Published : Feb. 14, 2017 - 18:23
At the presidential impeachment trial Tuesday, the Constitutional Court accepted a set of transcripts of controversial audio files as evidence, which the parliament sees as possible proof of President Park Geun-hye’s overreliance on her confidante Choi Soon-sil in state affairs.
During the 13th hearing, the court accepted the request by the parliament’s defense team to recognize the 29 transcripts of audio files as valid evidence.
The transcripts could indicate President Park’s involvement in illicit fundraising for the K-Sports Foundation and her reliance on her friend Choi in drafting presidential speeches, a key reason behind Park’s impeachment.
“(The) VIP (believed to be a reference to President Park) cannot do anything without this person (Choi), even a single decision. A letter, a word in presidential speeches should be revised here, even very late at night,” Ko was heard saying to an acquaintance in one of the files.
Choi Soon-sil
The files are part of some 2,300 audio files, submitted by the prosecution last week, containing recorded phone conversations between Ko Young-tae, Choi’s now-estranged associate, and other officials tied to the K-Sports Foundation.
But in the very files, Ko reportedly can be heard plotting to “dominate” the K-Sports Foundation, a nonprofit entity Choi allegedly controlled, to derive personal profits, which Park’s lawyers claim could prove the president’s innocence.
Park’s lawyers say the recorded conversation shows the president was wrongly framed in a scheme set up by Ko, who held a grudge against Choi and Park after failing to capitalize on Choi’s ties to the president.
They told reporters that they are still reviewing the voice recordings. They plan to ask the court to adopt some of them as evidence and hold hearings to verify the audio files in the courtroom.
The Constitutional Court cancelled the questions of the two witnesses who failed to show up and rejected the request by the president’s defense team to bring in two more witnesses, which seems to show the court’s strong determination not to be influenced by President Park’s apparent delaying tactic.
“What you want to ask the witnesses can be learned through the records, statements and testimonies we adopted as evidence. We cancel the decision to summon the witnesses,” acting Chief Justice Lee Jung-mi said, boosting the speculation that the ruling on Park’s impeachment will be made before the justice’s term ends on March 13.
President Park has been criticized for attempting to delay the court proceedings by requesting a long list of witnesses in what critics see as a key tactic to sway the ruling in her favor.
Many of the witnesses Park‘s lawyers have asked for so far have refused to appear, forcing the court to reschedule the hearings and push back the proceedings. Six of eight witnesses scheduled to testify this week are expected to skip the session.
Tuesday’s hearing in the morning lasted only 20 minutes, as Ahn Bong-geun, a close ex-presidential secretary to President Park, did not turn up. Instead of adjusting the schedule to call him in again, legal representatives of the parliament and president agreed to cross him off the witness list.
During the hearing, Park’s lawyer Lee Dong-heup, who joined the defense team a day earlier, called the parliament’s passage of the impeachment motion “unreasonable and hasty,” saying it lacked sufficient investigation and evidence.
“To expel the president, there should be betrayal of public trust and violation of law from the perspective of protecting the Constitution,” Lee said who previously served as a justice at the Constitutional Court.
“As long as her acceptance of bribery is not established, it is difficult for bribery to be a factor to expel the president,” he said, highlighting that Park has yet to be indicted and an arrest warrant for Samsung Group’s de facto chief Lee Jae-yong was rejected by a lower court.
“She deserves to be blamed for failing to remove those pursuing personal benefits by clinging to the powerful, but it is not enough to remove the president, whose term is guaranteed under the Constitution, from office.”
By Ock Hyun-ju (laeticia.ock@heraldcorp.com)