Yoon's Side Files Recusal and Objection Requests for Justices... Constitutional Court Meeting on the 14th (Comprehensive)

"Difficulty in Ensuring Fairness" Due to Uri Beop Yeonguhoe Chair Experience
Objections Raised to Commencement of Hearing and Securing Investigation Records
Inevitable Trial Delays if Accepted by Constitutional Court

The office of President Yoon Suk-yeol filed a motion to disqualify Justice Jeong Gye-seon of the Constitutional Court, who is presiding over the impeachment trial, on the 13th, stating that it is difficult to expect a fair judgment.

President Yoon's legal team stated, "We filed the disqualification motion because there are circumstances that make it difficult to expect a fair judgment from the justice." The legal team claimed, "Justice Jeong Gye-seon is a member and former chairperson of 'Uri Beop Yeonguhoe,' a progressive-leaning group within the judiciary, and during the parliamentary confirmation hearing on the 23rd of last month, he revealed prejudgments regarding the facts and legal assessments of this case in response to questions from lawmakers." They added, "Justice Jeong's spouse, lawyer Hwang Pil-gyu, is an attorney at the Gonggam Public Interest and Human Rights Foundation, whose chairman is lawyer Kim Yi-su, co-representative of the National Assembly's impeachment prosecution team."

President Yoon Suk-yeol

According to the Constitutional Court Act, parties to the trial may file a disqualification motion if there are circumstances that make it difficult to expect a fair judgment from a justice, by appearing at the hearing date and before the argument begins. No more than one justice can be disqualified in the same case. Under the Civil Procedure Act, which is applied by analogy to the Constitutional Court Act, the Constitutional Court must suspend the litigation procedure until a conclusion is reached regarding the disqualification motion. However, a Constitutional Court official explained that the hearing scheduled for the 14th is likely to proceed as planned.

The Constitutional Court may dismiss a disqualification motion if it is clearly intended to delay the trial. In the previous impeachment trial of former President Park Geun-hye, a disqualification motion was filed against presiding Justice Kang Il-won during the hearing on February 22, 2017, but the Constitutional Court promptly dismissed it, stating it was solely intended to delay the trial. Acting Chief Justice Moon Hyung-bae convened a justices' meeting at 10 a.m. on the 14th to discuss President Yoon's disqualification motion.

President Yoon's side also filed an objection, arguing that it is unfair for the Constitutional Court to have concluded the preparatory procedures on the 3rd and to proceed with the formal hearing on the 14th. They stated that until the impeachment trial decision on Prime Minister Han Deok-su is made, "the proper composition of the bench remains uncertain," and therefore "they cannot participate in the hearing, which has significant legal consequences." They also said, "Regarding the withdrawal of the charge of treason, the subject of the trial must be confirmed in writing in the petition for the formal hearing to properly commence."

Yoon Gap-geun, lawyer for President Yoon Seok-yeol, is announcing the position regarding the arrest warrant issued against President Yoon in front of the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office in Seocho-gu, Seoul on the 31st. Photo by Kang Jin-hyung

If the charge of treason under the Criminal Act is to be withdrawn from the grounds for prosecution, a revised petition reflecting the change must be submitted in writing after re-deliberation by the National Assembly; otherwise, they urge the withdrawal of the 'withdrawal claim.' They also argued, "Due to the ongoing serious illegal acts attempting to unlawfully execute an arrest warrant, it is difficult to express the intention to attend the first hearing." President Yoon's side also requested the cancellation of the designation of five hearing dates at once, calling it "a measure that severely restricts the respondent's right to defense and procedural participation."

Regarding the Constitutional Court's relaxation of the hearsay rule under the Criminal Procedure Act in the impeachment trial evidence, securing investigation records through certified copies, and admitting National Assembly minutes as evidence, President Yoon's side protested, claiming these actions "seriously infringe on the respondent's human rights." Hearsay evidence refers to indirect testimony or reports as if conveying facts experienced by others. The hearsay rule generally excludes the admissibility of such evidence, except when certain conditions stipulated by the Criminal Procedure Act are met.

President Yoon is refusing the arrest warrant issued by the High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Office (HOCI) on grounds such as "the constitutional trial is ongoing." However, at the same time, the Constitutional Court is delaying the start of the hearing to prioritize the Prime Minister's case and is demanding that evidence be examined individually by the Court without investigation records or National Assembly minutes. President Yoon's side claims these measures are necessary for a cautious and fair trial process, but there are also views that this may be part of a litigation delay strategy. If the Constitutional Court accepts all these demands, it is pointed out that delays in the impeachment trial's hearing and verdict procedures will be inevitable.

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