NEWSLETTER

Sign up to read weekly email newsletter
Asia Tech Times
Donate
Search
  • Home
  • Breaking News
  • Business
  • Finance
  • Medical
  • Political
Reading: South Korea’s impeachment battle is an act of democracy
Share
Font ResizerAa
Asia Tech TimesAsia Tech Times
  • Finance
  • Technology
Search
  • Home
  • Categories
    • Finance
    • Technology
  • More Foxiz
    • Blog Index
    • Forums
    • Complaint
    • Sitemap
Follow US
Made by ThemeRuby using the Foxiz theme. Powered by WordPress
Political

South Korea’s impeachment battle is an act of democracy

By Asia Tech Times
Last updated: 08/04/2025
7 Min Read
Share

December 11, 2024

chicago ——Yin Xiyeol’s latest political strategy undoubtedly did not unfold as he expected. South Korea’s scandal-plagued president suddenly declared martial law on December 3 and was forced to lift it within hours in the face of public protests and legislative opposition. He now faces an impeachment motion from the opposition Democratic Party, which denounced his “acts of insurrection”.

As of this writing, the opposition is eight votes short of the votes needed to oust Yoon Eun-hye. But given the clever design of South Korea’s 1987 constitution and the country’s recent experience with impeachment, the opposition has an advantage and is on solid legal footing. Yin’s ouster will serve as a global example, in stark contrast to the United States, of how democracies can and should respond to those who abuse the privileges of office.

South Korea’s president could be impeached for “violating the Constitution or other laws in the performance of official duties.” While a simple majority of the National Assembly can introduce an impeachment bill, it must be approved by a two-thirds absolute majority. As in the United States, the Constitution limits the effect of impeachment to removal from office and explicitly leaves open the possibility of criminal prosecution. But unlike the United States, South Korea’s president facing impeachment immediately hands over his responsibilities to the prime minister. In another departure from the American model, the impeachment motion is then submitted to the Constitutional Court for final approval.

This design has led to two successful impeachments in the past two decades. President Roh Moo-hyun was impeached in 2004, but the court found that the charges against him were insufficient to justify his dismissal. Roh went on to serve out his term but later committed suicide while facing corruption charges. Subsequently, in December 2016, President Park Geun-hye was impeached, and this time the Constitutional Court confirmed the decision. In 2018, Park Geun-hye was sentenced to prison on charges of criminal corruption and abuse of power (she was released in 2021).

South Korea’s impeachment experience is rare. A recent study I co-authored showed that between 1990 and 2017, there were only 10 successful impeachments worldwide. While some may consider removing elected leaders undemocratic, South Korea’s experience shows that impeachment can be an effective tool in defending democracy.

Today, South Korean lawmakers know they will break no new ground if they impeach Yoon. Unlike the impeachment proceedings in the United States, North Korea’s impeachment proceedings remain a credible, serious part of the country’s democratic politics. Lawmakers can be reassured by the fact that past decisions to remove presidents were not viewed solely as partisanship. Because the vote in Park Geun-hye’s case was bipartisan, members of Yoon’s People Power Party could not seek refuge simply by voting along party lines. Precedent requires them to take their constitutional responsibilities seriously, just as others before them have done.

The Constitutional Court’s certification of their decisions effectively checks the legality of their work and also plays an important role in protecting lawmakers from accusations of partisan misconduct. In 2004, the court made clear that while the National Assembly could play a political and fact-finding role, judges would ultimately decide whether the facts presented met the constitutional threshold for removal. Nor can legislators be accused of behaving undemocratically. After all, a successful impeachment vote would inevitably lead to new elections. Far from overthrowing the people, they prevented the people’s trust from being abused.

Final review by the Constitutional Court and the quick triggering of new elections are both missing from the American system, to its apparent detriment. Due to the wise choices of the drafters of South Korea’s constitution, impeachment served as a “hard reset” of the democratic system. When evil incumbents show their true colors, they can be swept out before the public loses faith in the system. The court’s ruling on the Roh Moo-hyun case in 2004 clearly illustrates this point. The judges held that impeachment should only occur in cases of serious violations of the law and when the president’s removal is “necessary to restore the damaged constitutional order.”

Given this criterion, there is good reason to conclude that Yoon’s behavior was even more up to par than Park’s. Under the 1987 Constitution, the president can only declare martial law “in response to military needs or to mobilize the military to maintain public safety and order in times of war, armed conflict or similar national emergencies.” Not only did Yin’s decision fall far short of that standard, it fell far below it. It laughs at it.

In his speech declaring martial law, Yoon did not even mention any “military necessity” or credible threat to “public order.” Instead, he criticized lawmakers for their financial decisions (which allegedly turned the country into a “drug paradise”), investigations into his scandals, and unwarranted criticism of “communist forces in North Korea and the threat from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.” The confirmed claims made some outrageous claims. […] Shameless pro-North Korea and anti-national forces. Mr. Yoon’s erratic behavior and blatant disregard for the facts fell far short of the constitutional standards for imposing martial law and exposed a reckless disregard for South Korea’s democratic institutions.

At a time when leaders of other countries whose democratic backsliding seems to go unpunished, South Korea’s latest impeachment reminds us that democracy, once established, can easily be lost through negligence or venality. The authority of the president must not be confused with the naked exercise of power by the man who once won the election.

The author is a law professor at the University of Chicago and the author of “The Collapse of Constitutional Remedies.”

TAGGED:ActbattledemocracyimpeachmentKoreasSouth

Sign Up For Daily Newsletter

Be keep up! Get the latest breaking news delivered straight to your inbox.
By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Use and acknowledge the data practices in our Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Share This Article
Facebook Email Copy Link Print

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!

HOT NEWS

Malaysia’s Sunway Team Chairman Jeffrey Cheah States The Very Best Is Yet To Find

Jeffrey Cheah. Ian Teh Forbes Asia This tale belongs to Forbes’ record on Malaysia’s wealthiest…

09/06/2025

China’s CATL Really feels the Pinch of a Lithium Cost Downturn it Developed

Years of long-lasting decreases in lithium costs are currently beginning to take a toll on…

19/03/2025

OpenAI strategies Sora video clip generator combination right into ChatGPT

Sora was released in December 2024 as a standalone internet application, making it possible for…

19/03/2025

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

To Impeach or Not to Impeach: Philippine Daily Inquirer

December 10, 2024 Manila – The road is long and uncertain for those seeking to remove Vice President Sara Duterte…

Political
09/04/2025

United States to back Bangladesh’s autonomous shift

January 20, 2025 Dhaka— The USA declares its ongoing assistance for Bangladesh’s recurring autonomous shift. Tracy Ann Jacobson, the brand-new…

Political
30/04/2025

Philippine senatorial options: Appeal over ability

January 28, 2025 Manila -When we planned for the Philippine Us senate political election in 2025, the troubling fad disclosed…

Political
17/04/2025

Primary step to openness: The Jakarta Blog Post

April 14, 2025 Jakarta – We applaud Head of state Prabowo Subianto for his campaigns focused on roundtable meetings and…

Political
16/05/2025

Asia Tech Times (ISSN: 3079-8566) stands as a preeminent authority in technology journalism, delivering profound insights and strategic intelligence on the technological advancements shaping the Asia-Pacific region and beyond. Renowned for its depth of analysis and editorial excellence, the publication serves as a critical nexus for industry leaders, policymakers, scholars, and innovators navigating the evolving digital landscape.

  • Jobs Board
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Exclusives
  • Learn How
  • Support
  • Solutions
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Editorial Policy
  • Marketing Solutions
  • Industry Intelligence

Follow US: 

Copyright © 2025 Asia Tech Times. All Rights Reserved.

All content published by Asia Tech Times (ISSN: 3079-8566), including but not limited to articles, reports, editorials, graphics, images, logos, and digital media, is the exclusive intellectual property of Asia Tech Times and is protected under international copyright laws and treaties.

Asia Tech TimesAsia Tech Times
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?