This past week, eagle-eyed observers of South Korean politics – not to mention the South Korean public – were supposed to have been put out of their respective miseries. The fate of the embattled South Korean President, Yoon Suk Yeol, would be made known, and South Korea could regroup and plan its next steps at a time of regional and global instability.
Instead, we are still waiting for the country’s constitutional court to decide the President’s destiny. Swiftness has certainly not been a priority for the eight judges. As protests in support of and against Yoon continue to line the streets of Seoul, one thing can be said with certainty: whatever the outcome, the political polarisation within South Korean society isn’t going away anytime soon.
Trying to oust a president is anything but new for South Korean politics
For a country that only became a full-fledged democracy in 1987, political factionalism, present in pre-democracy South Korea for so long, remained rife even after its democratic transition. South Korea in the 1980s and 1990s saw more than a mere trickle of lawmakers defect from existing political parties to form new ones. Presidents and senior officials were also indicted for charges including financial malpractice, silencing critics, breaking election law, and actively allowing South Korea’s infamous family-run conglomerates (chaebols) to meddle in politics.
Nearly forty years later, and these issues have hardly gone away. It is perhaps no wonder that when Yoon Suk Yeol was impeached on 14 December 2024 – eleven days after the ill-timed decision to declare martial law – it marked the third occasion that a South Korean president had been impeached.
Prior to the martial law debacle, the most infamous case was that of Park Geun-hye. Following her impeachment in December 2016, Park was removed from power in March 2017 and imprisoned on charges of corruption, abuse of power, and influence peddling. Less well-known is the impeachment of Roh Moo-hyun in March 2004 on the grounds of violating election law. Even though the constitutional court ruled in Roh’s favour, thereby restoring his presidential powers, the president committed suicide in 2009. This was following speculation that while in office, he had received $6 million (£4.6 million) from a businessman – whose employees made shoes for Nike – who was subsequently convicted of bribery.
Trying to oust a president is anything but new for South Korean politics, but the fact that it will likely be over 100 days from when Yoon was impeached is unprecedented. Park’s impeachment ruling took 91 days; that of Roh took 63. What makes the current situation unique is that in addition to facing charges of violating the South Korean constitution – upon which the constitutional court will rule – President Yoon also faces criminal charges with respect to inciting an insurrection. What is more, for the first time in South Korean history, an acting president has also been impeached, namely Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, on account of collusion with Yoon on his martial law declaration. Earlier today, Han’s ruling was overturned and his powers as acting president were reinstated.
The past three months have seen dramatic overreach on the part of Yoon’s opponents to go above and beyond in ensuring he is removed from power. The main opposition, the left-leaning Democratic party, has also sought to hinder the chances of the ruling conservative People Power party from emerging victorious in the event of a general election, which must be held if Yoon is ousted.
Rancour between parties looks only to worsen. On Friday, opposition lawmakers filed a motion to impeach the then-acting President and Finance Minister, Choi Sang-mok, for having failed to appoint a ninth judge to the constitutional court, which remains one judge down. The leftist opposition may seek to delegitimise the ruling party to push for an early presidential election. But election or no election, these manoeuvres are hardly going to calm the crowds of protesters outside South Korea’s constitutional court.
Given the intensity of political discord, it is no surprise that heightened security measures have already been put in place for the long-awaited day when the verdict on President Yoon’s future is announced. Schools and subway stations in the vicinity of the court will be closed; police will be on standby in anticipation of civil unrest; a no-fly zone for drones over the court buildings has even been enforced.
It is also no wonder that South Korean society is only becoming increasingly polarised. Crucially, whatever the outcome, the country cannot allow the months of turbulence to drown it as it continues to face serious security threats from North Korea and China, as well as questions over the durability of its ironclad alliance with the United States. As the Trump administration considers making significant cuts to the US military, including preventing the expansion of US forces stationed in Japan, the prospect of Seoul and Tokyo paying more for Washington’s security umbrella becomes ever more likely.
The waiting game, however, cannot last forever. With the constitutional court restoring Han Duck-soo’s powers as the acting president, the same court is now preparing to deliver its verdict on Yoon. But this is only just the beginning. With recent polls suggesting that support for the ruling conservative party is at near 43 per cent, only 2 per cent ahead of that for the Democratic party, any general election will likely be tightly fought. For one of the world’s most advanced states, the strife is not over – nor is the battle won.
Comments
Comment section temporarily unavailable for maintenance.