South Korea’s constitutional scholars called President Yoon Suk Yeol’s Dec. 3 martial law declaration “a pro-government coup attempt to strengthen his own power,” arguing that it violated the Constitution and the Martial Law Act.
Some 100 constitutional scholars, who formerly held positions at Constitution-related institutes or currently teach law at universities here, stressed the need to amend laws, including the Martial Law Act, and hold those responsible accountable to prevent similar incidents.
Kim Sun-taek, a professor of law at Korea University, referred to Yoon's Dec. 3 declaration as “an act by the president to undermine the constitutional order under the guise of ‘martial law,’" during a symposium held Wednesday afternoon on the theme of “Dec. 3 Martial Law Incident and Tasks for Restoring Democracy.”
“None of the procedural, formal or substantive requirements for emergency martial law, as outlined by the Constitution and the Martial Law Act, were met, making it ineligible to qualify as legitimate martial law,” Kim said, describing the incident as “a coup disguised as martial law.”
“(Through the martial law proclamation) President Yoon dreamed of dictatorship. … Dictatorship is the exact opposite of the liberal democratic system.”
While the impeachment of former President Park Geun-hye centered on a corruption scandal, Kim argued that Yoon’s case was a direct attack on the democratic system.
“(Yoon’s martial law attempt was) the first fundamental attack on Korean democracy and the constitutional system since the democratization of 1987.”
Yonsei University professor of law Lee Jong-soo echoed the view, calling the incident a “rebellion under the pretense of martial law” or a “pro-government coup.”’
Scholars also said the National Assembly’s withdrawal of the insurrection charge does not constitute a significant change to the grounds for impeachment.
They explained that Yoon’s team is using the question of whether the insurrection charge under criminal law applies as a strategy to delay the impeachment trial.
Sogang University Law School professor Im Ji-bong said, “Yoon’s side likely planned to focus their efforts on arguing that the charge of insurrection under criminal law does not hold up in the impeachment trial.”
He emphasized that the most important grounds for impeachment in Yoon’s case are “the substantive and procedural unconstitutionality of the emergency martial law declaration.”
Professor Kim Ha-yeol, who teaches law at Korea University and is a former director of the Constitutional Research Institute, stated that the constitutional court should focus its deliberations on violations of the Constitution and leave criminal law violations to other courts.
“The impeachment trial and criminal trial are separate procedures with distinct purposes and effects. … If the constitutional violation is serious enough to justify a decision for removal from office, there is no need to deliberate or rule on reasons for prosecution related to violations of criminal law,” Kim said.
The symposium also covered the historical significance of martial law, its unconstitutionality and illegality, and constitutional issues for democratic restoration.
Kwon Hyung-dun, a professor of law at Gongju National University, identified the root cause of the crisis as the inadequacies in the current constitutional system, which is unbalanced.
“There are no institutional safeguards requiring the president to adhere to democratic and legal principles under the sovereignty of the people. This flaw in the constitutional structure inevitably leads to presidential impeachment,” Kwon said.
ddd@heraldcorp.com
