'Yoon Impeachment Hearing' Dispute at Constitutional Court... "Authority Violation" vs "Legal Procedure"

Hearing Held by Democratic Party's Sole Action
People Power Party Files Jurisdiction Dispute with Constitutional Court

The ruling Democratic Party and the People Power Party (PPP) members, along with Jeong Cheong-rae, chairman of the National Assembly Judiciary Committee, clashed over the Democratic Party's forceful holding of a hearing on the petition for the impeachment of President Yoon Seok-yeol.

On the 27th, the Constitutional Court held a public hearing on the dispute over authority case filed by PPP Judiciary Committee members against Chairman Jeong at the Grand Bench of the Constitutional Court in Jongno-gu, Seoul.

PPP lawmaker Joo Jin-woo said, "Chairman Jeong unilaterally set and passed the unprecedented agenda of the impeachment petition hearing, fundamentally infringing on the rights of PPP members to represent the people and to deliberate and vote on agenda items."

The PPP side argued that the initiation of an impeachment motion is the prerogative of individual lawmakers and not an agenda that the parliamentary secretariat can handle; therefore, according to the National Assembly Act, it should be simply concluded after reporting to the Speaker of the National Assembly. They claimed that forcibly holding the hearing was illegal.

The PPP also asserted that Chairman Jeong did not appoint a ruling party secretary to the Judiciary Committee, did not form a subcommittee to review the petition, abused his authority to maintain order, unilaterally ended substitute debates, and held a hearing similar to a formal investigation conducted when an impeachment motion is initiated, thereby infringing on the rights of Judiciary Committee members as lawmakers.

On the other hand, Chairman Jeong's side claimed the procedure was lawful. Jeong's legal representative stated, "The president is accused of abusing various powers, and many citizens agreed with the petition. The Judiciary Committee can investigate this and raise the issue for discussion in the plenary session."

He added, "To say it is illegal and improper just because there is no legal authority for it disregards the characteristics of the National Assembly as a representative body and its political nature."

Article 65 of the National Assembly Act stipulates that committees may hold hearings on 'important agenda items.' Since the majority of Judiciary Committee members deemed it an important agenda, there was no problem, and the meeting proceedings were lawful, according to Chairman Jeong's side.

The Constitutional Court concluded the hearing procedure after listening to both sides' opinions on the day. The date for the ruling will be set later.

Last month on the 9th, the Democratic Party unilaterally placed the "Petition for Immediate Initiation of Impeachment Motion against President Yoon" on the agenda at the full Judiciary Committee meeting and approved the hearing plan and witness summons. The hearings were held on the 19th and 26th of last month. PPP Judiciary Committee members filed a dispute over authority with the Constitutional Court and also sought an injunction to block the hearing.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.