In South Korea, former President Yoon Suk Yeol was released from custody following a decision by a Seoul court to cancel his arrest. This move allows him to face trial for alleged rebellion without being detained. Upon leaving a detention facility near Seoul, Yoon expressed gratitude, acknowledging both the judicial decision that granted his release and the support of his followers, who greeted him with cheers and the waving of South Korean and U.S. flags as he made his way to his presidential residence.
In a statement issued through his legal team, Yoon commended the Seoul Central District Court for rectifying what he referred to as “illegality,” possibly alluding to his arrest’s controversial nature. He extended his thanks to his backers and urged those on hunger strikes protesting his impeachment to cease their actions.
Yoon’s legal troubles began when prosecutors arrested and charged him in January after he imposed martial law on December 3, sparking significant political upheaval in the nation. Following these events, the National Assembly, dominated by liberal opposition, voted to impeach him, leading to his suspension from the presidency.
The Constitutional Court is presently considering whether to officially dismiss or reinstate Yoon. Should the court uphold the impeachment, a national election will ensue within two months to elect his replacement. The Seoul Central District Court underscored that Yoon’s release was necessitated by unresolved legal issues surrounding the investigations conducted on his presidency. His attorneys argued that the agency which detained him lacked legitimate authority to investigate the rebellion claims against him.
The court also noted that the legal duration of Yoon’s formal arrest had lapsed by the time he was officially charged. Following the decision, prosecutors chose not to challenge the ruling, despite having the option to detain Yoon while appealing the court’s decision. This action prompted the liberal opposition Democratic Party, architects of Yoon’s impeachment, to criticize prosecutors, labeling them as Yoon’s “henchmen.” Party spokesperson Cho Seung-rae urged quick action from the Constitutional Court to mitigate public discord and anxiety.
The controversy surrounding Yoon’s martial law declaration largely stemmed from his dispatch of military and police forces to the National Assembly, effectively bringing the country under military control. Several senior military figures have claimed that Yoon instructed them to forcibly remove legislators in order to prevent a vote on the decree. Despite these claims, Yoon has maintained that his intent was to restore order.
Nonetheless, a sufficient number of legislators managed to convene and subsequently overturned Yoon’s decree unanimously. Investigators argue that Yoon’s actions amounted to rebellion, an offense that could result in the death penalty or life imprisonment if proven. Although Yoon enjoys presidential immunity for most criminal acts, this does not extend to severe accusations such as rebellion and treason.
Yoon defended his decision, asserting the martial law was a precaution to alert the public to threats posed by the Democratic Party, which he accused of impeding his political agenda and instigating impeachments against senior government members. In his declaration of martial law, Yoon described the assembly as “a den of criminals” and labeled its members as “anti-state forces.”
This event amplifies the sharp divide between conservatives and liberals in South Korea, a split that has become increasingly pronounced. Demonstrations either for or against Yoon’s impeachment have drawn clear lines among the populace in Seoul. Analysts suggest that regardless of the Constitutional Court’s forthcoming verdict, the political divisions in the country are likely to deepen further.
