Seoul, South Korea – South Korea’s opposition-controlled National Assembly voted Friday to impeach acting President Han Duck-soo despite strong protests from ruling party lawmakers, easing the country’s political crisis caused by President’s stunning statements Yoon Suk Yeol, further elaborated. imposing martial law And subsequent impeachment.
Han’s impeachment means he will be stripped of the powers and duties of the president until the Constitutional Court decides whether he is dismissed or reinstated. The court is already examining whether Yoon’s previous impeachment should be upheld. The impeachment proceedings against the country’s two highest officials are exacerbating political unrest, increasing economic uncertainty and damaging the international image.
The unicameral National Assembly approved Han’s impeachment motion with 192 votes against. Lawmakers from the ruling People Power Party boycotted the vote and gathered around the stage where Speaker Woo Won Shik was sitting, shouting that the vote was “invalid” and demanding Woo’s resignation. No incidents of violence or injuries have been reported.
JUNG YEON-JE / AFP via Getty Images
The PPP lawmakers protested after Woo called for a vote on Han’s impeachment motion following the announcement that its passage required a simple majority in the 300-member assembly, and not a two-thirds majority as claimed by the PPP. Most South Korean officials can be removed by the National Assembly with a simple majority vote, but the removal of a president requires the support of two-thirds. There are no specific laws regarding the removal of an acting president.
Han’s powers will be officially suspended when copies of his impeachment document are handed over to him and the Constitutional Court. Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Choi Sang-mok will take over.
Agence France-Presse points out that PPP leader Kweon Seong-dong said after the vote that Han “should continue to lead state affairs without giving in to the opposition’s approval of the impeachment motion.”
But Han said in a statement that he “respects parliament’s decision” and would await the Constitutional Court’s subsequent decision on whether to uphold it.
JUNG YEON-JE / AFP via Getty Images
Han, who was appointed prime minister by Yoon, became acting president after Yoon, a conservative, was impeached by the National Assembly about two weeks ago over his short-lived imposition of martial law on December 3. Han soon clashed with the main liberal opposition party, the Democratic Party, when he opposed opposition-led efforts to fill three vacant seats on the Constitutional Court, setting up an independent investigation into the state’s decree of Yoon’s siege and introducing bills for farmers.
At the center of the battle is the Democratic Party’s demand that Han approve the assembly’s appointment of three new Constitutional Court judges so that the full nine-member bench can be restored ahead of the ruling on Yoon’s impeachment. That is a politically sensitive issue because a court decision to remove Yoon as president would need the support of at least six judges, and adding more judges would likely increase the prospects of Yoon’s ouster. Yoon’s political allies in the ruling People Power Party oppose the appointment of the three judges, saying Han should not exercise presidential authority to make the appointments while Yoon has yet to be formally removed from office.
On Thursday, Han said he would not appoint the judges without the consent of both parties. The Democratic Party, which has a majority in the assembly, has filed an impeachment motion against Han and passed bills calling for the appointment of three judges.
South Korean investigative agencies are investigating whether Yoon committed rebellion and abuse of power with his marriage law decision. Its defense minister, police chief and several other senior military commanders have already been arrested over the deployment of troops and police officers in the National Assembly, leading to a dramatic standoff that ended when lawmakers managed to enter the chamber and voted unanimously to pass the decree van Yoon to revoke. .
