Withdrawing treason charge should be left to Constitutional Court
The National Assembly’s decision to withdraw its charge of treason under the Criminal Act in the impeachment case against President Yoon Suk Yeol has sparked controversy. During a preparatory hearing at the Constitutional Court, the Assembly’s legal representatives stated that the question of guilt or innocence regarding the treason charge would be addressed and proven in a criminal court. They emphasized that the impeachment trial should focus on constitutional violations rather than being consumed by the specifics of criminal law. However, the Assembly’s impeachment resolution had explicitly cited the misuse of martial law powers and the mobilization of the military and police to disrupt constitutional order as major reasons for impeachment, making the rationale for this withdrawal unclear.
The shift in the Assembly’s stance appears to be influenced by efforts to expedite the impeachment process and move toward a presidential election, driven in part by the judicial risks facing Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party (DP). Lee, who has already received a guilty verdict in the first trial regarding violations of the Public Official Election Act, faces further legal jeopardy. The decision to expedite Yoon’s impeachment before a final ruling on Lee’s case could be interpreted as an attempt to shift the political landscape. If treason charges were debated during the impeachment trial, the president’s legal team would likely demand extensive cross-examinations of numerous witnesses, potentially prolonging the proceedings. Moreover, prolonged investigations into treason allegations by law enforcement could delay the trial even further. However, if the DP-led Assembly’s legal maneuver is perceived as a means to mitigate Lee’s legal challenges, it risks losing public support.
That said, the People Power Party (PPP)’s demand for the Constitutional Court to dismiss the impeachment motion on these grounds also seems excessive. Floor leader Kweon Seong-dong called the withdrawal akin to “steamed buns without filling,” insisting that the revised impeachment motion must be reapproved by the Assembly. While the PPP appears to be pushing for the cancellation of the impeachment motion, Kweon’s stance invites criticism for its inconsistency. During the 2017 impeachment trial of former President Park Geun-hye, when he served as the Assembly’s impeachment manager, Kweon similarly argued that criminal charges like bribery and coercion should be excluded from the motion, focusing instead on constitutional violations.
As the Constitutional Court begins its deliberations with its current eight-member bench, the question of whether to accept the withdrawal of the treason charge should be left to its discretion. Demanding a revote on the impeachment motion or pushing for its cancellation will only fuel public division and worsen political turmoil. With the terms of two Constitutional Court justices set to expire in April, the possibility of a judicial deadlock cannot be ignored. Political leaders must cooperate to ensure the smooth progress of the impeachment trial.
In particular, Lee Jae-myung, whose first trial on election law violations concluded after an extraordinary 26 months, must actively participate in his appeal and avoid any actions that could be considered delaying tactics.
Translated using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.
The shift in the Assembly’s stance appears to be influenced by efforts to expedite the impeachment process and move toward a presidential election, driven in part by the judicial risks facing Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party (DP). Lee, who has already received a guilty verdict in the first trial regarding violations of the Public Official Election Act, faces further legal jeopardy. The decision to expedite Yoon’s impeachment before a final ruling on Lee’s case could be interpreted as an attempt to shift the political landscape. If treason charges were debated during the impeachment trial, the president’s legal team would likely demand extensive cross-examinations of numerous witnesses, potentially prolonging the proceedings. Moreover, prolonged investigations into treason allegations by law enforcement could delay the trial even further. However, if the DP-led Assembly’s legal maneuver is perceived as a means to mitigate Lee’s legal challenges, it risks losing public support.
That said, the People Power Party (PPP)’s demand for the Constitutional Court to dismiss the impeachment motion on these grounds also seems excessive. Floor leader Kweon Seong-dong called the withdrawal akin to “steamed buns without filling,” insisting that the revised impeachment motion must be reapproved by the Assembly. While the PPP appears to be pushing for the cancellation of the impeachment motion, Kweon’s stance invites criticism for its inconsistency. During the 2017 impeachment trial of former President Park Geun-hye, when he served as the Assembly’s impeachment manager, Kweon similarly argued that criminal charges like bribery and coercion should be excluded from the motion, focusing instead on constitutional violations.
As the Constitutional Court begins its deliberations with its current eight-member bench, the question of whether to accept the withdrawal of the treason charge should be left to its discretion. Demanding a revote on the impeachment motion or pushing for its cancellation will only fuel public division and worsen political turmoil. With the terms of two Constitutional Court justices set to expire in April, the possibility of a judicial deadlock cannot be ignored. Political leaders must cooperate to ensure the smooth progress of the impeachment trial.
In particular, Lee Jae-myung, whose first trial on election law violations concluded after an extraordinary 26 months, must actively participate in his appeal and avoid any actions that could be considered delaying tactics.
Translated using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.
No comments
Post a Comment