This piece has been updated to included the most recent events
South Korea’s Constitutional Court was forced to adjourn its first impeachment hearing for President Yoon Suk-yeol on Tuesday after he failed to attend, citing security concerns. Yoon, impeached in December following his abrupt imposition of martial law, faces charges of insurrection and is subject to an arrest warrant, further complicating the political turmoil.
Yoon declared martial law on December 3, claiming it was necessary to counter alleged pro-North Korean threats and obstruction by the Democratic Party, which holds a majority in the National Assembly. His announcement temporarily suspended political activity and surrounded the legislative chamber with soldiers. Lawmakers swiftly convened under martial law restrictions and voted to end it.
The National Assembly impeached Yoon on December 14, accusing him of abusing his power. Even members of Yoon’s conservative People Power Party (PPP) supported the impeachment, reflecting widespread outrage. Interim President Han Duck-soo, installed after Yoon’s impeachment, was also impeached later that month, leading to protests in Seoul against both actions.
The Constitutional Court, which has 180 days from the impeachment vote to decide Yoon’s fate, held its first hearing Tuesday. Yoon’s absence limited proceedings to rejecting his legal team’s request for Justice Chung Kye-sun’s recusal due to alleged political bias. The court announced plans to reconvene Thursday, with or without Yoon’s presence.
Yoon’s attorneys argued that attending the hearing would expose him to potential arrest, referencing a December 31 attempt by the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) to execute an arrest warrant. A six-hour standoff between law enforcement and the Presidential Security Service (PSS) ended without Yoon’s arrest, as the PSS cited national security concerns.
Yoon’s refusal to attend hearings complicates both the impeachment and criminal processes. A National Assembly special committee investigating the martial law declaration has summoned Yoon to testify on January 22, raising further questions about his willingness to leave the presidential residence.
Meanwhile, the CIO, national police, and PSS remain divided over executing Yoon’s arrest warrant, with the PSS maintaining that it violates protocol. The situation underscores the political instability gripping South Korea as Yoon’s fate hangs in the balance.
South Korea made history with the arrest of its sitting president, Yoon Suk Yeol, on Wednesday. Investigators accused Yoon of insurrection linked to a failed martial law order on December 3 that sparked a national crisis. The arrest, following his impeachment by parliament, marks an unprecedented moment in the country’s political landscape.
In a dramatic pre-dawn operation, more than 1,000 investigators and police breached the security perimeter of Yoon’s central Seoul residence. The team scaled barricades, cut through barbed wire, and circumvented other security measures to execute the warrant. Hours later, Yoon, 64, was taken into custody after releasing a brief video reiterating claims that the warrant was legally invalid but agreeing to cooperate to avoid potential violence.
Yoon has been suspended from office, pending a Constitutional Court ruling to finalize his impeachment. The nation is temporarily led by Finance Minister Choi Sang-mok, as the first acting president, Han Duck-soo, was also impeached earlier by the opposition-majority parliament.
Yoon’s legal team has denounced the arrest as unlawful, arguing the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) lacks jurisdiction over insurrection cases. They also claim procedural errors in the warrant’s issuance. Despite these assertions, a court rejected an injunction to invalidate the warrant, reinforcing its legality.
The Democratic Party, which leads parliament, views the arrest as a victory for justice and democracy. Floor leader Park Chan-dae called it a step toward restoring constitutional order and the rule of law.
Yoon’s arrest concludes weeks of tense standoffs. On January 3, an earlier attempt to detain him ended in a six-hour stalemate with his security detail. Wednesday’s operation was carefully coordinated, utilizing ladders, bolt cutters, and alternate routes to ensure the warrant’s execution.
Yoon’s silence during questioning on Wednesday leaves key questions unanswered about the insurrection allegations. His political future hinges on both the Constitutional Court’s decision and the outcome of the investigation. Meanwhile, South Korea faces a period of political instability, with temporary leadership tasked with navigating the country through this crisis.
