public. .

As the country’s political polarization has deepened in recent years, the court has dealt with an increasing number of cases only it can resolve: officials, prosecutors and judges impeached by the National Assembly. Mr. Yoon is the third South Korean president in the past two decades to be impeached.

In 2004, President Roh Moo-hyun was impeached by the National Assembly for violating the election law, but was taken back by the courtwho ruled that his offense was not serious enough. In 2017, the court removed Park Geun-hyeanother president impeached, for corruption and abuse of power.

“When the country is adrift without a skipper or without knowing who is the boss, the Constitutional Court will put it back on track,” said Jung Ji Ung, a lawyer and president of a bar association for Gyeonggi, the populous province that surrounds Seoul.

South Korea has a separate Supreme Court, but created the Constitutional Court in 1987 as the ultimate interpreter of its Constitution. Located in Seoul’s quiet old city, the court has often attracted rival activists who hold banners and loudspeakers as it approaches historic verdicts.

In 2005, it abolished a centuries-old practice of allowing children to adopt only the father’s family name. In 2009, he voted against a ban on night-time protests, allowing citizens to gather after hours to voice their grievances, as in recent months for and against Mr. Yoon. In 2015, the court decriminalized adultery. In 2019, it is knocked down a 66-year-old law that made abortion a crime punishable by up to two years in prison.

As the number of impeachment cases grew, the court became more politically important and so did its nine judges, who each serve a six-year term. Three are chosen by the president, three by the chief justice of the Supreme Court and three by the political parties.

The current court has eight judges, and one vacancy. Two were chosen by Mr. Yoon and his party; three from the former and current supreme court; and three from Mr. Yoon’s predecessor, Moon Jae-in, and his Democratic Party, the current opposition.

Mr. Yoon can be removed from office if six or more justices agree that he should be, but he may not be able to rely on partisanship in the court to save him. In the past, justices have not always voted based on who supported their appointments: The court unanimously decided to remove Ms. Park, even though some of them had been nominated by her party.

The court’s decision will depend on the seriousness of any constitutional and legal offenses found to have been committed by Mr. Yoon, said Bang Seung-Ju, a professor at Hanyang University Law School in Seoul. He will also weigh whether a decision not to expel him will have a greater disadvantage for the constitutional order and the national interest than his removal, such as to promote political instability, he said.

Prosecutors at the court are appointed by the National Assembly and say that Mr. Yoon committed insurrection when he sent armed troops into the Assembly, ordering them to take over parliament and detain his political enemies. Since taking office in 2022, Mr. Yoon has been locked in a clash with the National Assembly, which he called “a den of criminals” when justifying his martial law decree.

Mr. Yoon also violated the Constitution by banning all political activities and placing the news media under military control, prosecutors said.

State prosecutors have already arrested a former defense minister and several military generals accused of helping Mr. Yoon stage an uprising. Mr. Yoon ordered the generals to break down the doors to the National Assembly, “shoot if necessary,” and “drag out” lawmakers, prosecutors said.

Mr Yoon Kab-keun, the president’s lawyer, called these testimonies “corrupt”.

But legal analysts, including Noh Hee-bum, a former research judge at the Constitutional Court, expect the court to remove Mr. Yoon in early February, to help ease the country’s political uncertainty and because there is enough evidence against him.

“It’s a matter of time,” said Mr Noh.