SEOUL, South Korea — The former defense minister of South Korea was officially arrested on Wednesday amid allegations of collusion with President Yoon Suk Yeol and others in the enactment of martial law last week. This move has drawn scrutiny as authorities examine whether their actions could be classified as rebellion.
The martial law, which was enforced for the first time in over four decades, lasted only approximately six hours but resulted in a significant public outcry and large-scale protests across the nation. President Yoon and several of his close aides are currently under criminal investigation, with impeachment motions being put forth against them. The Justice Ministry has placed a travel ban on President Yoon along with eight others, highlighting their status as key suspects in the inquiry. This marks an unprecedented instance where a sitting South Korean president has faced such a restriction.
The Seoul Central District Court has authorized the arrest of former Defense Minister Kim Yong Hyun based on accusations of his central involvement in rebellion and the abuse of power, making him the first individual arrested in connection with the martial law decree issued on December 3. The court cited the gravity of his alleged actions and the potential risk of him tampering with evidence as factors in its decision.
Kim, a close ally of President Yoon, stepped down from his position last Thursday and has been in custody since the following Sunday. Prosecutors have a timeframe of up to 20 days to decide whether to formally charge him. If convicted of rebellion, he could face the ultimate penalty, which includes the death sentence.
Accusations against Kim involve claims that he suggested implementing martial law to President Yoon and dispatched troops to the National Assembly to obstruct lawmakers from voting on the decree. Eventually, enough lawmakers were able to access the parliament chamber and unanimously rejected Yoon’s order, which forced the Cabinet to rescind it before daybreak on December 4.
In a statement released on Tuesday, Kim expressed sincere regret for the distress and inconvenience caused by the situation. He stated that he takes full responsibility for the martial law’s implementation and urged leniency for the soldiers who followed his commands, asserting that they were merely obeying orders.
In response to the controversial martial law declaration, the opposition-dominated parliament passed a bill on Tuesday to appoint an independent special counsel tasked with investigating President Yoon and other senior military officials involved. The main opposition party, the Democratic Party, believes an independent inquiry is necessary, arguing that public prosecutors cannot be relied upon to conduct a thorough investigation of President Yoon, considering his background as a former prosecutor-general.
During a recent parliamentary hearing, Kwak Jong-keun, the commander of the Army Special Warfare Command, testified that he received explicit orders from Kim Yong Hyun to prevent lawmakers from entering the National Assembly. Kwak indicated that Kim’s directives aimed to thwart the gathering of 150 votes required to overturn Yoon’s martial law decree.
Furthermore, Kwak reported a direct call from Yoon who requested that the troops “quickly destroy the door and drag out the lawmakers who are inside.” After discussing Yoon’s orders with on-site commanders, they concluded that they could not threaten lawmakers with non-lethal tactics such as shooting blanks or cutting off electricity.
In the same hearing, military counterintelligence officer Kim Dae-woo revealed that his superior, Yeo In-hyung, inquired whether there was available space in an army bunker in Seoul to detain political figures following the martial law enforcement. Yeo is noted to be close to Kim Yong Hyun. In a separate incident last week, Hong Jang-won, a deputy director of the national spy agency, alleged that Yoon instructed him to assist Yeo’s efforts to detain certain political opponents, a request that he ultimately disregarded.
Kwak and Yeo, along with President Yoon and Kim, are now facing rebellion charges raised by opposition parties, and the Defense Ministry suspended them from their positions last week.
Critics from opposition parties and various experts are asserting that the martial law declaration was unconstitutional. They argue that the law permits a president to declare martial law only in scenarios involving “wartime, war-like situations, or other comparable national emergencies,” emphasizing that South Korea was not experiencing such conditions. They contend that using military force to restrict access to the National Assembly represented an act of rebellion since the Constitution does not authorize a president to utilize military power for suspending parliamentary activities under any circumstances.
In his address regarding martial law, President Yoon emphasized the necessity of “rebuilding the country,” referencing the removal of what he termed “shameless North Korea followers and anti-state forces,” a clear allusion to his liberal political opponents dominating the parliament. Since taking office in 2022, Yoon has frequently clashed with the main liberal opposition Democratic Party, which has pursued impeachment motions against several of his senior officials and launched a wave of political accusations concerning scandals involving him and his spouse.
Yoon narrowly evaded impeachment last Saturday as the majority of lawmakers from his party chose to boycott the voting session in the National Assembly. The Democratic Party announced plans to initiate a new vote for Yoon’s impeachment on Saturday. On Tuesday, the party filed motions to impeach Yoon’s police chief and justice minister as well. It also attempted to motion for the impeachment of Kim Yong Hyun and the safety minister, although both resigned prior to a parliamentary vote.
Should Yoon face impeachment, his presidential powers would be suspended until the Constitutional Court evaluates whether to restore them or remove him from office altogether. If he is dismissed, it would trigger a new presidential election.
