Explainer-South Korea’s Constitutional Court to decide fate of accused president By Reuters
Explainer-South Korea’s Constitutional Court to decide fate of accused president By Reuters


By Joyce Lee

SEOUL (Reuters) – South Korea’s Constitutional Court will hold its first hearing on Friday in the case of President Yoon Suk Yeol, after parliament ousted him over its brief martial law decree on Dec. 3.

Below are key issues for the future of South Korea.

WHAT NEXT?

After being indicted on December 14, Yoon’s presidential powers are suspended, but he remains in office and retains his immunity from most charges except those of insurrection or treason. Yoon-appointed Prime Minister Han Duck-soo is the acting president.

The Constitutional Court must decide within 180 days whether to remove Yoon from office or reject the impeachment and restore his powers. If the court removes Yoon or he resigns, presidential elections must be held within 60 days.

The court will hold its first preparatory hearing on Friday.

Opposition Democratic Party lawmaker Jung Chung-rae, head of parliament’s Legislation and Justice Committee, is leading the case to impeach Yoon.

Yoon’s legal counsel has not yet been announced, but his experience as a prosecutor has led to reports that he is turning to former colleagues or could even represent himself.

Kim Hong-il, a former prosecutor and former head of the broadcasting regulator during Yoon’s government, as well as former Constitutional Court spokesperson Bae Bo-yoon, are expected to join Yoon’s legal teams in the impeachment review. and in criminal investigations, local media reported. .

IMPEDIMENTS TO A JUDICIAL SENTENCE?

Under South Korea’s Constitution, six judges must reach a deal to overthrow an impeached president. The nine-member Constitutional Court now has three vacancies, so the current judges would have to vote unanimously to remove Yoon.

The Constitutional Court has said it can deliberate and hear arguments with only six justices.

The three vacancies are assigned to parliament to fill. The main opposition party, the Democratic Party, which has a majority in parliament, is seeking to fill the vacancies.

Parliament on Monday held a hearing for two potential candidates, which the ruling People’s Power Party boycotted, saying interim President Han has no right to appoint judges to the Constitutional Court.

There is precedent for a sitting president appointing a Constitutional Court judge, as occurred when former President Park Geun-hye was impeached in 2016-2017.

WHAT HAPPENS IN COURT?

In South Korea’s only previous presidential removal through impeachment, the court took three months to remove Park in 2017.

This time, the terms of two court judges expire in April, and legal experts predict the court could try to rule before then to minimize uncertainty.

In the past, scholars say, Constitutional Court justices did not vote predictably out of political inclination, but rather decided on a case-by-case basis, based on their interpretation of the constitution.

Conservative attempts to rally popular support for Yoon are not expected to affect the court’s ruling, as Park was removed from office despite continued conservative protests to keep her in power, facing candlelight demonstrations to remove her from power.

In the case of Park, who like Yoon belonged to a center-right party, the court voted unanimously to remove her, including some judges considered conservative and two judges appointed by Park.

Yoon also faces criminal investigations related to the martial law decision.

If he is accused, he could ask the Constitutional Court to suspend the 180-day period for the impeachment ruling. The court denied a similar request in Park’s case.

© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: Protesters attend a demonstration against South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, who declared martial law, which was revoked hours later, in Seoul, South Korea, December 21, 2024. REUTERS/Kim Soo-hyeon/File Photo

In 2004, then-President Roh Moo-hyun, of a center-left party, was accused of failing to maintain political neutrality as required of a senior public official.

The court rejected the motion after about two months and Roh served his five-year term.

By Admin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *