In a significant development in South Korea’s ongoing political turmoil, the Constitutional Court has reinstated Prime Minister Han Duck-soo as the acting leader of the country. This decision overturns the impeachment he faced from opposition lawmakers three months prior.
The court’s ruling has come at a tense moment, with the country simultaneously awaiting a verdict on the impeachment of conservative President Yoon Suk Yeol. Yoon’s impeachment, initiated due to his temporary decision to impose martial law in December, has left South Korea’s leadership in a state of uncertainty. The court is close to deciding if Yoon should be permanently removed from office or reinstated.
Prime Minister Han was positioned as the government’s caretaker following Yoon’s impeachment by the National Assembly on December 14. Typically wielding limited authority, Han’s political journey has seen him in various governmental roles since the 1970s. Yoon’s impeachment put Han in acting presidential duties, though Han largely opposed demands from the liberal opposition Democratic Party, notably over the appointment of members to the Constitutional Court.
The composition of the court is especially crucial because ousting Yoon requires support from at least six out of the nine justices. Han, meanwhile, resisted filling three vacancies on the court without bipartisan agreement, generating accusations from the Democrats that he was siding with the governing conservatives. Following Han’s impeachment on December 27, Deputy Prime Minister Choi Sang-mok temporarily took over, making two appointments but avoided selecting a progressive justice suggested by the opposition.
The court’s decision to reinstate Han was a significant one. Seven out of eight justices dismissed his impeachment, citing a lack of serious legal misconduct or proper quorum during the impeachment motion. Only one justice upheld the impeachment. After his reinstatement, Han called for unity, emphasizing the importance of tackling challenges like the trade policies emerging from the US.
The court’s ruling on Han does not directly indicate how Yoon’s case will be judged. Han was not involved in planning or enforcing Yoon’s brief martial law, which was annulled shortly after its declaration on December 3. However, his reinstatement has sparked frustration among the Democratic Party, with their leader Lee Jae-myung, who narrowly lost the presidential race, expressing sharp criticism. He questioned why Han’s noncompliance over justice appointments was not seen as an impeachable offense and urged the court for a prompt resolution on Yoon’s fate.
From Yoon’s perspective, his office welcomed the court’s decision on Han, claiming it highlighted the opposition’s reckless and politically motivated impeachment attempts.
Yoon himself is dealing with separate charges of criminal misconduct and rebellion, accused of abusing military authority, bypassing legal protocols, and attempting to dissolve the legislature. The Constitutional Court is tasked with deciding if Yoon should remain in office, not delving deeply into the criminal charges per se. Experts believe Han’s testimony related to Yoon’s martial law decree could influence the court’s ultimate decision.
Accusations against Yoon suggest he did not follow the constitutional requirement for a Cabinet meeting before declaring martial law. Han has supported claims of such procedural bypassing, stating Yoon informed his Cabinet members rather than consulting with them. Alongside other officials, Han attempted to dissuade Yoon, given the potential repercussions on South Korea’s international standing. Under the constitution, such severe measures like martial law can only be justified during significant national threats or wartime situations.