President Yoon Suk Yeol’s brief martial law declaration on December 3 has thrust South Korea into profound social and political turmoil. His decision to deploy military forces onto the streets of Seoul – a sight unseen in decades – stunned observers both at home and abroad.
But what initially appeared to be a political dead end for the president is now taking an unexpected turn. The tide seems to be shifting in favor of the impeached Yoon despite his unprecedented arrest on January 15 on charges of insurrection.
Long stagnant, Yoon’s approval ratings have recently surged and surpassed their pre-martial law numbers. The ruling People Power Party is also revamping quickly after months of division and factional infighting.
While this uptick could prove temporary, the growing wave of pro-Yoon supporters and the president’s rising momentum are becoming harder to ignore. Rallies in the country’s capital have swollen in size, drawing multigenerational crowds united in their defense of the chief executive and their claim of upholding the constitutional order.
Interviewed for Asia Times, Hwang Kyo-ahn, who was South Korea’s 44th prime minister and also served as justice minister, shared his insights. Having served as acting president during the impeachment and removal of President Park Geun-hye in 2016-17, Hwang offers a unique perspective on the unfolding political drama.
Was President Yoon’s martial law decree justified?
Emergency martial law is an inherent right bestowed on the chief executive, an extraordinary authority that supersedes ordinary law. But, that aside, one must understand the circumstances that prompted President Yoon to declare martial law on December 3.
Over the two and a half years since Yoon’s administration took office, the opposition, wielding a majority in parliament, has effectively paralyzed the legislative branch. Most notably, the de facto leftist coalition, headed by the main opposition Democratic Party, has systematically obstructed the implementation of the president’s signature agendas.
The coalition, for instance, has wielded its budgetary power for years, hiking members’ salaries while slashing funding for Yoon’s flagship policies. They also eliminated the president’s special activities budget, a crucial resource for managing executive operations.
Beyond financial measures, the opposition has consistently obstructed the appointment of key personnel, rejecting nominees during confirmation hearings or pressuring them to resign even after taking office. In a glaring display of obstructionism, the Democratic Party has filed 29 impeachment motions against state officials, prosecutors and others until today. This is a record-breaking figure unmatched by any previous administration.
With President Yoon’s regular powers and political avenues stymied, he had no choice but to take action. However, let there be no misunderstanding. Implementing the decree did not involve troops suppressing citizens by force, nor did Yoon seek to overthrow the Constitution or any state organ.
Can you elaborate on the election fraud controversies?
Another key reason behind President Yoon’s declaration of emergency martial law was to investigate the National Election Commission’s computerized system and uncover the truth behind election fraud allegations. Because the commission is an independent constitutional body staffed by senior judiciary members, conducting a thorough investigation during peacetime is virtually impossible. Under martial law, the military was thus deployed to the Election Commission and related agencies to secure servers and crucial evidence.
Allegations of election fraud first emerged during the general elections in April 2020 and April 2024. Evidence includes defective ballots, improperly stamped seals and ballot boxes that were supposed to be sealed but were found open. These irregularities and other flaws in the electoral system have resulted in statistically implausible outcomes in certain districts.
We uncovered these facts through recounts initiated by myself and other candidates adversely affected by the flawed system. Over 1,000 defective ballots were found despite only 1,900 voters having been registered at a polling station in Incheon, for instance. Former parliamentarian Min Kyung-wook relentlessly pursued this issue through legal means and eventually secured a Supreme Court ruling invalidating 279 faulty ballots. It did not alter the election outcome, however.
In October 2023, a report from the National Intelligence Service highlighted serious vulnerabilities in South Korea’s electoral roll, vote-counting process and early voting system. Regardless of one’s view on election fraud, investigating an electoral system with clear signs of flaws should be nothing more than common sense.
What is your take on insurrection charges against President Yoon?
Criminal law hinges on two essential concepts – subjective and objective requirements. The subjective requirement addresses the intent and purpose behind an act. Without purpose, punishment is not feasible. The objective requirement pertains to the act itself. If I punch a passerby, for instance, that would meet the definition of an assault.
For a guilty verdict on insurrection charges, both elements must be present. In the case of President Yoon’s martial law, however, neither was evident. There is no indication that the president ordered the overthrow of the parliament or acted with such intent.
You claim the opposition’s ‘tyranny’ has not stopped. How so?
On December 14, after a failed attempt, opposition parties rammed through an impeachment motion against President Yoon in parliament. The motion accuses him of orchestrating an insurrection through an unconstitutional martial law decree – a narrative that Democratic Party lawmakers have vigorously championed in recent weeks.
But now, perhaps recognizing the challenge of proving insurrection charges, the main opposition party is moving to omit that accusation from the impeachment articles. Instead, they are reorienting their case on claims that Yoon failed to follow proper procedure in his December 3 martial law declaration.
Streamlining the article by removing the high-burden-of-proof insurrection charge would expedite Yoon’s impeachment procedure, allowing judges to rule on fewer contentions and reducing the number of witnesses. And this is precisely what the main opposition is fixated on. Ultimately, Democratic Party lawmakers are dead set on swiftly removing President Yoon from office, paving an unobstructed path for opposition leader Lee Jae-myung to ascend to the helm. For Lee, who is grappling with mounting legal challenges, this scenario is highly ideal.
Recently, to further pressure Yoon, the Democratic Party has introduced a special counsel bill to probe the president, not only for insurrection but also for claims of inciting North Korean aggression. Their tyrannical endeavor, therefore, shows no signs of abating.
I have long warned that a leftist like Lee Jae-myung assuming power would spell the end of South Korea’s liberal democracy. To that end, we conservatives must stand firm and fight to the last breath.