Impeachment trial marred by flaws sparks calls to reopen

Mar 11, 2025, 10:02 am

		0
Source: Yonhap

AsiaToday reporters Kim Im-soo & Kim Chae-yeon

The Constitutional Court's impeachment trial to determine whether President Yoon Suk-yeol should be removed from office is now in a state of uncertainty, with only the verdict remaining. The court's decision to cancel President Yoon's detention last Friday, citing issues of "procedural legitimacy," appears to be influencing the Constitutional Court's deliberations. Both political and legal circles suggest that the Constitutional Court must address the numerous procedural flaws and questions that have persisted since the start of the impeachment trial to ensure the legitimacy of its ruling.

According to legal sources on Monday, the Constitutional Court held a comprehensive deliberation with its eight justices last Friday but failed to reach a final conclusion. As a result, this week's verdict remains uncertain. "It is a matter for the justices to decide," a Constitutional Court official stated, adding, "Discussions are ongoing."

Currently, it is difficult to predict whether the Constitutional Court will uphold or dismiss President Yoon's impeachment. However, there is a prevailing view that the court must first address the procedural legitimacy of the impeachment trial to ensure public acceptance of the outcome.

In this context, the court's decision to cancel President Yoon's detention has highlighted the importance of procedural legitimacy and the right to defense, casting a spotlight on the Constitutional Court's "hasty proceedings." The ruling party's calls for reopening the arguments are growing, and President Yoon's release is seen as influencing the court's deliberations.

In reviewing President Yoon's impeachment trial, several procedural flaws have been noted from the beginning. The Constitutional Court considered the impeachment trial documents delivered on January 20, only six days after receiving the impeachment request from the National Assembly on January 14, and set the first hearing for January 27. At that time, President Yoon had not yet formed a defense team and requested a change of date, which was denied. The court's refusal to change the date, despite the overlap with President Yoon's first trial preparation hearing for insurrection charges, led to controversy over the infringement of his right to defense.

Subsequently, the Constitutional Court's acceptance of the National Assembly's withdrawal of the insurrection charges, which were the basis for the impeachment, further fueled public distrust. The National Assembly had passed the impeachment motion, citing President Yoon's martial law declaration as insurrection, but later quietly withdrew the charge, which the court overlooked, sparking allegations of a "fraudulent impeachment."

During the hearings, the Constitutional Court's decision to accept the prosecution's investigation records (interrogation reports) related to martial law as evidence was also problematic. Despite the 2022 amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act, which disallows the admissibility of interrogation reports denied by the defendant or co-defendants, the court proceeded according to previous practices, ignoring the legislative intent. The court concluded the hearings on February 25 without sufficient verification, despite conflicting testimonies regarding the National Assembly blockade orders and the list of politicians to be arrested.

"The court's cancellation of President Yoon's detention will have an indirect impact on the impeachment trial," said Jang Young-soo, a professor at Korea University's School of Law. "The court decided that detention based on unjust procedures was wrong, which could lead to a conflict between the Constitutional Court and the court's judgments."

#Impeachment