South Korea’s SEOULOn Thursday, anti-corruption officials in South Korea asked prosecutors to arrest ousted President Yoon Suk Yeol for mutiny and abuse of power due to his brief imposition of martial law.
Yoon, the first sitting president to be imprisoned in South Korea’s history, was identified by the Corruption Investigation Office for High-Ranking Officials (CIO) as the head of an uprising that also involved his defense minister at the time.
Recent developments have thrown South Korea into a political crisis that has affected the economy and caused friends, particularly the United States, to worry about the political stability of the nation.
Yoon, who was suspended from office and impeached on December 14, has been in jail since last week while an inquiry is conducted into his attempt to impose martial law on December 3, which stunned the country even though parliament quickly overturned it.
Established in 2021 as an independent anti-graft agency, the CIO has headed a joint team of the military ministry and police to probe high-ranking officials, including the president and their family members, while prosecutors conduct their own investigation.
The CIO is required by law to send any matter to the prosecutor’s office for additional action, and they are only permitted to investigate the president.
According to the CIO, Yoon’s custody is scheduled to expire on or around January 28. However, before formally charging the president, prosecutors are anticipated to request an additional 10-day extension from the court.
The Office of the Supreme Prosecutors chose not to comment.
Kim Yong-hyun, Yoon’s defense minister at the time, has already been charged with insurrection by prosecutors. Among the officials charged thus far are the heads of the Seoul police, the national police commissioner, the Capital Defense Command, and the Defense Counterintelligence Command.
Yoon has disregarded CIO investigators’ summons and refused to speak to them since his arrest on January 15.
Citing the president’s unwillingness to cooperate, Lee Jae-seung, deputy chief of the CIO, stated that it would be more effective for the prosecutors to take over the investigation before indicting Yoon.
Lee told a briefing that the suspect is still recalcitrant, refusing to answer questions and not responding to criminal justice proceedings, even though he is facing serious charges of being the ringleader of an uprising.
According to him, investigators had gathered statements from a number of military officers regarding Yoon’s purported attempts to arrest lawmakers and his reference to a second martial law decree. These accusations were refuted by Yoon and his attorneys.
Although it’s unknown how close they are today, Yoon, a senior prosecutor before becoming president, now has prosecutors from that same world handling his criminal case.
Yoon’s attorneys have stated time and time again that the CIO lacks the power to handle his case because the statute only lists a broad range of high-ranking officials and offenses that it can look into; it makes no reference to rebellion.
When Yoon’s attorneys attempted to use that defense to stop his arrest, a Seoul court rejected their case.
In its separate hearing on Yoon’s impeachment, the Constitutional Court will decide whether to remove Yoon from office before any criminal probe can begin, according to Yoon’s counsel.
On Thursday, the attorneys restated their stance that they will hold the CIO responsible for what they described as its unlawful probe and urged the prosecutors who are now handling the case to follow the law.
In remarks to the Constitutional Court on Tuesday, Yoon denied requesting that the finance minister draft a budget for an emergency legislative body or directing troops to eject legislators from parliament.
Yoon might be prosecuted with insurrection, which is one of the few crimes for which a South Korean president is not immune and is, in theory, capital. However, it has been almost 30 years since South Korea last carried out an execution.
On Thursday afternoon, Yoon went to another hearing in his impeachment case before the Constitutional Court.
His attorneys reiterated the president’s previous claim that he had only ever planned to issue the measures as a warning to end the political impasse, not to fully declare martial law.
Former defense minister Kim testified at Thursday’s session, his first public appearance since he attempted suicide in jail last month. He contended that Yoon’s lack of commitment to enforcing military authority was demonstrated by the tiny number of troops mobilized.