[Initial Perspective] Why You Need to Take a Detour When in a Hurry

Controversy Over Withdrawal of Treason Charge in Impeachment Trial
Prosecutor's Office Investigation Must Also Avoid Procedural Errors
Constitutional Court Should Focus Solely on the Trial

Facing the emergency martial law situation of December 3rd, South Korea is experiencing unprecedented "time for interpretation" amid extreme chaos. Investigations into President Yoon Seok-yeol and the Constitutional Court's impeachment trial have begun, but legal confusion is intensifying over procedural legitimacy, causing turmoil even within the judicial system.

The biggest issue is that the Democratic Party of Korea withdrew the charge of treason from President Yoon's impeachment motion. On the 3rd, during the second preparatory hearing for President Yoon's impeachment trial, the National Assembly's impeachment prosecution team announced, "We will withdraw the charge of treason from the grounds for impeachment." It appears this calculation was made to shorten the impeachment trial period by having the Constitutional Court only review the unconstitutionality, excluding the establishment of treason under criminal law. The People Power Party immediately reacted strongly by visiting the Constitutional Court in protest that day. Kwon Seong-dong, floor leader of the People Power Party, stated, "The treason charge is the core of the impeachment motion against President Yoon and Acting President Han Deok-su," and argued, "If the core reason has been withdrawn, the Constitutional Court should dismiss the hastily drafted impeachment motion."

Controversy is also igniting within the legal community. Some suggest that the opposition party's decision to withdraw the treason charge was at the Constitutional Court's urging. If the Constitutional Court, which should maintain political neutrality, was so deeply involved as to directly request the opposition, it could be criticized as shooting itself in the foot. It is hard to avoid suspicion that this was done to hold the presidential election before judicial risks, such as the second trial verdict in Lee Jae-myung's violation of the Public Official Election Act, materialize. Professor Jang Young-su of Korea University Law School said, "Changing such a core part as the treason charge is a serious issue," adding, "If this was the opinion of an individual constitutional justice, it could be seen as prejudiced, and President Yoon's side could file a motion to disqualify that justice."

From the Constitutional Court's perspective, the situation is indeed urgent. With the retirement of Justices Moon Hyung-bae and Lee Mi-seon, appointed by the president, approaching on April 18, the president's uncertain status must be resolved before then to prevent extreme chaos. A legal expert who requested anonymity pointed out, "It was a clear mistake that caused doubts about the Constitutional Court's neutrality itself," and said, "If the trial procedure had been conducted based on principles, there would have been no problem, but with many factors to consider, the process became tangled."

The High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Division, investigating the treason charge case, handed over the execution of the arrest warrant to the police just before the warrant expired that day, as President Yoon refused to comply citing that the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) has no authority to investigate treason. Within the police, there is dissatisfaction that the CIO is now trying to shift related duties to the police. After the martial law incident, the CIO and police rushed into a competition to investigate, but when procedural legitimacy was questioned, they appear to be scrambling to manage the situation belatedly. The controversy over the investigative authority has ironically provided President Yoon with an excuse.

Just because the purpose is legitimate does not justify the means. The essence of a trial is procedure, and procedure secures the legitimacy of the verdict. The Constitutional Court, which has begun meetings with an eight-member panel, must focus on conducting the trial without legal or procedural errors, unaffected by political circumstances. It is time to remember the proverb, "More haste, less speed."

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