Go to contents

Yoon’s defense cites ‘clerical error’ in martial law decree

Yoon’s defense cites ‘clerical error’ in martial law decree

Posted January. 17, 2025 07:46,   

Updated January. 17, 2025 07:46

한국어

President Yoon Suk Yeol’s defense team has argued before the Constitutional Court that the controversial martial law decree, which fully prohibited activities of the National Assembly, regional councils, and political parties, resulted from a clerical error by former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun. The defense claims that Kim mistakenly copied clauses from a prior decree, which dated back to a time when the president had the constitutional authority to dissolve the National Assembly, and that Yoon “overlooked” the error during the drafting process.

The martial law decree is a critical document in the execution of martial law, and its drafting typically requires meticulous attention. According to the indictment of Kim, he briefed Yoon on the first draft of the decree two days before the martial law declaration, made revisions based on Yoon's instructions, and received the president’s final approval. This process raises questions about the plausibility of President Yoon's claim that the error was overlooked.

Critics find it especially puzzling that Yoon, a former legal practitioner, could have failed to notice that the 1987 constitutional amendment had repealed the president's authority to dissolve the National Assembly. Former Defense Minister Kim has publicly denied that the clause was a mistake, asserting that the decree was reviewed and approved by Yoon and aligned with its original intent. Furthermore, historical precedent shows no prior martial law decree specifically prohibiting the activities of the National Assembly, regional councils, or political parties.

President Yoon’s explanation for the military's actions at the National Assembly has also drawn criticism. His claim that martial law troops broke windows and forcibly entered the Assembly “to stop an agitated crowd” has been dismissed as implausible. As noted in reports, the primary objective was to prevent a vote to lift martial law. President Yoon’s attempts to shift blame onto his subordinates while maintaining that he is not shirking responsibility have been widely criticized. His explanation comes across as both insubstantial and self-serving.