Court Upholds Impeachment of President Yoon Suk Yeol
In a landmark decision, South Korea’s Constitutional Court unanimously upheld the National Assembly’s impeachment of President Yoon Suk Yeol, ruling that his declaration of martial law and subsequent actions violated the country’s constitution and democratic values.
Yoon becomes the second president in South Korea’s history to be removed from office through impeachment. The ruling closes a turbulent chapter in South Korean politics that began in December when Yoon briefly declared martial law and deployed military forces to occupy the National Assembly building.
Martial Law Sparked Constitutional Crisis
The political crisis began on December 3, when President Yoon delivered a surprise address announcing martial law. Although the order lasted only six hours, it marked the first time a sitting South Korean president used military force to intervene in government operations.
The court found that Yoon’s justification—that the opposition-controlled legislature had paralyzed his administration—did not meet constitutional standards for invoking martial law. Judges emphasized that political deadlock must be resolved through democratic means, not military intervention.
Court Cites Constitutional Violations
According to the court’s ruling, Yoon’s actions included:
- Deploying special forces to block and enter the National Assembly
- Attempting to detain members of the National Election Commission
- Plotting the arrest of former judges
- Banning political activity under martial law
These actions were ruled to have “violated the rule of law and the constitutional order,” presenting a serious threat to the democratic structure of the republic.
Public Response to the Verdict
Large crowds gathered outside the court during the verdict’s announcement. Supporters of the impeachment cheered at each finding against Yoon, with many reacting emotionally to the final decision removing him from office.
One protester, a university student who had traveled regularly to Seoul to demonstrate, described the ruling as both a relief and a hopeful turning point for the country.
Meanwhile, some of Yoon’s supporters expressed disappointment and concern about the country’s direction. Former military personnel and others sympathetic to the ousted president described the court’s decision as a failure to uphold national security.
Political Fallout and Next Steps
A snap presidential election is scheduled within 60 days to elect Yoon’s successor. Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party and a key opposition figure, is widely viewed as the frontrunner. He has pledged to restore political stability and address economic concerns.
The ruling also opens the door to criminal proceedings against Yoon and several aides, with charges reportedly including insurrection and abuse of power.
As per South Korean law, Yoon will lose both his presidential pension and immunity from prosecution.
Legal and Political Legacy
Legal experts noted that the court’s decision sets a precedent in addressing the limits of executive authority. Former Constitutional Court judge Noh Hee Bum emphasized that even in times of crisis, martial law must not be used to bypass democratic institutions.
The case has drawn global attention, with comparisons made to political instability in other democracies. The Constitutional Court’s ruling is seen by many as a reaffirmation of the strength of South Korea’s democratic institutions.
