South Korea's opposition says delay of Yoon impeachment ruling is irresponsible
SEOUL (Reuters) - South Korea's opposition Democratic Party on Monday urged the country's Constitutional Court to swiftly rule on President Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment, saying keeping the country waiting is "irresponsible" and deepening social division.
As the eight-member court continued deliberations well into the third week, political tensions have surged between those who demand Yoon's ouster for declaring a short-lived martial law in December and supporters who want him reinstated.
The court had wrapped up arguments on February 25, where Yoon said his martial law declaration was needed to root out "anti-state" elements but he never intended to fully impose emergency military rule.
"The country and the people have come to the breaking point," a Democratic Party leadership member Kim Min-seok said. "We wait for the court's responsible decision. Further delay is not normal and irresponsible," he told a party meeting.
In 2017, former president Park Geun-hye was removed from office 11 days after the final arguments in the Constitutional Court in her impeachment trial.
South Koreans have gathered in huge numbers in the capital Seoul supporting and backing the conservative leader's removal, saying the delay has been frustrating and made confusion worse.
Yoon was impeached by the Democratic Party-controlled parliament in December for violating his constitutional duty. He committed acts that are a grave threat to rule of law and more than disqualify him from office, the impeachment motion said.
Yoon is on a separate criminal trial on charges of leading insurrection, which is punishable by death or life in prison.
The fallout of Yoon's martial law declaration has widened the rifts between the conservatives and liberals and those in the public, adding stress on institutions and putting much of the government policy making in limbo.
Some of the country's top military commanders have been taken off duty and face criminal trials for their roles in the martial law decree. Arguments in the trial of former defence minister Kim Yong-hyun on insurrection charges begin on Monday.
Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, who was briefly acting president after Yoon was impeached and suspended from power on December 14, has also been impeached and the country is now led by the Finance Minister Choi Sang-mok.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Iconic Hollywood filmmaker David Mamet dishes on why he was 'kicked out of the left'
One famed filmmaker and playwright spoke to Fox News about his transformation from a "brain-dead liberal" to his journey into constitutional conservatism. Film director and playwright David Mamet, known for writing the stage play "Glengarry Glen Ross" and its film adaptation, opened up about his political values during a Thursday interview on the "Brian Kilmeade Show." Mamet discussed how he got "kicked out of the left" about 25 years ago and what led him to discover his right-leaning values. He noted his past comments referring to himself as a "brain-dead liberal" and urging for political civility in an article he wrote, resulting in many of his leftist peers losing contact with him. "I didn't know any Republicans, so I didn't understand what conservatism was," he said. "Then I got kicked out of the left, and I started researching what the constitutional conservatism was about, and I got very, very interested and very excited about it — here I am now." Mamet noted that he became disillusioned with the Democratic Party and its values, explaining how he thought that the party did not best represent American workers and had become the "party of the elites." "I discovered my conservative beliefs because I discovered everything I thought and believed about the Democratic Party was false," he said. Amid a tumultuous period in American politics, Mamet expressed optimism about the future following President Donald Trump's election victory in November 2024. "America is self-correcting again, as we saw in the election," Mamet said. "And the red states are thriving." Referring to his vast theater experience, Mamet also touched upon the media and entertainment's focus on "social consciousness." "Black people are people too, gay people are people too, but the problem with that is, everybody knows that," he said. "So we don't want to come to a theater or a movie to get lectured to, right? Our wives will do that — so in order to keep their place, the idea of a meritocracy crumbled in the media, so the awards and safety, or the illusion… was awarded to those who could scream the loudest." Mamet released his book "The Disenlightenment: Politics, Horror, and Entertainment" on June 3, which details his musings about politics and culture.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Puerto Rico's Democratic Party boss offers rare endorsement of Andrew Cuomo for NYC mayor
The head of the Democratic Party of Puerto Rico is endorsing Andrew Cuomo for mayor of New York City, marking an unusual foray into Big Apple politics for the organization, which typically only focuses on issues local to the island. Luis Dávila Pernas, the party's chairman, made the endorsement official in a new campaign ad that Cuomo's team set to air on television and digital platforms during Sunday's Puerto Rican Day Parade in Manhattan. Cuomo's camp said it's spending about $100,000 on airing the ad over the course of a week. 'Andrew Cuomo always has and always will stand with the people of Puerto Rico,' Dávila Pernas says in the 1-minute ad, which the Daily News got a preview of before it hit television and online. Dávila Pernas then lists off how Cuomo, as governor, traveled to Puerto Rico in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria in 2017 to 'coordinate aid' when President Trump's first administration 'failed to act.' Again, in 2020, when devastating earthquakes rocked the island, Dávila Pernas notes in the ad, Cuomo was back on Puerto Rico with National Guard troops to help local leaders rebuild. 'As we come together for this year's Puerto Rican Day Parade, let's remember: When Puerto Rico needed an ally, Andrew Cuomo was there,' Dávila Pernas adds in the spot. Cuomo, who resigned as governor in 2021 amid accusations of sexual misconduct and of having mismanaged nursing home policies during the COVID-19 pandemic, is expected to march in Sunday's Puerto Rican Day Parade along Fifth Ave. Many other local politicians typically also march in the parade, including Mayor Adams, who isn't running in this month's Democratic mayoral primary after having dropped out of it in the wake of the Trump administration's controversial dismissal of his corruption indictment. The new ad highlights how Cuomo, who denies engaging in wrongdoing as governor, is seeking to appeal to Puerto Ricans in particular and Hispanic voters more broadly. New York City is home to a number of large Hispanic communities seen as key constituencies in local elections. 'I am honored to have Chairman Luis Dávila Pernas' support and look forward to continuing to work with and support the Puerto Rican community any way I can as the next mayor of New York City,' Cuomo told The News. Cuomo remains the favorite to win the June 24 Democratic mayoral primary, according to most polls. Some recent surveys, though, have shown Queens Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, who is polling in second place, cutting into Cuomo's lead, as the election looms less than three weeks away.
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Democrats are busy bashing themselves. Is it needed, or just needy?
To hear Republicans tell it, California is a failed state and Donald Trump won the presidency in a landslide that gives him a mandate to do as he pleases. No surprise there. But more and more, Democrats are echoing those talking points. Ever since Kamala Harris lost the election, the Democratic Party has been on a nationwide self-flagellation tour. One after another, its leaders have stuck their heads deep into their navels, hoping to find out why so many Americans — especially young people, Black voters and Latinos — shunned the former vice president. Even in California, a reliably blue state, the soul-searching has been extreme, as seen at last weekend's state Democratic Party convention, where a parade of speakers — including Harris' 2024 running mate, Tim Walz — wailed and moaned and did the woe-is-us-thing. Is it long-overdue introspection, or just annoying self-pity? Our columnists Anita Chabria and Mark Z. Barabak hash it out. Chabria: Mark, you were at the convention in Anaheim. Thoughts? Barabak: I'll start by noting this is the first convention I've attended — and I've been to dozens — rated 'R' for adult language. Apparently, Democrats think by dropping a lot of f-bombs they can demonstrate to voters their authenticity and passion. But it seemed kind of stagy and, after a while, grew tiresome. I've covered Nancy Pelosi for more than three decades and never once heard her utter a curse word, in public or private. I don't recall Martin Luther King Jr., saying, 'I have a [expletive deleted] dream.' Both were pretty darned effective leaders. Democrats have a lot of work to do. But cursing a blue streak isn't going to win them back the White House or control of Congress. Chabria: As someone known to routinely curse in polite society, I'm not one to judge an expletive. But that cussing and fussing brings up a larger point: Democrats are desperate to prove how serious and passionate they are about fixing themselves. Gov. Gavin Newsom has called the Democratic brand 'toxic.' Walz told his fellow Dems: 'We're in this mess because some of it's our own doing.' It seems like across the country, the one thing Democrats can agree on is that they are lame. Or at least, they see themselves as lame. I'm not sure the average person finds Democratic ideals such as equality or due process quite so off-putting, especially as Trump and his MAGA brigade move forward on the many campaign promises — deportations, rollbacks of civil rights, stripping the names of civil rights icons off ships — that at least some voters believed were more talk than substance. I always tell my kids to be their own hero, and I'm starting to think the Democrats need to hear that. Pick yourself up. Dust yourself off. Move on. Do you think all this self-reproach is useful, Mark? Does Harris' loss really mean the party is bereft of value or values? Barabak: I think self-reflection is good for the party, to a point. Democrats suffered a soul-crushing loss in November — at the presidential level and in the Senate, where the GOP seized control — and they did so in part because many of their traditional voters stayed home. It would be political malpractice not to figure out why. That said, there is a tendency to go overboard and over-interpret the long-term significance of any one election. This is not the end of the Democratic Party. It's not even the first time one of the two major parties has been cast into the political wilderness. Democrats went through similar soul-searching after presidential losses in 1984 and 1988. In 1991, a book was published explaining how Democrats were again destined to lose the White House and suggesting they would do so for the foreseeable future. In November 1992, Bill Clinton was elected president. Four years later, he romped to reelection. In 2013, after two straight losing presidential campaigns, Republicans commissioned a political autopsy that, among other recommendations, urged the party to increase its outreach to gay and Latino voters. In 2016, Donald Trump — not exactly a model of inclusion — was elected. Here, by the way, is how The Times wrote up that postmortem: 'A smug, uncaring, ideologically rigid national Republican Party is turning off the majority of American voters, with stale policies that have changed little in 30 years and an image that alienates minorities and the young, according to an internal GOP study.' Sound familar? So, sure, look inward. But spare us the existential freakout. Chabria: I would also argue that this moment is about more than the next election. I do think there are questions about if democracy will make it that long, and if so, if the next round at the polls will be a free and fair one. I know the price of everything continues to rise, and conventional wisdom is that it's all about the economy. But Democrats seem stuck in election politics as usual. These however, are unusual times that call for something more. There are a lot of folks who don't like to see their neighbors, family or friends rounded up by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in masks; a lot of people who don't want to see Medicaid cut for millions, with Medicare likely to be on the chopping block next; a lot of people who are afraid our courts won't hold the line until the midterms. They want to know Democrats are fighting to protect these things, not fighting each other. I agree with you that any loss should be followed by introspection. But also, there's a hunger for leadership in opposition to this administration, and the Democrats are losing an opportunity to be those leaders with their endless self-immolation. Did Harris really lose that bad? Did Trump really receive a mandate to end America as we know it? Barabak: No, and no. I mean, a loss is a loss. Trump swept all seven battleground states and the election result was beyond dispute unlike, say, 2000. But Trump's margin over Harris in the popular vote was just 1.5% — which is far from landslide territory — and he didn't even win a majority of support, falling just shy of 50%. As for a supposed mandate, the most pithy and perceptive post-election analysis I read came from the American Enterprise Institute's Yuval Levin, who noted Trump's victory marked the third presidential campaign in a row in which the incumbent party lost — something not seen since the 19th century. Challengers 'win elections because their opponents were unpopular,' Levin wrote, 'and then — imagining the public has endorsed their party activists' agenda — they use the power of their office to make themselves unpopular.' It's a long way to 2026, and an even longer way to 2028. But Levin is sure looking smart. Chabria: I know Kamala-bashing is popular right now, but I'd argue that Harris wasn't resoundingly unpopular — just unpopular enough, with some. Harris had 107 days to campaign. Many candidates spend years running for the White House, and much longer if you count the coy 'maybe' period. She was unknown to most Americans, faced double discrimination from race and gender, and (to be fair) has never been considered wildly charismatic. So to nearly split the popular vote with all that baggage is notable. But maybe Elon Musk said it best. As part of his messy breakup with Trump, the billionaire tweeted, 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate.' Sometimes there's truth in anger. Musk's money influenced this election, and probably tipped it to Trump in at least one battleground state. Any postmortem needs to examine not just the message, but also the medium. Is it what Democrats are saying that isn't resonating, or is it that right-wing oligarchs are dominating communication? Barabak: Chabria: Mark? Barabak: Sorry. I was so caught up in the spectacle of the world's richest man going all neener-neener with the world's most powerful man I lost track of where we were. With all due respect to Marshall McLuhan, I think Democrats need first off to figure out a message to carry them through the 2026 midterms. They were quite successful in 2018 pushing back on GOP efforts to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, if you prefer. It's not hard to see them resurrecting that playbook if Republicans take a meat-ax to Medicare and millions of Americans lose their healthcare coverage. Then, come 2028, they'll pick a presidential nominee and have their messenger, who can then focus on the medium — TV, radio, podcasts, TikTok, Bluesky or whatever else is in political fashion at the moment. Now, excuse me while I return my sights to the sandbox.
