Beginning last Thursday, South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol had multiple court appearances to defend himself and fight to stay in office. He is facing criminal charges of insurrection and obstruction of arrest, as well as impeachment charges. The main question at the heart of his charges is whether or not he violated the Constitution when he decreed martial law in December. A decision in these cases is not expected to be reached until March. 

Through this all, Yoon, a member of the far-right People Power Party, continues to spread lies about his liberal opposition and claims of election fraud. His lawyers are claiming that his arrest was completely politically motivated. Specifically, they claimed that investigators were “warrant shopping.” Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, who briefly served as acting president but was later also impeached, appeared as a witness in court, saying that the liberal opposition did in fact disrupt state affairs, but that President Yoon may have violated the Constitution because he did not hold a Cabinet meeting to discuss the action of declaring martial law. The prosecution argues that Yoon’s declaration of martial law was an attempt to arrest political opposition and shut down the National Assembly for political gain.

South Korea is still in political turmoil from the martial law decree two months ago. The indictment of President Yoon was essential for restoring the precedent that politicians are not above the law, and that they serve the people, not their political party. There has been both outcry and support of the indictment, so regardless outcome of the trial, there will inevitably be a group of people who are upset. Because of this, it is best for members of President Yoon’s party to admit to his wrongdoing, like they did when they opposed the martial law declaration. Additionally, further cooperation between the liberals and the far right is necessary to ensure peace and stability moving forward, and not further divide the country.

President Yoon declared martial law on December 3rd, citing legislative concerns and saying that the opposition was conducting “anti-state activities” and speaking with “North Korean communists.” The decree lasted less than 24 hours, as the National Assembly voted to end the decree the morning of December 4th. President Yoon apologized for his actions but defended them by saying he was protecting the citizens of South Korea. The National Assembly voted to impeach him on December 14th, which suspended Yoon from his duties, and he was later arrested on January 15th. Article 77 of the South Korean Constitution says that “the president has the authority to declare martial law in times of war, armed conflict, or similar national emergencies,” none of which seem to justify Yoon’s decision. Allowing President Yoon to commit this action without consequence would set a dangerous precedent that could be used in the future to erode democracy and eliminate opposition. 

If President Yoon is indicted, a new presidential election will be held within 60 days. It is essential that declaring national emergencies solely on politically motivated reasons is condemned and followed with consequences. No matter the outcome of the trials, South Korea needs to focus on inter-party cooperation to reach peace and stability and reassure their citizens that their democracy will hold strong.