Impeachment of Prime Minister Han Duck-soo dismissed

The South Korean Constitutional Court has dismissed the National Assembly’s impeachment of Prime Minister Han Duck-soo. While the Court acknowledged that Han’s failure to appoint Constitutional Court justices was unconstitutional and unlawful, it ruled that this did not warrant his removal from office.

On Monday morning, the Court held a sentencing session at the main courtroom in Jongno-gu, Seoul, and delivered the decision 87 days after the National Assembly passed the impeachment motion. Five of the eight justices—Moon Hyung-bae, Lee Mi-sun, Kim Hyung-doo, Jeong Jeong-mi, and Kim Bok-hyeong—voiced the opinion to dismiss the case, which became the Court’s official ruling. Justice Chung Kye-sun gave an opinion to uphold the impeachment, while Justices Cheong Hyung-sik and Cho Han-chang gave dissenting opinions to reject the case outright.

First, the Court did not accept the claim that Han colluded in, aided and abetted, or condoned President Yoon Suk Yeol’s declaration of emergency martial law on December 3. “There is no evidence or objective data to suggest that [Han] engaged in any active conduct—such as recommending the president to hold a Cabinet meeting to lend procedural legitimacy to the emergency martial law declaration,” the Court stated.

However, the Court found that Acting President Han’s failure to appoint the nominees—Chung Gye-seon, Cho Han-chang, and Ma Eun-hyuk—as Constitutional Court justices was unconstitutional and unlawful. “The respondent has a constitutional obligation to appoint the three individuals elected by the National Assembly as justices,” the Court explained, adding that “the failure to appoint them violates this duty.” However, it added, “There is no evidence or objective data to support the claim that the refusal to appoint them was driven by an intent or purpose to incapacitate the Constitutional Court as it was proceeding with an impeachment trial against the sitting president,” concluding that “grounds justifying dismissal from office do not exist.”

The Court did not rule on the legality of the December 3 martial law declaration, which had drawn attention due to its connection to President Yoon’s impeachment trial. Given the starkly differing opinions among the justices—ranging from upholding to rejecting the case—some expect the Court’s decision on Yoon’s impeachment to be delayed until April due to the case’s complexity.

“A society divided to the extreme only leads to misfortune, and no one’s dreams will be fulfilled in such a state,” Acting President Han addressed the public after immediately returning to his duties after the ruling. “I earnestly ask for bipartisan cooperation from both ruling and opposition parties so that the Republic of Korea can overcome the current crisis and leap forward once again,” he added. Reactions from political parties were divided. “This is a stern warning from the judiciary against the reckless legislative tyranny of the dominant opposition party,” Kwon Young-se, the head of the emergency response committee of the People Power Party, said. “It’s a 0-9 loss—a historic and resounding defeat in the constitutional history,” he added. Meanwhile, Democratic Party of Korea leader Lee Jae-myung commented, “It is questionable whether the public will truly accept a ruling that such a clear and intentional violation of the constitutional duty to form constitutional institutions does not amount to grounds for impeachment.”


김자현 기자 zion37@donga.com