For six weeks, South Korea has stumbled through its worst political crisis in decades, calling into question the resilience of the country’s democracy. On Tuesday, the biggest step towards the dismissal will be taken, when the Constitutional Court will start discussing whether to remove or reinstate the impeached president of the country.
The court’s eight judges will be the final arbiters of the fate of President Yoon Suk Yeol, who was impeached and suspended by the National Assembly on Dec. 14 for his short-lived declaration of martial law 11 days earlier.
The stakes are high. Rival citizen groups have been gathering for weeks, some outside the courthouse, either calling for Mr. Yoon’s removal or demanding his return to office. Hardliners on both sides have warned of “civil war” if the court does not rule in their favor.
If Mr. If Yoon is ousted, it will be another blow to the country’s conservative camp: He will be the third conservative president in a row to be ousted, imprisoned, or both before or after his term ends.
But if the deeply unpopular leader is allowed to return to office, it could set a precedent for future leaders to use martial law as a political tool, said Ha Sang-eung, a political science professor at Sogang University in Seoul.
“I wonder what other democracies around the world would think of this happening in South Korea,” Mr. Ha said.
Mr. Yoon promised a triumph at the Constitutional Court. But his lawyers said he would not attend Tuesday’s first hearing, citing fears that criminal investigators might try to detain him for questioning on sedition charges if he leaves his fortified residence in central Seoul. His absence is expected to cut short Tuesday’s hearing. But the court can continue its deliberations from the second hearing, scheduled for Thursday – with or without him.
“President Yoon will defend himself in court as long as necessary,” said his lawyer Yoon Kab-keun.
Mr. Yoon’s state of emergency lasted just six hours after it was revoked by lawmakers in the opposition-led National Assembly. But his attempt to bring South Korea under military rule for the first time in four decades has sparked lingering political uncertainty in key ally the United States, which has expressed concern over Mr Yoon’s move.
While Mr. With Yoon facing a parallel criminal investigation on sedition charges, the focus for resolving the issue of his presidency now shifts to the Constitutional Court: his decision could help clear up that uncertainty, or could add to the uproar if his decision angers the public.
As political polarization in the country has deepened in recent years, the court has dealt with an increasing number of cases that only it can handle: officials, prosecutors and judges impeached by the National Assembly. Mr. Yoon is the third South Korean president in the past two decades to be impeached.
In 2004, the National Assembly impeached President Roh Moo-hyun for violating the election law, but the court reinstated him, ruling that his offense was not serious enough. In 2017, the court removed Park Geun-hye, another impeached president, for corruption and abuse of power.
“When a country floats without a captain or doesn’t know who the captain is, the Constitutional Court puts it back on track,” said Jung Ji Ung, a lawyer and president of the bar association for Gyeonggi, a populous province that surrounds Seoul.
South Korea has a separate Supreme Court, but in 1987 it established a Constitutional Court as the ultimate interpreter of its Constitution. Located in Seoul’s quiet old city, the court often attracted rival activists holding banners and loudspeakers as it neared historic verdicts.
In 2005, he abolished the centuries-old practice whereby children were allowed to take only their father’s surname. In 2009, it voted against a ban on night-time protest gatherings, allowing citizens to gather after hours to voice their displeasure, as they have done in recent months for and against Mr. Yoon. In 2015, the court decriminalized adultery. In 2019, it overturned a 66-year-old law that made abortion a crime punishable by up to two years in prison.
As the number of impeachment cases grows, the court becomes more politically important, and so do its nine judges, who each serve six-year terms. Three are chosen by the president, three by the chief justice of the Supreme Court and three by political parties.
The current court has eight judges, and one vacant seat. Two were chosen by Mr. Yoon and his gang; three by the former and current President of the Supreme Court; and Mr. Yoon’s three predecessors, Moon Jae-in, and his Democratic Party, the current opposition.
Mr. Yoon can be removed from office if six or more justices agree that he should be removed, but he may not be able to rely on the bias of the court to save him. In the past, justices have not always voted based on who supported their appointments: The court ruled unanimously to remove Ms. Park, although some were appointed by her or her party.
The court’s decision will depend on the severity of any constitutional and legal violations Mr. Yoon is found to have committed, said Bang Seung-Ju, a professor at Hanyang University Law School in Seoul. It will also be weighed whether the decision not to expel him would represent greater damage to the constitutional order and the national interest than his dismissal, for example by further strengthening political instability, he said.
The prosecutors of the court are appointed by the National Assembly and they say that Mr. Yoon committed rebellion when he sent armed troops into the Assembly, ordering them to occupy the parliament and imprison his political enemies. Since he took office in 2022, Mr. Yoon is at odds with the National Assembly, which he called a “den of criminals” when justifying his martial law decree.
Mr. Yoon also violated the Constitution by banning all political activity and placing the media under military control, prosecutors said.
State prosecutors have already arrested a former defense minister and several army generals on charges of aiding Mr. Yoon in the rebellion. Mr. Yoon ordered the generals to break down the doors of the National Assembly, “by shooting if necessary,” and “draw out” the lawmakers, prosecutors said.
Mr. Yoon Kab-keun, the president’s lawyer, called the testimony “corrupt.”
But legal analysts, including Noh Hee-bum, a former research judge at the Constitutional Court, expect the court to remove Mr. Yoon as early as February, to ease political uncertainty in the country and because there is enough evidence against him.
“It’s a matter of time,” Mr. Noh said.
