Yoon's legal strategy stirs controversy amid rising tensions
Published: 09 Jan. 2025, 00:00
President Yoon Suk Yeol has signaled through his legal team that he would comply with a court trial if formally indicted or if a pretrial detention warrant is issued against him. However, this position is unlikely to garner public sympathy. His legal representatives stated Wednesday, "We maintain our stance that we cannot comply with an investigation based on an invalid arrest warrant." They added that a pretrial detention warrant issued by the Seoul Western District Court is unacceptable, though they would cooperate if the warrant was issued by Seoul Central District Court. This is no more than "court shopping" — a stark contradiction to their earlier criticism of "warrant shopping" against the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) for getting the arrest warrant issued by the Seoul Western District Court.
Korea’s judiciary has dismissed President Yoon’s claims about the invalidity of the arrest warrant. The Seoul Western District Court rejected the objection raised by the president's camp, asserting that it was neither unlawful nor invalid. Furthermore, the court’s issuance of a search warrant to facilitate the execution of the arrest warrant, specifying that "Articles 110 and 111 of the Criminal Procedure Act are not applicable," has been explained as standard legal procedure. The Court Administration Office clarified during a parliamentary inquiry that "physical searches and personal arrest procedures follow different legal principles, a view supported by prevailing academic interpretations." In a system based on the rule of law, disputing court decisions must occur within legal channels. A defendant cannot selectively choose judicial venues based on personal convenience.
As President Yoon continues to pursue this contentious argument, tensions surrounding the re-execution of the arrest warrant are escalating. Both the CIO and police have labeled this their "final attempt" and are reportedly exploring all possible strategies. Meanwhile, the Presidential Security Service has fortified the president's residence with buses and barbed wire, turning it into a veritable fortress. Discussions of deploying helicopters, armored vehicles and SWAT teams have surfaced within police ranks, raising fears of a dangerous clash between law enforcement agencies. To avert such a crisis, President Yoon must step out of his residence voluntarily and submit to investigation. Speculation about his evasion has reached absurd levels, tarnishing Korea’s global reputation. A dignified response is crucial to restoring the nation’s image.
Instead, Yoon’s team has argued that "using SWAT teams or riot police to execute an arrest is tantamount to rebellion and insurrection," a claim that smacks of audacity coming from a suspect accused of inciting insurrection himself.
In a related development, the National Assembly failed Wednesday to pass the "Special Prosecutor Act for the Insurrection Investigation" during a revote. The bill fell short by just two votes, with 198 out of 300 lawmakers present supporting it — two fewer than the required two-thirds majority. The Democratic Party (DP) has vowed to reintroduce the bill, arguing that entrusting the investigation to a special prosecutor is the best way to resolve the controversy surrounding prosecutorial authority over President Yoon.
For this plan to succeed, however, the DP must revise the provision that grants the opposition sole authority to recommend special prosecutors. Meanwhile, the People Power Party must recognize that appearing to shield President Yoon could harm its long-term prospects. The increase in dissenting votes from within the party during yesterday’s revote is a reality check that cannot be ignored. The party should formulate its own proposal to address the constitutional concerns surrounding the special prosecutor bill and engage in negotiations with the opposition.
Korea’s political landscape is at a crossroads. Finding a resolution to this crisis requires all parties to rise above partisanship and prioritize the nation’s rule of law and institutional integrity.
Translated using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.
Korea’s judiciary has dismissed President Yoon’s claims about the invalidity of the arrest warrant. The Seoul Western District Court rejected the objection raised by the president's camp, asserting that it was neither unlawful nor invalid. Furthermore, the court’s issuance of a search warrant to facilitate the execution of the arrest warrant, specifying that "Articles 110 and 111 of the Criminal Procedure Act are not applicable," has been explained as standard legal procedure. The Court Administration Office clarified during a parliamentary inquiry that "physical searches and personal arrest procedures follow different legal principles, a view supported by prevailing academic interpretations." In a system based on the rule of law, disputing court decisions must occur within legal channels. A defendant cannot selectively choose judicial venues based on personal convenience.
As President Yoon continues to pursue this contentious argument, tensions surrounding the re-execution of the arrest warrant are escalating. Both the CIO and police have labeled this their "final attempt" and are reportedly exploring all possible strategies. Meanwhile, the Presidential Security Service has fortified the president's residence with buses and barbed wire, turning it into a veritable fortress. Discussions of deploying helicopters, armored vehicles and SWAT teams have surfaced within police ranks, raising fears of a dangerous clash between law enforcement agencies. To avert such a crisis, President Yoon must step out of his residence voluntarily and submit to investigation. Speculation about his evasion has reached absurd levels, tarnishing Korea’s global reputation. A dignified response is crucial to restoring the nation’s image.
Instead, Yoon’s team has argued that "using SWAT teams or riot police to execute an arrest is tantamount to rebellion and insurrection," a claim that smacks of audacity coming from a suspect accused of inciting insurrection himself.
In a related development, the National Assembly failed Wednesday to pass the "Special Prosecutor Act for the Insurrection Investigation" during a revote. The bill fell short by just two votes, with 198 out of 300 lawmakers present supporting it — two fewer than the required two-thirds majority. The Democratic Party (DP) has vowed to reintroduce the bill, arguing that entrusting the investigation to a special prosecutor is the best way to resolve the controversy surrounding prosecutorial authority over President Yoon.
For this plan to succeed, however, the DP must revise the provision that grants the opposition sole authority to recommend special prosecutors. Meanwhile, the People Power Party must recognize that appearing to shield President Yoon could harm its long-term prospects. The increase in dissenting votes from within the party during yesterday’s revote is a reality check that cannot be ignored. The party should formulate its own proposal to address the constitutional concerns surrounding the special prosecutor bill and engage in negotiations with the opposition.
Korea’s political landscape is at a crossroads. Finding a resolution to this crisis requires all parties to rise above partisanship and prioritize the nation’s rule of law and institutional integrity.
Translated using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.
with the Korea JoongAng Daily
To write comments, please log in to one of the accounts.
Standards Board Policy (0/250자)