Korean National Assembly to emphasize the illegal nature of martial law, the President argues that he acted within his rights

Seoul: With the eleventh hearing of the political trial of President Yoon Suk Yeok established for Tuesday (February 25), both parties are preparing for the statements that justify their respective statements about the positions of insurrection and energy abuse of the leader South Korean.

The legal representatives of the National Assembly, who approved the resolution for Yoon’s political trial in December, held a meeting on Saturday (February 22) to discuss their strategy for the next hearing. They are expected to focus on what they have said is the illegal and unconstitutional nature of the declaration of the Martial Law on December 3, and the orders made by Yoon in the process.

Meanwhile, Yoon’s side states that the declaration of martial law was within his presidential rights, which was declared as a “warning” to the opposition. He said that the series of accusations of the opposition controlled assembly and its readjustment of state budgets led the country to the edge of the national emergency.

The focal point of the trial has been about whether Yoon declares the martial law on December 3 can be considered a legitimate action by a president, and if his orders to have legislators and his political opponents arrested really occurred as accused by the Parliament .

Thursday’s hearing in the Constitutional Court focused on the alleged arrest warrant, which Hong Jang-Won, the first deputy director of the National Intelligence Service at the time of Martial Law, had testified on February 4 to receive them and write them.

He returned to the Court on Thursday, after asking him to testify again after his previous account was questioned, particularly his details when and how he took notes.

Yoon’s lawyers questioned Hong’s reasons on Thursday about not giving prosecutors the original memorandum of people who, according to him, was ordered to arrest, and accused him of trying to deliver him to the main democratic party of Korea.

The lawyer Yun Gap-Geun asked him if Hong’s assistant, who wrote the memorandum, was a friend of the former president of People Power Party, have dong-hoon, one of those who supposedly in the list of arrests, to which Hong said that has no knowledge of the personal connections of the assistant.

In addition, the defense commander of the then capital, Lee Jin-Woo, told the prosecutors that Yoon told him that “the door of the Parliament and drags them (legislators). Shoot if necessary.” But he asked about this at the audience on February 4, he testified that he could not remember.

Yoon denies making orders to arrest politicians or enter the assembly complex.

In the fifth hearing of the trial on February 4, he emphasized that “nothing happened”, comparing the trial with “pursuing the shadow of the moon floating in a lake.”

Read and Yeo In-Hyung, the former head of the defense counterintelligence command who was withdrawn from his position after martial law, both refused to testify before the Constitutional Court by Yoon’s alleged orders, saying that a Criminal judgment on this matter and that Will testifies then.

Yeo, however, said he received orders to mobilize the military from Defense Minister Kim Yong-Hyun, Yoon’s close confidant who wrote the decree of the martial law.

Some 1,500 South Korean army troops were mobilized during martial law and surrounded the National Assembly, but the president states that it was simply to maintain order and not cordon off the parliamentary building. The decree of the martial law prohibited all kinds of political activities, including the National Assembly, but there is no clause that gives the President Power to restrict Parliament’s activities.

Yoon said that the martial law was initially planned to end up in the maximum of half a day, and that the decree of the martial law was nothing more than a formality. Yoon also said that Kim added by mistake the problematic clause about Parliament, and that there was no intention to use the mortal force. It was discovered that the mobilized units received live ammunition, but the Ministry of Defense has said that they were not distributed to individual soldiers.

Marcial Law was built about six hours after being declared, but after the National Assembly was convened and voted unanimously to ask Yoon to lift it around 1 in the morning of December 3. Yoon only accepted the application at 4:20 am, more than three hours later. The parliamentary vote.

The eleventh hearing will begin at 2 PM, and the interim chief of the Constitutional Court, Moon Hyung-Bae, promised not to set time limits for the final arguments. The eight judges at the bank after they will deliberate whether or not to confirm Yoon’s accusation.

The court is generally expected to reach a final decision within two weeks after the last hearing, based on precedents of the previous presidential political trials. Trials of political trial of former presidents Park Geun -Hye and Roh Moo -Hyun, the first was confirmed and the second was rejected, each took 14 days and 11 days to end after the last hearing.

Yoon’s supporters and the ruling party have been attacking Moon, with protesters who maintain demonstrations outside their home and legislators who accused him of bias in favor of the opposition and the liberal block.

If Yoon’s accusation is confirmed, a presidential election for his successor must be held within 60 days. If the court decides against Yoon’s accusation, he will return to his charge as president until his term concludes on May 9, 2027. – The Korea Herald/Ann