The Daily Populous Monday March 24th, 2025 morning edition
Authored by apnews.com and submitted by AudibleNod

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — South Korea’s Constitutional Court overturned the impeachment of Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, reinstating the nation’s No. 2 official as acting leader Monday while not yet ruling on the separate impeachment of President Yoon Suk Yeol over his shocking imposition of martial law late in December.

Many observers said the 7-1 ruling in Han’s case did not signal much about the upcoming verdict on Yoon, as Han wasn’t a key figure in imposing martial law. But the ruling could still embolden Yoon’s staunch supporters and ramp up their political offensive on the opposition.

South Korean acting President Han Duck-soo speaks during a briefing at the Government Complex in Seoul, South Korea, Monday, March 24, 2025. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon, Pool) South Korean acting President Han Duck-soo speaks during a briefing at the Government Complex in Seoul, South Korea, Monday, March 24, 2025. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon, Pool) Share Share Facebook

Speaking with reporters following his reinstatement, Han thanked the court for what he called “a wise decision” and promised to focus on tackling “urgent matters,” including a fast-changing global trade environment, in an apparent reference to the Trump administration’s aggressive tariffs policy. He also called for national unity, saying: “There’s no left or right — what matters is the advancement of our nation.”

South Korea has been thrown into huge political turmoil, since Yoon, a conservative, declared martial law on Dec. 3 and sent hundreds of troops to the liberal-controlled National Assembly and other places in Seoul. Yoon’s decree lasted only six hours as enough lawmakers managed to enter an assembly hall and voted it down quickly.

The assembly impeached Yoon on Dec. 14, alleging he violated the constitution and other laws by suppressing assembly activities and trying to detain politicians. Yoon’s impeachment made Han acting president until he was impeached in late December.

The unprecedented, successive impeachments that suspended the country’s top two officials intensified domestic division and deepened worries about the country’s diplomatic and economic activities.

Han, who attempted to reassure diplomatic partners and stabilize markets during his time as acting president, was accused in the impeachment motion of abetting Yoon’s martial law declaration and obstructing efforts to restore the Constitutional Court’s full membership and investigate Yoon’s alleged rebellion.

Moon Hyung-bae, acting chief justice of South Korea’s Constitutional Court, presides over the impeachment verdict for South Korean Prime Minister Han Duck-soo at the Constitutional Court in Seoul Monday, March 24, 2025. (Kim Min-Hee/Pool Photo via AP) Moon Hyung-bae, acting chief justice of South Korea’s Constitutional Court, presides over the impeachment verdict for South Korean Prime Minister Han Duck-soo at the Constitutional Court in Seoul Monday, March 24, 2025. (Kim Min-Hee/Pool Photo via AP) Share Share Facebook

The nine-member court at the time had three vacancies, but ousting Yoon would require support from at least six justices. After Han was suspended, his successor as acting president, Choi Sang-mok, appointed two new justices but left the ninth seat vacant.

Seven of the Constitutional Court’s eight justices ruled to overturn or dismiss Han’s impeachment. They ruled the accusations against him weren’t against the law or weren’t serious enough to remove him from office or his impeachment motion didn’t even met a required quorum when it passed thorough the assembly. One justice upheld Han’s impeachment.

The Democratic Party expressed regret over the court’s decision to reinstate Han and urged it to dismiss Yoon’s case quickly. Yoon’s office welcomed Monday’s ruling, saying it shows again the opposition’s abuse of impeachment motions were “reckless, malicious political offensive.”

South Korean Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, center, speaks to the media as he arrives at the Government Complex in Seoul Monday, March 24, 2025, after the Constitutional Court dismissed the impeachment of the prime minister. (Jung Yeon-je/Pool Photo via AP) South Korean Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, center, speaks to the media as he arrives at the Government Complex in Seoul Monday, March 24, 2025, after the Constitutional Court dismissed the impeachment of the prime minister. (Jung Yeon-je/Pool Photo via AP) Share Share Facebook

Observers earlier had predicted the Constitutional Court would rule on Yoon’s case in mid-March, but it hasn’t done so, sparking varied speculation on possible reasons.

“Today’s verdict will give hope to Yoon’s supporters for a similar fate and hope for Yoon’s opponents for his ouster,” said Duyeon Kim, a senior analyst at the Center for a New American Security in Washington. “But it’s too soon to predict the court’s verdict on Yoon because the specific details of both cases and allegations are different.”

South Korean acting President Han Duck-soo bows during a briefing at the Government Complex in Seoul, South Korea, Monday, March 24, 2025. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon, Pool) South Korean acting President Han Duck-soo bows during a briefing at the Government Complex in Seoul, South Korea, Monday, March 24, 2025. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon, Pool) Share Share Facebook

Kim said the the reinstatement of Han, a career bureaucrat, will bring more stability to South Korea compared to when his powers as acting president were suspended.

Massive rival rallies backing Yoon or denouncing Yoon have divided the streets of Seoul and other major cities in South Korea. Earlier surveys showed that a majority of South Koreans were critical of Yoon’s martial law enactment, but those supporting or sympathizing with Yoon have later gained strength.

Yoon argues that his martial law introduction was a desperate attempt to bring attention to the “wickedness” of the main liberal opposition Democratic Party which obstructed his agenda and filed many impeachment motions against senior officials. Yoon critics counter he likely tried to use military rule to frustrate possible special investigations into scandals involving him and his wife.

Senior military and police officers sent to the assembly have said that Yoon ordered them to drag out lawmakers to prevent a floor vote to overturn his decree. Yoon says the troops’ deployment was designed to maintain order.

If the court upholds Yoon’s impeachment, South Korea must hold a presidential election to choose his successor. If it rules for him, Yoon will regain his presidential powers.

Yoon has separately been charged with rebellion in connection with his martial law decree, a charge that carries the death penalty or a life sentence if he is convicted.

Associated Press writer Kim Tong-hyung contributed to this report.

Zaktius on March 24th, 2025 at 02:16 UTC »

Context on the quorum bit, since AP doesn’t provide it - Korea’s national assembly has 300 seats. A simple majority is enough to impeach most officials, but a 2/3 majority is required to impeach the president. It was (and maybe still is) an open question what the requirement was to impeach an acting president - 151 because he is the prime minister, or 200 because he is (acting) president? Apparently some of the justices think it’s the latter, (edit) but it seems like the majority ruled that it’s 151.

This feels like it was the weakest of the cases, for what it’s worth. He was consistently saying he was against the martial law, and it seems like they failed to prove he was actually involved with it.

Techiesarethebomb on March 24th, 2025 at 02:10 UTC »

This guy isn't Yoon (The president who started the Martial Law Order), he is up for sentencing next. If he doesn't get impeached, then shit will go down.

AudibleNod on March 24th, 2025 at 01:54 UTC »

> On Monday, seven of the court’s eight justices overturned or dismissed Han’s impeachment. They ruled the accusations against him weren’t against the law or weren’t serious enough to remove him from office or his impeachment motion didn’t even meet a required quorum when it passed through the assembly.

Not having a quorum seems sketchy. The other parts of South Korean law, I can't comment on.