South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol lost his presidential immunity after being dismissed from office on April 4th for violating the constitutional powers of his office by the Constitutional Court of Korea. Although Yoon still enjoyed immunity from prosecution after his suspension as head of state, this rule did not apply to charges of sedition or high treason. Therefore, investigations into Yoon for these two charges were already initiated last year.
Before the Constitutional Court concluded the impeachment hearings on February 25th, Yoon said that his decision to declare martial law was an appeal to the people to resist state enemies and sympathizers of the Democratic Workers’ Party of Korea (DPRK) in the opposition. Yoon stated that he did not intend to keep martial law in place permanently but wanted to raise the alarm. According to Yoon, the opposition Democratic Party abused their parliamentary majority. He accused the opposition of sympathizing with the DPRK and preparing a rebellion.
This week, the trial against the deposed former president began. On Monday, Yoon Suk-yeol appeared before the central district court of Seoul. Yoon is accused of instigating an uprising by declaring martial law on December 3rd, 2024, during which troops were sent to the National Assembly to prevent lawmakers from voting on Yoon’s decree.
At the beginning of the first court hearing, the prosecution stated that Yoon lacked legal grounds for declaring martial law and accused him of wanting to paralyze state institutions like the parliament. Yoon, who was the country’s chief prosecutor before becoming president, rejected the prosecution’s allegations. “The indictment merely lists the details of the investigation during the period between 22:30 on December 3rd and 2 to 3 a.m. the following morning” said Yoon, after the prosecution presented a summary of their charges.
According to Yoon, it goes against legal principles to construct a case of sedition based on an indictment that looks like “a printout of an incident.” The martial law “only existed for a few hours and was immediately withdrawn” after the parliament demanded its repeal, Yoon added.
However, the prosecution claims that despite the preparations of the president for declaring martial law, he intended to “ignite an uprising” to “undermine the constitution.” “Martial law is not a coup” Yoon continued. “This was a peaceful ‘message of martial law’ to the nation. I knew that this martial law would end within half a day, one day.”
Yoon said that he had indeed informed former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun of his intentions. However, the military officials who carried out the order obviously went too far, as they were used to training according to other guidelines for martial law.
The prosecution alleges that Yoon appointed former National Security Service Chief Kim Yong-hyun as Defense Minister in early September 2024, almost three months before declaring martial law, to prepare for it. However, the former president denied this accusation and claimed that the government must always be prepared for martial law. “That is why there is a division at the heads of the South Korean general staff that deals with martial law. They conduct exercises to declare martial law in case of a possible national emergency” Yoon explained.
In the afternoon, two high-ranking officers appeared as witnesses in court. Both testified that they received orders from their superior officer to send troops to “pull out” lawmakers from the parliament during Yoon’s martial law. Yoon also denied this accusation and stated that he did not issue such an order.
Due to the severity of the charge, he faces additional punishments of the death penalty or life imprisonment. However, South Korea has not executed anyone since 1997.
The attempt to declare martial law, which lasted about six hours before Yoon withdrew it due to protests, led to the most severe constitutional crisis in South Korea in decades. On June 3rd, early presidential elections will be held in the East Asian country.