South Korea’s President yoon Suk Yeol was notably absent from the first session of his impeachment trial at the Constitutional Court. The proceedings, which lasted a mere four minutes, were marked by the president’s non-attendance, as reported by Yonhap adn Reuters on Tuesday, January 14, 2025.
The court swiftly moved forward, scheduling the next hearing for Thursday, January 16. During the initial session, the judges unanimously dismissed a request from Yoon’s legal team to exclude one of the eight constitutional judges, Chung Kye Sun, from the trial. The defense argued that Chung’s past leadership at a progressive legal research institute could compromise the fairness of the proceedings.
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
Acting President of the Constitutional Court, Moon Hyung Bae, emphasized that the trial would proceed regardless of Yoon’s presence.”The court will proceed with the impeachment trial regardless of whether Yoon will attend or not,” he stated, citing relevant legal rules.
Outside the court, Yoon Kab Keun, one of Yoon’s lawyers, indicated that the president would decide on his attendance for the next hearing after finalizing his defense strategy. “He will decide whether to appear in person at the next trial after discussing his defense strategy,” Yoon Kab Keun told reporters.
Yoon’s legal team had previously cited concerns over his personal safety as the reason for his absence from the initial hearing. Investigators’ efforts to arrest him in connection with a military emergency examination were reportedly a significant factor in this decision.
Yoon Impeached
|
Photo: Yoon Suk Yeol (Reuters doc).
|
Yoon Suk Yeol, the embattled former president of South Korea, has found himself at the center of a political storm. His lawyer recently claimed that attempts to arrest Yoon have hindered his ability to present his side of the story in court. “The arrest attempt has prevented my client from expressing his position in the trial,” the lawyer stated.
Since his impeachment by the South Korean parliament, Yoon has remained largely out of the public eye. He is currently residing in the presidential residence in Seoul,where he has reportedly avoided appearing for questioning three times. The investigation revolves around allegations of rebellion and abuse of power tied to his controversial declaration of martial law.
The first trial, held on Tuesday, January 14, marked exactly one month as Yoon’s impeachment. The parliament’s unanimous decision came in response to the brief imposition of martial law on December 3, an act that plunged the nation into its most severe political turmoil in decades.
The Constitutional Court now has 180 days to determine whether to uphold or overturn Yoon’s impeachment. If the court rules in favor of upholding the impeachment,Yoon will be formally removed from office,triggering a snap presidential election within 60 days of the verdict. Conversely, if the impeachment is rejected, Yoon will be reinstated as South Korea’s president.
Watch the Video: Supporters Block Road to South Korean Presidential Palace, Warning the Arrival of Investigators
Page 2 of 2
(w/print)
What are some of the key reasons why this impeachment trial is considered historic for South korea and global politics?
Interview with Dr. Min-Jae Kim, Constitutional law Expert, on the Impeachment Trial of President Yoon Suk yeol
Archyde News Editor: Good afternoon, Dr.kim. Thank you for joining us today to discuss the ongoing impeachment trial of South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol. The trial has garnered significant attention, especially given the president’s absence from the frist session. Can you provide some context on why this trial is so historic?
Dr. Min-Jae Kim: Thank you for having me.This trial is indeed historic for several reasons. First, it marks the first time in over four decades that a south Korean president has faced impeachment proceedings. the last time was in 2004, when President Roh Moo-hyun was impeached, tho he was later reinstated. second, the allegations against President Yoon—specifically, his attempt to impose martial law—are unprecedented in modern South Korean history. This raises serious constitutional questions about the limits of presidential power and the role of the judiciary in checking executive overreach.
Archyde News Editor: President yoon was notably absent from the first session of the trial. His legal team cited concerns over his personal safety as the reason. what are your thoughts on this decision?
Dr. Min-Jae Kim: the absence of a sitting president from an impeachment trial is highly unusual and raises questions about the optics of the situation. while concerns over personal safety are valid, especially given the polarized political climate in South Korea, the president’s absence could be interpreted as a lack of respect for the judicial process. The Constitutional Court has made it clear that the trial will proceed nonetheless of his attendance, which underscores the principle that no one is above the law, not even the president.
Archyde News Editor: During the first session, the court dismissed a request from Yoon’s legal team to exclude Judge Chung Kye Sun, citing potential bias due to her past leadership at a progressive legal research institute. How significant is this decision?
Dr. Min-Jae Kim: This decision is significant because it reinforces the independence of the judiciary. The court’s unanimous dismissal of the request sends a strong message that judges are expected to act impartially, regardless of their personal or professional backgrounds. It also highlights the high threshold for recusal in such cases. The defense would need to provide concrete evidence of bias, not just speculative concerns, to have a judge removed from the bench.
Archyde News Editor: Acting President of the Constitutional Court, Moon Hyung Bae, stated that the trial would proceed regardless of Yoon’s presence. What does this tell us about the court’s approach to this case?
Dr. min-Jae Kim: This statement reflects the court’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring that the impeachment process is not derailed by procedural delays or political maneuvering. The court is clearly prioritizing the integrity of the judicial process over the personal circumstances of the defendant. This is crucial in maintaining public trust in the judiciary, especially in a case with such high stakes.
Archyde news Editor: Yoon’s legal team has indicated that he will decide on his attendance for the next hearing after finalizing his defense strategy. What factors do you think will influence this decision?
Dr. Min-Jae Kim: Several factors will likely come into play. First, the legal team will weigh the potential benefits of Yoon’s presence—such as demonstrating accountability and openness—against the risks, including security concerns and the possibility of his statements being used against him. Second, they will consider the political implications. If Yoon attends, it could be seen as a sign of confidence in his defense. If he doesn’t, it could further fuel criticism that he is avoiding accountability.
Archyde News Editor: what do you think the outcome of this trial could mean for South Korea’s political landscape?
Dr. Min-Jae kim: The outcome of this trial will have far-reaching implications. If Yoon is removed from office, it could lead to a significant shift in South Korea’s political dynamics, potentially paving the way for a new governance with a diffrent policy agenda. On the other hand, if he is acquitted, it could embolden his administration and reinforce the powers of the presidency. Regardless of the outcome,this trial is a critical test for South Korea’s democratic institutions and their ability to hold leaders accountable.
Archyde News Editor: Thank you, Dr.Kim, for your insightful analysis. We’ll be closely following the developments in this historic trial.
Dr. Min-Jae Kim: Thank you. It’s a pivotal moment for South Korea, and I look forward to seeing how the judiciary navigates this complex and unprecedented case.
