As the Constitutional Court gears up for the impeachment trial of President Park Geun-hye, scholars, politicians and the media are revisiting the 2004 trial of late President Roh Moo-hyun for a hint of what is to come.  

It took 63 days for the top court to overturn Roh’s parliamentary impeachment, but opinions are split as to whether the upcoming trial of President Park will produce a similar result or take a similar amount of time. Pundits seem to agree on one thing at least.

The cases of Roh and Park have two significant differences that could lead to a different outcome: public sentiment and charges brought against the president. 

Public sentiment

When the National Assembly impeached President Roh in 2004, the lawmakers who had pushed for it faced fierce public backlash. Candlelight vigils were held to salvage the embattled liberal leader and denounce “arrogant” lawmakers who had impeached Roh for a “trivial” controversy. The cumulative participation in the pro-Roh rallies was over 1 million.

Roh was impeached for remarks he had made at a press conference two months before a parliamentary election: “I expect voters to overwhelmingly support (the pro-government) Uri Party. … If any good deed of mine could help the Uri Party in the (parliamentary) election, I would like to do whatever is within the boundary of law.”

He was accused of violating election laws.

But this time, it is the public who wants Park’s ouster over the scandal involving her confidante Choi Soon-sil, which broke out in late October and pressured lawmakers to vote for her impeachment Friday, experts said.

Over the past seven weeks, a total of nearly 7 million people have taken to the street on Saturdays for candlelight vigils calling for Park’s resignation.

“Public sentiment will surely come into play (when the court deliberates),” said attorney Cho Dae-hyun, who was one of the nine Constitutional Court justices who tried President Roh. 

Professor Kim Seung-dae of the Pusan National University School of Law, who participated in Roh’s impeachment trial as one of the nine justices of the Constitutional Court, said, “The 2004 Roh impeachment case was a political tussle. It wasn’t something that people wanted.”

Kim added that the strong public anger toward the head of state would make judges feel less worried if they have to deliver an unfavorable verdict against her.

Different charges 

The parliamentary impeachment motion, which passed the National Assembly in a landslide 234-56 vote Friday, lists 13 breaches of the Constitution and laws as grounds for President Park’s impeachment.  

“There was one core issue in the Roh impeachment trial and it was simple -- the election law violations,” said Kim Jong-dae, another former judge who participated in the 2004 trial. 

Moreover, Roh had admitted to making the controversial remarks.

But in the case of Park, the president firmly denies the eight charges brought against her, which sets the stage for a fierce legal battle.  

Park’s attorney Yoo Young-ha said in previous briefings that the president had no part in the corruption scandal involving Choi and others.

All the president has done was for the sake of the country and she had no knowledge that Choi pursued private benefits using their decadeslong ties, Yoo claimed.

This is why some experts say the trial could drag on past the 63 days it took for Roh’s case, or even the legal limit of 180 days.

On Friday, after the parliament passed the impeachment motion against her, Park hired Chae Myung-seong as her legal representative, adding to three other lawyers who will represent her at the Constitutional Court.

“The size of Park’s legal representatives for the impeachment trial will be bigger than the one that was formed for the (soon-to-be-launched) independent counsel investigation,” an official at Cheong Wa Dae said, hinting that Park may choose not to reveal some of the members of her legal representative team, as she has done so far.

Former President Roh formed a large counsel for his impeachment trial. It comprised of 12 lawyers including former Senior Presidential Secretary for Civil Affairs Moon Jae-in, ex-prosecutors, judges and human rights lawyers.

The parliament formed a 60-member “prosecutor” team, headed by Rep. Kim Ki-chun, then chairman of the National Assembly Justice Committee. The two sides held seven rounds of arguments from March 30 to April 30, 2004 which Roh declined to attend despite the court’s request.  

On May 15, 63 days after Roh was impeached by the parliament, the court ruled in favor of the president, saying, “(Roh’s election law violations) were not serious or grave enough to justify the unseating of the president.”

The verdict effectively set a guideline for presidential impeachment in South Korea: the president can be removed only for “grave violations.”

According to the court, the gravity of a violation should be determined by “balancing the degree of negative impact or harm to constitutional order caused by the violation of the law and the effects that would be caused by the removal of the respondent from office.”

By Kim Da-sol (ddd@heraldcorp.com)