Thank you for joining us. I’m Yoon Jung-min.
On Friday, the Constitutional Court held its first preparatory hearing on President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment case, with representatives for the National Assembly and President Yoon in attendance.
With a fierce legal battle expected, the judges called another preparatory session.
Our correspondent Oh Soo-young starts us off.
The Constitutional Court’s session to set out a roadmap for President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment trial ended without conclusive grounds, as the first preparatory hearing for his case on Friday wrapped up in 40 minutes.
Starting at 2 PM, the hearing was attended by Yoon’s legal representatives, and the National Assembly’s impeachment panel,.. with two justices aiming to organize the main grounds for impeachment, and the list of evidence and witnesses both sides wish to draw upon throughout the trial.
However, as President Yoon’s side did not submit any materials,.. the Court was unable to form concrete lists of grounds, witnesses, or evidence.
Based on the National Assembly’s motion for impeachment and documents submitted prior to the hearing, the justices outlined four rough grounds for impeachment, which include:
Yoon’s declaration of Martial Law on December third, the proclamation of the martial law order, the lockdown of the National Assembly and disruption to parliamentary activities, and the attempted search and seizure of National Election Commission servers and their employees’ mobile phones.
These include the deployment of troops to facilitate Yoon’s decree.
The National Assembly’s panel said they will later decide whether to call for Yoon’s alleged order to arrest political, legal, and media figures as an independent ground for impeachment.
The panel also applied to summon 15 witnesses including key figures implicated in the martial law order such as former Defence Minister Kim Yong-hyun, Park An-su who was appointed Martial Law Commander, and Roh Sang-won, a former Director of Military Intelligence.
Before the hearing began, the National Assembly’s impeachment panel chief Jung Chung-rae and former Constitutional Court Justice Kim Yi-su indicated to reporters that they will emphasize that Yoon’s actions disrupted the country’s constitutional order, and that he incited insurrection by declaring martial law.
Meanwhile, Yoon’s legal team told the Court that the grounds proposed by the National Assembly, were based on media coverage and called for evidence-based claims.
The President, in his speech on December 12th, argued his declaration of martial law was a political act, not subject to judicial review, and that it was his executive right.
Also, his team appeared to contest the Constitutional Court’s method of notifying Yoon on the trial proceedings.
The President for over a week rejected the delivery of court papers, leading to the judges deeming the documents received at his residence.
As he left the hearing session, attorney Yun Gap-geun said the President himself would speak at an appropriate time, appearing to raise the possibility that Yoon could appear during the trial to defend himself.
“In another attempt to organize the guidelines for the Constitutional battle between the President and Parliament, the court set the date for a second preparatory hearing one week later on January third.”
Justice Lee Mi-seon said while the schedule may feel rushed, the severity and significance of the case for the country’s governance requires a fast-paced timeline.
This comes amid concerns that the trial proceedings may be lengthened, intentionally as delaying tactics, as Yoon’s team so far has expressed the need for more preparation time.
Yoon’s legal representatives were announced abruptly on the morning of the hearing, along with their plans to attend the session.
Also, there are concerns that a ruling cannot be declared with the three vacancies in the panel of Constitutional Court justices.
The court announced on Friday it is in the process of discussing the issue.
As six out of nine judges are needed to uphold the impeachment, the current panel of six justices would have to vote unanimously in order to remove Yoon from office.
Oh Soo-young, Arirang News.
Source : Arirang TV, https://www.arirang.com/news/view?id=279419
Arirang TV(public institution's name)'s public work is used according to KOGL