Yoon Suk Yeol, the leader of South Korea, is at a crucial turning point. His death now rests with the Constitutional Court, which was defeated by congress on December 14. Yoon may be removed from office if six of the panel’s eight members vote to support the movement.
Yoon is also the subject of growing inquiries into rebellion allegations, which are a local laws offense that is punishable by life in prison or death. For the first time in its story, a judge issued an arrest warrant for a sitting president on New Year’s Eve in a serious turn of events.
Amid looming difficulties, but, pro-Yoon conservatives in South Korea remain strong. They contend that the mayor’s declaration of martial law was both appropriate and appropriate. For months, hundreds of thousands of Yoon’s followers have gathered in Seoul, denouncing the senate as illegal.
In an interview with Asia Times, Kang Yong-seok, an attorney and popular right-wing critic, offered his view on the latest improvements. A former legislator, Kang has been acoustic in shaping and solidifying the pro-Yoon station from the outside. His two YouTube programs boast over 900, 000 members.
On December 31 a judge granted Yoon’s arrest permit. What are your ideas?
The permit is evidently unconstitutional. Standing presidents are exempt from criminal prosecution under the South Korean Constitution, aside from rebellion and international aggression-inciting situations. The investigative body that issued the warrant, the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials ( CIO ), has no authority to rule in this case.
Thus, the CIO expanded its investigation into Yoon’s abuse of power by framing the insurrection claim as a natural transition of the case. For legal excess, if permitted, had position virtually no limits on the CIO’s power. Any analysis or proof gathered under an unlawful warrant would eventually be declared illegal.
Another important point is the CIO’s” determine shopping” to maintain a favorable decision. Prosecutors in South Korea frequently have prior knowledge of the permit courts ‘ decisions that will be decided on particular dates. The Seoul Central District Court is supposed to issue a warrant to the CIO, but when they discovered a prosecutor there was anxious to grant their legal expansion, they moved to the Western District Court, where they had a more accommodating determine.
Surprised by the judge it, the judge reinterpreted existing legal laws to issue a warrant for President Yoon. The parties responsible for issuing and approving this unlawful permit will be held accountable in due course.
Was Yoon’s December 3 military rules order justified?
Issuing military law falls squarely within the government’s power, and the correct methods have been followed in its application. What is really undermining the working of congress, however, is the majority-opposition Democratic Party’s actions—cutting crucial state money while increasing their own salaries, filing 22 impeachment motions against state officials, prosecutors, and Yoon’s allies, and passing bills formally with little oversight. Such shenanigans seem less like leadership and more like a protracted rant over Lee Jae-myung’s battle in the presidential election.
Does Yoon’s actions amount to rebellion?
The major legal argument will be whether President Yoon declared martial law to destroy, through power, position organs–in this case, the National Assembly or parliament.
To convict President Yoon of spearheading an insurrection, investigators must demonstrate that he had the “purpose” of overthrowing the National Assembly and that a “riot” occurred in the process. So far, there is no indication of either. The president’s decree was also immediately voided after the parliament decided to override it, further demonstrating a lack of intention.
It’s extremely difficult to obtain a conviction for insurrection. Lee Seok-ki, a former leftist lawmaker who was found guilty of plotting a rebellion to overthrow the South Korean government during a potential conflict with North Korea, was not found guilty of insurrection.
According to some testimony, Yoon has instructed the military to “neutralize” the National Assembly.
Yes, but those claims are merely testimonies collected during the investigation. The president once made up rumors about him using a secure phone, which was referred to as” smoking gun” evidence, to communicate with military officials during the decree. No such phone has surfaced, and the media has quietly dropped that narrative. Additionally, it’s incredibly unlikely that no one ever recorded their conversation while speaking directly to the president.
If you remember, in early December, Hong Jang-won, the first director of the National Intelligence Service, claimed that the president personally called him with a list of arrests during martial law. Yet, those claims have mysteriously vanished.
The special warfare commander who made a number of revelations on the Democratic Party’s YouTube channel for the opposition has also now stopped speaking. Those who had been so vocal before suddenly became tight-lipped once the official investigation began and arrests were made.
The media appears to be now grasping onto another allegedly smoking gun, a pocketbook that is allegedly owned by former head of defense intelligence Noh Sang-won. But what is a diary, if not a collection of personal musings, unverified and limited to one’s perspective?
Similar circumstances developed during former president Park Geun-hye’s impeachment when a diary kept by senior Blue House official Ahn Jong-bum was presented as crucial evidence of a civilian meddling in state affairs. Later, the courts rejected the diary and held it to be circumstantial at best. Frankly, I’d argue diaries don’t even qualify as credible circumstantial evidence.
Will the Constitutional Court uphold the impeachment?
I highly doubt it. Although we’d like to think that courts are largely independent of politics and public opinion, they are not, and the Constitutional Court is no exception. In recent weeks, Yoon’s approval ratings have increased, with more conservative supporters pushing to overturn his impeachment, a trend that judges are undoubtedly aware of.
More importantly, the charge of insurrection is far-fetched, and Yoon’s martial law declaration does not constitute an egregious violation of the Constitution–in other words, an impeachable offense.
The pro-Yoon rally is getting bigger by the day. Why?
One of the most important things is that conservative camp factions have put their differences aside to prevent Park Geun-hye from getting the same fate as President Yoon. Many people are strong and unyielding without engaging in combative combat.
Pastor Jeon Kwang-hoon’s role, of course, is central to forming a unified front in the streets. In the same way, conservative pundits and YouTubers have momentarily put their differences aside to work together for a greater cause.
Last weekend, for instance, over 500, 000 rallygoers gathered in Gwanghwamun Square to show their backing for Yoon. Legislators like Yoon Sang-hyun and Kim Min-jeon have taken notice of this sluggish movement, according to the ruling People’s Party.
This momentum should be maintaining, in my opinion.