South Korea

Impeachment in the Name of Democracy

South Korea´s Constitutional Court has removed suspended President Yoon Suk-Yeol from his office. All judges unanimously upheld the impeachment by parliament. New elections must now be held within the next 60 days.

The process took longer than expected. Observers suspected deep divisions among the judges. The clear verdict refuted these speculations. It could contribute to moderation in an increasingly polarized political landscape. In recent months, tens of thousands of demonstrators from both political camps had regularly gathered in the capital, Seoul. One side demanded the president's impeachment, while the other side called for Yoon's return to the presidential office. The ruling is a clear defeat for Yoon and his supporters.

Extreme Polarization

Constitutional Court Chief Justice Moon Hyung-Bae said Yoon's declaration of martial law in December was unconstitutional because there was no serious national crisis. Yoon had disregarded the rights of lawmakers and violated his duties as commander-in-chief of the armed forces. This was a “serious breach of trust.”

On December 4th late in the evening, President Yoon had unexpectedly declared martial law. Yoon claimed that he had to protect the country from North Korean and “anti-state” groups. He had parliament sealed off by a special force unit. Thousands of people immediately took to the streets to protest. Despite military resistance, members of parliament – including some from Yoon's own conservative People Power Party (PPP) – gained access to parliament. They passed a resolution to lift martial law. This decisive reaction by civil society and parliament shows how deeply democratic values are rooted in South Korea almost 40 years after the end of military dictatorship.

The ruling of the Constitutional Court proves that South Korea's institutions are resilient despite a tense situation. The rule of law had come under pressure in recent weeks. Yoon made unsubstantiated accusations against the electoral commission and had his armed presidential guard protect him against arrest. Political and institutional chaos ensued.

The Swedish think tank Varieties of Democracy Institute downgraded South Korea from a liberal democracy to an electoral democracy. While electoral democracies guarantee free elections, liberal democracies also protect civil liberties and control the executive through independent institutions. The Economist Intelligence Unit's Democracy Index recorded South Korea´s crash from 22nd place to 32nd place. Both downgrades must now be reconsidered.

Dangerous Conspiracy Theories

In view of Yoon's radical approach and his conspiracy theories, even conservative media distanced themselves from him. Extremist YouTube channels and evangelical preachers, on the other hand, continued to spread his theories. As a result, Yoon mobilized an arch-conservative base, a small minority of whom resorted to violence. In January, some of his supporters destroyed a courthouse in Seoul in anger at the judiciary.

In the run-up to the Constitutional Court ruling, radical supporters of Yoon had called for violence in case the ruling went against him. Evangelical pastor Jeon Kwang-hoon threatened: “And if the Constitutional Court tries to do something wrong? In the name of the people's right to resist, I will blow it away with a sword.”

So far, there have been no riots following the ruling of the Constitutional Court. However, the ruling does not end the drama surrounding martial law. Criminal proceedings against Yoon for high treason ongoing. These proceedings start on April 14th and are likely to influence the election campaign.

Bitter Dispute Between The Parties

How Yoon's party positions itself will be of great importance. The conservative PPP stems from the elite power structures of the dictatorship. Many of its leading figures had ties to the former military regime. The progressive Democratic Party Korea (DPK), on the other hand, has its roots in the pro-democratic and civil rights movements of the 1980s.

The rifts between the two political camps are deep. Each party expects unconditional loyalty from its members. Yoon has used this unconditional, internal party unity to rally his party behind him in recent months. His defeat at the Constitutional Court should make it easier for the conservatives to distance themselves from Yoon and field a moderate candidate in the upcoming presidential election. The PPP has declared that it will accept the court-ruling.

Necessary Change On Both Sides

The Democratic Party of Korea also needs to take a long, hard look at itself. It used its parliamentary majority to push its power to the limit and showed little interest in compromise. During Yoon's term in office, the DPK initiated around 30 impeachment proceedings – all of which were unsuccessful. This confrontational attitude contributed to the escalation that ultimately culminated in Yoon's martial law. The Constitutional Court also criticized the opposition's rigorous policies. It is the task of parliament “to reach decisions through dialogue and compromise,” said the judges.

The DPK is expected to field their party leader Lee Jae-Myung as candidate for President. In recent weeks, he has tried to appeal to moderate voters with moderate economic and foreign policy stands. An election campaign that targets the political center could help cool the heated climate.

A recent, historic decision by parliament also gives cause for hope. In March, members of parliament across the aisle passed sweeping pension reforms, the first in 18 years. This rare unity in the face of the urgent problem of depleted pension coffers and the rapid aging of South Korea´s society shows that pragmatic solutions are still possible in Seoul.

*Frederic Spohr is the Head of the Korea office of the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom in Seoul.