Home > Opinion > Editorials

Will halting trials by law really bring ‘national stability’?

Published: 03 Nov. 2025, 00:00

Yoo Dong-gyu, former planning director of the Seongnam Development Corporation, arrives at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho District on Oct. 31 to attend the first trial verdict hearing on charges related to the Daejang-dong development scandal. [JOINT PRESS CORPS]

The Democratic Party (DP) is once again pushing a bill that would halt criminal trials for a sitting president. At a press briefing at the National Assembly on Oct. 2, chief spokesperson Park Soo-hyun said the party would now refer to it as the “National Stability Act,” signaling renewed determination. The bill would amend the Criminal Procedure Act to suspend criminal trials if a defendant is elected president. It was first introduced after the Supreme Court sent President Lee Jae Myung’s election law violation case back to a lower court before the 2025 presidential election. But facing criticism that it was designed to shield Lee, the party held back. The proposal has resurfaced after the Seoul Central District Court sentenced key figures in the Daejang-dong land development scandal — including businessman Kim Man-bae and former Seongnam Development Corporation official Yoo Dong-gyu — to four to eight years in prison.

Lee’s own trial has already been put on hold. Citing Article 84 of the Constitution, which states that a sitting president cannot face criminal prosecution except for insurrection or treason, the Seoul High Court indefinitely postponed proceedings. However, debate continues over whether “prosecution” includes ongoing trials. The issue resurfaced during a parliamentary audit last month, when Seoul High Court Chief Judge Kim Dae-ung said it was “theoretically possible” to proceed with Lee’s trial. What had been a fringe view among a few hard-line lawmakers gained momentum after the heavy sentences in the Daejang-dong case.

The court ruled that collusion between Seongnam Development Corporation officials and private developers allowed enormous profits that should have gone to the public to end up in private hands. While it did not explicitly determine whether then-Seongnam mayor Lee Jae Myung was involved, the ruling referred to “Seongnam city leadership.” Instead of reflecting on the moral responsibility associated with such a case, the DP is prioritizing legislation to halt trials. If the party insists Lee was not involved, as it claims, it would be more reasonable to allow the appeals process to conclude.

In practice, continuing a president’s trial is complicated. Some argue that having the head of state appear in court weekly could disrupt governance. But if so, the president and ruling party must explain this clearly to the public and seek understanding. National stability does not come from stopping trials by law, but from respecting legal procedures and maintaining public trust.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.