{"id":2207426,"date":"2024-12-07T20:06:25","date_gmt":"2024-12-07T11:06:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/koreapro.org\/?p=2207426"},"modified":"2024-12-09T19:00:49","modified_gmt":"2024-12-09T10:00:49","slug":"yoon-suk-yeols-fate-uncertain-as-impeachment-vote-fails-to-move-forward","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/koreapro.org\/2024\/12\/yoon-suk-yeols-fate-uncertain-as-impeachment-vote-fails-to-move-forward\/","title":{"rendered":"Yoon Suk-yeol\u2019s fate uncertain as impeachment vote fails to move forward"},"content":{"rendered":"
South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol faces an uncertain future as the impeachment vote at the National Assembly on Saturday failed to move forward, following his martial law order earlier in the week he said was necessary to root out “anti-state” forces in the country.<\/p>\n
Most of 195 lawmakers present likely votes for impeachment, but this is five votes short of the 200 votes necessary to pass the motion. Most ruling People Power Party (PPP) lawmakers refused to participate in the vote, which appears to be the decisive factor in preventing the motion from passing.<\/p>\n
Of those present, all but one had gone on record endorsing the impeachment motion.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Opposition lawmakers appeared to be slow-walking the vote in hopes that enough PPP lawmakers would return to the assembly hall and support the impeachment motion. Speaker Woo Won-shik announced the impeachment vote’s failure to pass at 9:20 p.m., calling it “regrettable.”<\/span><\/p>\n The DP had earlier pledged to reintroduce an impeachment motion in the next<\/span> special session if Saturday\u2019s impeachment failed.<\/span><\/p>\n Nearly all PPP lawmakers left the assembly hall after voting on a motion to initiate a special investigation into the first lady for alleged stock price manipulation, boycotting the impeachment motion that came after.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Only one, Ahn Cheol-soo, remained in the assembly hall. He was greeted with roaring applause when he moved to cast his vote. PPP lawmaker Kim Yea-ji, who returned to the assembly hall to vote after exiting with her party, was greeted similarly.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Later at around 7 p.m. KST, another PPP lawmaker, Kim Sang-wook, also returned to vote as a massive crowd outside the assembly continued to protest, urging lawmakers to pass the impeachment.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n South Korean police barricade the National Assembly’s gates following President Yoon Suk-yeol’s martial law declaration, Dec. 3, 2024 | Image: Korea Pro<\/em><\/p><\/div>\n THE MOTION<\/b><\/p>\n The Democratic Party (DP) and five minor opposition parties accused Yoon of violating 16 constitutional articles and six legal statutes through his martial law declaration. The motion they submitted specifically cited Yoon’s Dec. 3 martial law declaration as “unconstitutional and illegal,” arguing there was no situation equivalent to wartime or national emergency to justify such measures.<\/span><\/p>\n The motion stated that Yoon issued a proclamation order within just one hour of declaring martial law \u2014 a serious constitutional violation.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n It also accused the South Korean president of violating constitutional requirements for political neutrality of public servants and military personnel by mobilizing martial law troops to blockade the National Assembly and allegedly attempting to arrest National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-shik and leaders of both ruling and opposition parties.<\/span><\/p>\n The motion further detailed violations of the Martial Law Act. Accordingly, Yoon failed to meet the basic requirements necessary for a martial law declaration and did not comply with the National Assembly\u2019s vote to lift martial law for around three hours.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Yoon\u2019s martial law decree banned all political party activities and sought to compel medical personnel to return to work amid a longstanding strike. The opposition deemed these orders excessive and violations of basic rights including freedom of political activity and occupational choice.<\/span><\/p>\n Had Saturday\u2019s vote been successful, Yoon would have been suspended from his duties and authorities as president within the day as per precedent, while the constitutional court reviewed the legality of the parliamentary impeachment vote.<\/span><\/p>\n The National Assembly has twice voted to impeach a sitting president, in 2004 and 2016, with only the latter case resulting in the court upholding the decision to remove President Park Geun-hye.<\/span><\/p>\n