From a Constitutional Right to a Political Blunder: South Korea’s Short-Lived Martial Rule

9 Dec

On December 3rd, South Korea experienced martial law for the first time since 1979, sending shockwaves throughout the country. At approximately 10:30 pm Seoul time, President Yoon Suk Yeol declared the emergency on live television, stirring a six-hour period of confusion, uncertainty, and fear for the future of democracy. Many Korean citizens got to face what many of their elders and relatives had done so before: the contentious and politically silencing era of 20th century Korea, hosting the likes of the Korean War and dictator rulership.

What is martial law?

According to the US Department of Justice, martial law “involves the temporary substation of military authority for civilian rule”. The conditions for when martial law is implemented tend to be during a period of war, rebellion, political instability, or natural disaster. Thus, the relative status of the stable democracy that South Korea is seen as being, in regard to other countries that have undergone military governance, makes this manoeuvre by the South Korean president all the more out of place. In martial law, civilian rights are suspended, political activity is ceased, the media are taken control of by the executive branch and the country’s medical forces are obliged to return to work within 48 hours (of which many had been on strike in 2024).

Why did this happen?

Many journalists and broadcasting channels offer their explanations for the reasoning behind martial law, yet most come to a common agreement on its absurdity. Although President Yoon claimed that he wished to save the country from danger, accusing the opposition party of “trying to overthrow the free democracy” and being a “den of criminals”, there is little evidence to support this. It is very possible that this declaration was in fact a desperate attempt to regain illiberal power in government amid his low public support, factoring in his government’s poor response to the Itaewon Halloween crushing, personal scandals involving his wife and her ‘luxurious pursuits’, and the ongoing political standoff over law execution. He also explicitly accused the communist North Korean elements of influencing his decision, perhaps as a way to garner backing from right-wing anti-communist conservatives.

Ultimately, President Yoon’s plan failed. Despite political activity being ‘suspended’ by law, the National Assembly still met and mass protests occurred around the National Assembly building. Lawmakers willingly fought back against the troops that were guarding the main hall, making their way to parliament to unanimously vote to block martial law. This, along with the country’s main labour union organisation’s call for Yoon to step down, eventually led to a reversal of martial law after only 6 hours, highlighting the complete misread the President had of his country.

The extent of the protests was felt across the world, where one incident of a party spokesperson grappling with a rifle-wielding soldier has gone viral. Ahn Gwi-ryeong bravely stood her ground against one of the troops, symbolising the widespread defiance of Yoon’s impositions, even shown in his own party, where several party members were discussing his expulsion.

Opposition lawmakers were hugely keen on the idea of prosecution, which has become a ‘political tool’ especially in South Korea, showcased in the political suicides of previous Presidents Park Geun-hye and Roh Moo-hyun. They were all victims of the intense investigations conducted by the justice department, suggesting another reason as to why Yoon was so keen on this drastic measure, to avoid prosecution. Counter-intuitively however, opposition lawmakers took this opportunity to table a motion to impeach President Yoon.

If two-thirds of the National Assembly voted to impeach within the 72-hour given period, the President would have been suspended, giving the momentary presidency to the acting prime minister. After a successful trial in which six court members vote to sustain the impeachment, the president is then removed from office and a new presidential election is held within 60 days. However, as of the 7th of December, the South Korean president narrowly survived his impeachment vote due to members of the People Power Party (his party) boycotting the vote. He has made no offer to resign but instead offered a mandatory-appearing apology on Saturday morning – given his devastatingly low approval rates, it is likely that the fight to impeach Yoon Suk-Yeol will persist.