The impeachment trial of South Korea’s President Yoon Suk Yeol has begun, with the Constitutional Court deciding whether to strip him of his presidential duties over a failed martial law bid. Yoon’s December 3 power grab plunged South Korea into its worst political crisis in decades, after he directed soldiers to storm parliament in an unsuccessful attempt to stop lawmakers voting down his suspension of civilian rule. Yoon was impeached soon after and suspended from duty, but has gone to ground in his residence since, refusing summonses from investigators probing him on insurrection charges and using his presidential security team to resist arrest.
The trial’s first of five hearings began at 2:00 pm (0500 GMT) but lasted just minutes with Yoon not in attendance. The following sessions will take place on January 16, 21, 23, and February 4. Lawmakers also impeached Yoon’s stand-in last month, putting the country in further political instability. The court’s eight judges will decide mainly two issues, whether Yoon’s martial law declaration was unconstitutional and if it was illegal. Yoon’s legal team said he would not appear at the first hearing over purported safety concerns, saying he would be willing to appear at a later date if security issues were ironed out. The trial can continue from the second hearing in his absence if he does not appear.
Source : Yasuyoshi Chiba/AFP/Getty Images
A parallel criminal inquiry is underway, with a joint team of investigators from the Corruption Investigation Office (CIO) and police preparing a fresh attempt to arrest Yoon. If the new warrant is executed successfully, Yoon would become the first sitting South Korean president to be arrested. If eventually convicted, Yoon faces prison or even the death penalty.
As media speculation rose that the second attempt would take place this week, the police, CIO, and Yoon’s presidential security service met to discuss the arrest warrant. Police are also reportedly preparing 1,000 investigators for the fresh attempt. Yoon’s legal team has sought to put pressure on police to avoid being involved in the arrest attempt, claiming officers would be in violation of multiple laws if they cooperated with investigators.
