The legal team of suspended President Yoon Suk Yeol claimed Friday that Yoon's impeachment trial does not warrant a ruling as he should have immunity from prosecution, citing the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on Donald Trump.
In a document presented to the Constitutional Court in Yoon's impeachment trial, the legal team said Yoon exercised his due presidential power to handle a "national emergency situation" while declaring martial law on Dec. 3.
"As martial law was lifted in six hours, it did not restrict the people's basic rights," the document read. "Things were fully restored so that there is no need to judge the declaration itself."
Yoon's side pointed to the U.S. court ruling in July last year that said Trump cannot be prosecuted for actions that were within his constitutional powers as president.
In a 6-3 ruling, the justices threw out a lower court's decision that had rejected Trump's claim of immunity from multiple criminal charges, including his moves to undo his election failure to Joe Biden. It was the first decision recognizing any form of presidential immunity from prosecution.
Yoon has said his martial law imposition was an act of governance and cannot be subject to a court judgment.
The Constitutional Court said it would hold the first oral arguments for Yoon's impeachment trial on Jan. 14, as it wrapped up its preparatory proceedings earlier in the day.
On Dec. 14, the National Assembly voted to impeach Yoon. The Constitutional Court has up to 180 days to determine whether to remove Yoon from office or restore his powers.
Yoon is under probe for inciting an insurrection and abusing his presidential power with the martial law declaration. (Yonhap)
South_Telephone_1688 on January 4th, 2025 at 02:09 UTC »
Citing precedent from outside your jurisdiction is a bold move. Might as well cite Putin/Russia for staying in power indefinitely.
Spade18 on January 4th, 2025 at 01:17 UTC »
This is why consequences and accountability are important
alpacinohairline on January 4th, 2025 at 00:55 UTC »
South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol’s team is drawing attention to a key ruling in the U.S. related to former President Trump’s role in the January 6th Capitol riot, suggesting that it might set a legal precedent for actions they’re considering at home. The ruling essentially paved the way for the potential disqualification of Trump from future office, citing that his actions around the insurrection could be seen as a violation of the 14th Amendment’s insurrection clause. Yoon’s camp is leveraging this ruling to argue that individuals who engage in activities aimed at destabilizing the state—whether through violent acts or political subversion—should face legal consequences.
The emphasis here is not on mere symbolic gestures but on holding accountable those who cross the line between political speech and criminal action. By referencing the U.S. case, Yoon’s team is signaling a readiness to confront challenges to state sovereignty, pointing to a broader international movement toward robust democratic defense. This draws a parallel between the violent aftermath of the Capitol riot and potential threats to South Korea’s own political stability, reinforcing the idea that democracy must not only be defended from foreign threats but from internal forces that seek to undermine it.