South Korea’s Yoon speaks out, slams opposition obstruction, slackness on nationwide safety

SEOUL, South Korea – Disempowered and disgraced South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol broke cover on Thursday morning to deliver an impassioned defense, via TV broadcast, of his shock declaration of martial law last week.

The National Assembly overturned martial law within just three hours, but public fury lingers, and his self-justification may not be enough to save him when the house convenes on Saturday to vote, again, for his impeachment.

Last Saturday the motion failed to pass when Mr. Yoon’s right-wing People Power Party, who occupy 108 seats in the 300-seat Assembly, boycotted voting. A two-thirds majority is needed.

On Thursday, PPP head Han Dong-hoon — who has twisted and turned over impeachment — told his party to vote for it. Per local reports, seven PPP lawmakers have said they will vote for impeachment, reinforcing the three who defied last week’s boycott.

That would — just — secure the necessary numbers.

Addressing Koreans Thursday, Mr. Yoon alleged a “parliamentary dictatorship” by the left-wing main opposition, the Democratic Party of Korea, which controls the National Assembly.

Power is divided between the presidency and the National Assembly, which is unicameral; there is no upper house. That entrenches checks and balances, but the bilateral power structure leads to deeply confrontational politicking when executive branches face opposition-controlled houses.  

If Saturday’s vote goes against Mr. Yoon, he will be the third president impeached over the last five administrations.

Mr. Yoon on Thursday alleged opposition obstruction of state actions against Chinese espionage, North Korean electoral interference — and even against organized crime and drug trafficking.

His latest approval ratings are 11 percent. Any traction he gains today may fall short.

There is a widespread, bipartisan sense that last week’s brief declaration of martial law — though it led to no reported injuries, let alone deaths – was a throwback to the authoritarian governance that ended in 1987 after years of pro-democracy struggle.

“Invoking martial law to counter political opposition is what authoritarian leaders do,” said Jenny Town, a visiting Korea analyst who directs the Stimpson Center’s 38 North project. “Korea had its own experience with this and fought to overcome it. Reviving that chapter of their history serves no one’s interests.”

Disgraced president justifies martial law

Mr. Yoon complained about the huge number of rallies against himself and accused the opposition of refusing to “acknowledge the democratically elected president.”

Mr. Yoon is midway through his five-year term, having won the 2022 presidential election by a margin of under 1 percent.

The opposition, “in a blatant attempt to obstruct the government’s functioning … have impeached numerous government officials,” he said. That, he claimed, “has severely undermined the integrity of public service and the fundamental principles of justice.”

The legislature-executive brouhaha that erupted immediately before martial law was over national budget. The DPK cut all funds for nuclear power projects, as well as multiple future science projects, but paved the way for Chinese solar energy fields.

Mr. Yoon also discussed national security.

He said Chinese nationals had undertaken espionage in Korea, photographing military facilities, but claimed, “under current law, there is no way to punish espionage by foreigners.”

Attempts to remedy this were blocked by the opposition, he said.

Last year, DPK leader Lee Jae-myung generated anger among Korean conservatives by holding a chummy meeting with Beijing’s ambassador to Korea.

Mr. Yoon slammed the DPK for calling for easing U.N. sanctions on North Korea; for cutting funding for police and prosecution; and for halting probes into drug trafficking and organized crime.

As a result, Korea “is in a state of national paralysis and social disorder,” Mr Yoon said, where “it is impossible for the administration and judiciary to function normally.”

Conservatives have long been suspicious about electoral systems. Mr. Yoon addressed their concerns.

He revealed that North Korea hacked various South Korean systems, including electoral computers, last fall, but that the National Electoral Commission, which is led by senior justices, resisted in-depth probes. He stated that its security protocols were dire — such as “12345” passwords.

Under martial law, Yoon ordered special forces to seize the NEC. Those troops deployed before other units arrived at the National Assembly, though the latter received greater coverage.

Finally, Mr. Yoon said that after the DPK moved to impeach prosecutors and auditors, he felt compelled to act. 

But some have criticized his autocoup for sloppy execution.

Mr. Yoon said he had deliberately not cut power and water to the National Assembly, nor jammed broadcasting. His decree, he stated, “Was aimed at informing the people of the disastrous situation.”

In his broadcast, Mr. Yoon did not mention his wife, Kim Keon-hee, who many Koreans consider a “Lady Macbeth”-type figure. She is facing multiple allegations of corruption, stock manipulation and political meddling.

Stability ahead, or …?

Mr. Yoon is sequestered in the presidential compound, where his security has prevented police investigators from entering to gather evidence. Elsewhere, protest groups seeking to march upon the compound have been turned back by uniformed police.

A former chief prosecutor, Mr. Yoon has assembled his legal team for impeachment, The Washington Times understands. “I will not evade legal or political responsibility,” he said Thursday.

If impeachment is voted for, it will provide political stability. 

According to two constitutional law experts who briefed foreign reporters on Wednesday, Mr. Yoon’s recent handover of power to his party and prime minister lacks constitutional basis.

During impeachment deliberations, the premier takes on national leadership. That procedure operated normally during South Korea’s two, prior presidential impeachments.

The two experts raised another issue.

The nine-seat Constitutional Court currently has only six judges, but it is likely to request a full staff, they said. As Constitutional Court judges are appointed by the National Assembly, a potential tug-of-war looms in the house.