South Korean President Survives Impeachment Attempt

Legislators in South Korea did not succeed in impeaching President Yoon Suk Yeol, following his brief declaration of martial law. A legislative measure to censure President Yoon Suk Yeol did not pass, missing the required 200 votes by five, as numerous members of the ruling People Power Party (PPP) in parliament abstained from the vote. The South Korean president generated considerable shock and public outrage on Tuesday when he announced military rule, a measure linked to authoritarianism in the nation, in an effort to resolve a political deadlock. Parliament promptly reversed President Yoon’s declaration, and his administration withdrew it several hours later amid significant public demonstrations. For the impeachment bill to pass, a two-thirds majority was required in the National Assembly, which would have necessitated at least eight People Power Party (PPP) Members of Parliament to vote in support. Nevertheless, all but three PPP MPs departed the chamber earlier on Saturday. Cho Kyung-tae, one of the departing lawmakers, stated that President Yoon’s apology for the martial law decree, issued on Saturday morning after three days out of public view, influenced his choice not to support impeachment at this juncture. He informed the BBC before the vote, “The president’s apology and his willingness to step down early, as well as delegating all political agendas to the party, did have an impact on my decision.” Cho expressed his belief that impeachment would transfer the presidency to Lee Jae-myung, the leader of the Democratic Party of Korea (DPK). He further commented that President Yoon’s “irrational and absurd decision” to declare martial law had “overshadowed” what he characterized as the DPK’s “many extreme actions” during its time in power. Lee Unjoo, a DPK lawmaker, conveyed to the BBC that she wept when PPP politicians exited. She stated, “We did know there was a possibility they might boycott the vote, but we didn’t believe they would actually go through with it when tens of thousands of citizens were watching right outside.” After Saturday’s vote, Lee asserted that his party “will not give up” its efforts to impeach President Yoon, whom he described as having become “the worst risk” to South Korea. He declared to a crowd assembled outside the parliament in Seoul, the capital, “We will definitely return this country to normal by Christmas and the end of the year.” Before Tuesday, martial law—defined as temporary governance by military authorities during an emergency, typically involving the curtailment of civil rights—had not been enacted in South Korea since before its transition to a parliamentary democracy in 1987. President Yoon asserted that these measures were necessary to overcome “anti-state forces” within parliament and referenced North Korea. However, others viewed the action as an extreme response to the political impasse that emerged after the DPK’s landslide victory in April, which had led to his government vetoing bills passed by the legislature, coupled with President Yoon’s growing unpopularity following a scandal involving the First Lady. The president’s address late at night led to dramatic events at the National Assembly, as numerous protesters arrived while military personnel tried to obstruct access to the building. Legislators engaged in confrontations with soldiers, with 190 Members of Parliament successfully entering the building to vote against the order. In the early hours of Wednesday morning, President Yoon’s cabinet officially withdrew the martial law declaration. Nevertheless, the brief military takeover has resulted in ongoing daily protests in the streets. While some individuals demonstrated in favor of President Yoon, their presence was overshadowed by larger, angry crowds. Authorities have subsequently disclosed additional details regarding the events of Tuesday night. The commander responsible for the military takeover stated that he became aware of the decree via television, simultaneously with the rest of the nation. He reported that he declined to order his troops to arrest lawmakers inside parliament and did not provide them with live ammunition. The National Intelligence Service subsequently corroborated rumors that President Yoon had commanded the arrest and interrogation of his political adversaries, and even some presumed political allies, including his own party leader, Han Dong-hoon. These disclosures prompted some members of President Yoon’s own party to indicate their backing for impeachment. President Yoon’s apology on Saturday morning seemed to be a final attempt to consolidate support. He stated that the martial law declaration was issued out of “desperation” and promised not to repeat such an action. President Yoon did not propose his resignation but indicated he would entrust decisions on national stabilization to his party. Should he face impeachment, such an event would not be without precedent. In 2016, then-President Park Geun-hye was impeached following accusations of assisting a friend in committing extortion. If the South Korean parliament approves an impeachment bill, a trial would be conducted by a constitutional court. A two-thirds majority of that court would be required to uphold the decision for his permanent removal from office.