- South Korea’s Constitutional Court schedules an additional hearing for Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment case on February 18.
- Yoon, detained on insurrection charges, faces removal over his martial law declaration, which parliament rejected.
- If impeachment is upheld, a new presidential election must be held within 60 days.
South Korea’s suspended President Yoon Suk Yeol will face another hearing next week before judges decide whether to permanently remove him from office over his controversial martial law decree, the country’s Constitutional Court announced on February 13.
The decree, which lasted just six hours before being struck down by the opposition-led parliament, ultimately led to Yoon’s impeachment.
EDITOR’S PICKS
- 45% of Nigerian Girls Become Mothers Before 18 — World Bank
- ECOWAS Faces Historic Defection as Three West African Nations Withdraw
- Netanyahu to Meet Trump at White House Next Week
He was later detained on insurrection charges, making him the first sitting South Korean president to be arrested.
Tuesday’s hearing was widely expected to be Yoon’s last before the judges began deliberations. However, the court has scheduled an additional session for February 18.
Following the trial’s conclusion, a verdict could take up to two weeks. Previously impeached presidents Park Geun-hye and Roh Moo-hyun waited 11 and 14 days, respectively, for their rulings.
If the court upholds Yoon’s impeachment, South Korea will be required to hold a new presidential election within 60 days.
Yoon’s trial has largely focused on whether his martial law declaration violated the constitution, as such measures are typically reserved for war or national emergencies.
FURTHER READING
- [VIDEO] Commotion Rocks PDP BoT Meeting as Faction Confront Each Other
- NiDCOM Prepares for Deportation of Nigerians from U.S
- BREAKING: Sowore Pleads Not Guilty to Cybercrime Charges Filed by Police IG
His lawyers argue that the decree was “an act of governance and cannot be subject to judicial review.”
Last week, Yoon also suggested that even if he had ordered the arrest of MPs to prevent them from voting down his decree, it would be legally irrelevant since the order was never carried out.
