
Yoon Suk Yeol removed as South Korea's president over short-lived martial law
The verdict capped a dramatic fall for Yoon, a former star prosecutor who became president in 2022, just a year after he entered politics.
In a nationally televised hearing, the court's acting chief Moon Hyung-bae said the eight-member bench found Yoon's actions were unconstitutional and had a grave impact.
'By declaring martial law in breach of the constitution and other laws, the defendant brought back the history of abusing state emergency decrees, shocked the people and caused confusion in the society, economy, politics, diplomacy and all other areas,' Moon said.
'Given the negative impact on constitutional order caused by the defendant's violation of laws and its ripple effects are grave, we find that the benefits of upholding the constitution by dismissing the defendant far outweigh the national losses from the dismissal of the president,' the justice concluded.
Protesters erupt in jubilation and sorrow
Anti-Yoon protesters near the court erupted into tears and danced when the verdict was announced in the late morning. Two women wept as they hugged and an old man near them leapt to his feet and screamed with joy. The crowd later began marching through Seoul streets.
Outside Yoon's official residence, many supporters cried, screamed and yelled at journalists when they saw the news of the verdict on a giant TV screen. But they quickly cooled down after their organizer pleaded for calm.
'We will absolutely not be shaken!' a protest leader shouted on stage. 'Anyone who accepts this ruling and prepares for an early presidential election is our enemy.'
No major violence has been reported by late afternoon.
Korea faces an election with deep divisions
An election will be held within two months for a new president. But a festering divide over Yoon's impeachment could complicate South Korea's efforts to deal with crucial issues like President Donald Trump's tariffs and other 'America First' policies, observers say.
Yoon said in a statement issued via his defense team that he deeply regrets failing to live up to the public's expectations, but stopped short of explicitly accepting the verdict. There have been fears he would incite efforts to resist his removal, as he earlier vowed to fight to the end.
He added that he will pray for the country and its people. 'It has been the greatest honor of my life to serve our nation,' Yoon said.
Yoon's ruling People Power Party said it would accept the decision, but one of Yoon's lawyers, Yoon Kap-keun, called the ruling 'completely incomprehensible' and a 'pure political decision.'
Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, the country's acting leader, vowed to maintain public safety and order and ensure a smooth transition to the next administration.
Surveys show Lee Jae-myung, leader of the main liberal opposition Democratic Party, is the early favorite to win the upcoming presidential by-election, though he faces several trials for corruption and other charges.
Lee welcomed the ruling and credited the South Korean people for 'protecting our democratic republic.'
Crisis started with a night of chaos four months ago
Martial law lasted only six hours, but left behind a political crisis, rattling financial markets and unsettling the country's diplomatic partners.
After announcing martial law late at night on Dec. 3, Yoon sent hundreds of soldiers to the National Assembly, election offices and other sites. Special operations soldiers smashed windows at the assembly and scuffled with protesters, evoking traumatic memories of the country's past military rules among many South Koreans.
Enough lawmakers, including some from the ruling party, managed to enter the assembly to vote down Yoon's decree unanimously.
Some senior military and police officers sent to the assembly testified Yoon ordered them to drag out lawmakers to block the vote on his decree or to detain his political rivals. Yoon says the troops were deployed to the assembly simply to maintain order.
Yoon, 64, a conservative, was impeached by the National Assembly on Dec. 14. The assembly accused him of violating the constitution and other laws by suppressing assembly activities, attempting to detain politicians, and undermining peace across the country.
In his final testimony at the Constitutional Court hearing, Yoon said his decree was a desperate attempt to draw public support of his fight against the 'wickedness' of the Democratic Party, which had obstructed his agenda, impeached top officials and slashed the government's budget bill. He earlier called the National Assembly 'a den of criminals' and 'anti-state forces.'
The Constitutional Court ruled Yoon infringed upon the Assembly's right to demand martial law be lifted, the freedom of political party activities and the neutrality of the military. It also said Yoon's political impasse with the opposition wasn't the type of emergency situation that required martial law and that Yoon's decree lacked required legal procedures such as deliberation by a formal Cabinet meeting.
Yoon still faces criminal charges
Yoon has been indicted on charges of rebellion in connection with his decree, a charge that carries the death penalty or a life sentence if convicted. He became the first South Korean president to be arrested or indicted while in office.
Yoon was released from jail in March after a Seoul district court ruled he did not have to be detained during that trial process.
His removal from office also costs Yoon the presidential immunity that protected him from most criminal prosecutions. This means he could face other criminal charges, such as abuse of power, in connection with his martial law decree, some observers say.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


San Francisco Chronicle
28 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Hidden in the hills: photos of French peacekeepers uncovering Hezbollah's remnants in Lebanon
SULUKI VALLEY, Lebanon (AP) — A convoy of armored vehicles carrying French peacekeepers barrels through southern Lebanon. Last year's war between Israeli forces and Hezbollah left villages scarred and empty. Rubble lines the roads. Torn Lebanese flags and Hezbollah banners flutter from shattered buildings. From a UNIFIL base above Kafr Kila, the town below looks like a wasteland of crumpled concrete. Across the valley, bulldozers churn dust as they build new positions on land held by Israeli forces despite the November ceasefire. French peacekeepers trek up wooded slopes in the Saluki Valley, under the hum of an Israeli drone. Less than 200 meters in, they uncover remnants of a Hezbollah post: a cannon hidden among trees, an abandoned shack with blankets, playing cards, and books—frozen traces of fighters who once occupied the hillside. Electrical wires snake toward destroyed rocket launchers. Empty rocket cartons and torn manuals litter the hillside. 'We find all kinds of weapons — rocket launchers, cannons, small arms, mines, IEDs, ammunition,' said Col. Arnaud de Coincy, commander of UNIFIL's Force Commander's Reserve, about 700 French and 200 Finnish troops. Earlier this month, Lebanese soldiers were killed dismantling an arms depot. Their deaths underscore both dedication and the urgent need for support. At a base in Deir Kifa, peacekeepers track Israeli overflights with a Mistral missile system. On this day alone, they counted more than 10 drones. This is a photo gallery curated by AP photo editors.


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
A soldier in New Zealand is sentenced to two years in military prison for attempted espionage
WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — A New Zealand soldier, who admitted trying to spy for a foreign power, was sentenced to two years in military prison followed by discharge from the army. The sentencing by a judge and a panel of three senior military officers Wednesday came two days after the man pleaded guilty to three charges, including attempted espionage. It was the first conviction for spying in New Zealand's history. The soldier's name was suppressed, as was the name of the country he sought to pass secrets to. Military court documents said the man believed he was engaged with a foreign agent in 2019 when he tried to communicate military information, including base telephone directories and maps, assessments of security weaknesses, his own identity card and log-in details for a military network. The wording of the charge said his actions were 'likely to prejudice the security or defense of New Zealand.' The soldier wasn't speaking to a foreign agent, but rather an undercover New Zealand police officer collecting intelligence on alleged right-wing extremist groups, documents supplied by the military court showed. Judge Kevin Riordan said the espionage attempts were unsophisticated, unlikely to cause harm and naive, but his actions were still serious. 'There is no such thing as a non-serious act of espionage,' Riordan said, according to Radio New Zealand. 'There is no trivial act of espionage.' The soldier came to the attention of law enforcement as part of an operation that was established after a March 2019 terrorist attack on two mosques in the city of Christchurch, when an Australian white supremacist opened fire on Muslim worshipers, killing 51. Officers spoke to the man twice about his involvement in a group, court documents showed, and after the government became aware he had expressed a desire to defect he was contacted by the undercover officer. When the soldier's hard drive was searched, investigators found a copy of Christchurch gunman Brenton Tarrant's livestreamed video of his massacre and a manifesto document he published online before the killings. Possession of either without permission is a criminal offense in New Zealand and the soldier, who pleaded guilty to that charge as well, joins several others convicted in New Zealand of having or sharing banned material. In a statement read to the court by his lawyer, the man said the two nationalist groups with which he was involved were 'no more than groups of friends with similar points of view to my own,' according to RNZ. The lawyer, Steve Winter, added that his client denied supporting the Christchurch shooter's ideology. The soldier, who was based at Linton Military Camp near the city of Palmerston North, also pleaded guilty to accessing a military computer system for dishonest purposes. The amended suite of three charges replaced 17 counts levelled against him earlier in the proceedings. New Zealand's Army Chief Maj. Gen. Rose King said there was no place for people like the soldier in the country's military. 'The actions of this individual were deplorable,' she said in a statement. 'They were incredibly poorly judged and brought risk to all of those he served alongside, as well as the wider New Zealand public.' The three charges carried maximum prison terms varying from seven to 10 years in New Zealand. He had been due to stand trial by court-martial before he admitted the offenses. His was the first charge in a New Zealand military court for espionage or attempted spying. The last time such a case reached the civilian courts was in 1975, when a public servant was acquitted on charges alleging he had passed information to Russian agents.


San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Menendez brothers face parole hearings after decades in prison for parents' 1989 murders
LOS ANGELES (AP) — The Menendez brothers will make their cases for parole starting Thursday, marking the closest they've been to winning freedom from prison since their convictions almost 30 years ago for murdering their parents. Erik and Lyle Menendez were sentenced in 1996 to life in prison for fatally shooting their father, Jose Menendez, and mother, Kitty Menendez, in their Beverly Hills mansion in 1989. While defense attorneys argued the brothers acted out of self-defense after years of sexual abuse by their father, prosecutors said the brothers sought a multimillion-dollar inheritance. They became eligible for parole after a Los Angeles judge in May reduced their sentences from life in prison without the possibility of parole to 50 years to life, making them immediately eligible under California law because they were under the ages of 26 when they committed their crimes. But even if the board grants their parole, it could be months before the brothers walk free — if at all. A panel of parole hearing officers will evaluate the brothers individually. Erik Menendez will have his hearing Thursday morning, followed by Lyle Menendez on Friday. They will appear over videoconference from prison in San Diego. The board will assess whether the brothers pose an 'unreasonable risk of danger to society' if released, considering factors such as criminal history, motivation for the crime, signs of remorse, behavior while in prison and plans for the future, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. If the board grants each brother's parole, the chief legal counsel has 120 days to review the case. Then Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has 30 days to affirm or deny the parole. Newsom had previously ordered the state parole board to conduct a risk assessment of the brothers in response to a clemency request. He hasn't said if he's likely to support parole, but he has denied recommendations in high-profile cases in the past — most notably for Sirhan Sirhan, who assassinated presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. Erik and Lyle Menendez have the support of their relatives, who are expected to deliver statements at their hearings. 'For more than 35 years, they have shown sustained growth,' their family said in a statement. 'They've taken full accountability. They express sincere remorse to our family to this day and have built a meaningful life defined by purpose and service.' The case has captured the attention of true crime enthusiasts for decades and spawned documentaries, television specials and dramatizations. The Netflix drama ' Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story " and a documentary released in 2024 have been credited for bringing new attention to the brothers. A greater recognition of the brothers as victims of sexual abuse has also helped amass a legion of supporters who seek their release. Some have flown to Los Angeles to hold rallies and attend court hearings. The previous LA County district attorney first opened the door to possible freedom for the brothers last fall by asking a judge to reduce their sentences. The judge's decision to ultimately resentence the brothers followed months of pushback from current prosecutors. LA County District Attorney Nathan Hochman said ahead of the parole hearings that he opposes parole for the brothers because they have 'not demonstrated full insight into their crimes," comparing them to Sirhan. Newsom denied him parole in January 2022 because of his 'deficient insight." Insight means taking full responsibility for a crime and understanding the factors that led you to commit the crime, such as anger, inability to handle stress, and substance abuse, said Michael Beckman, a lawyer specialized in parole hearings. Erik and Lyle's college degrees, participation in volunteer programs and support groups, and the fact that Lyle has not been in a single fight in prison are all positive factors for their release, he said. But recent rules violations could have major consequences for the brothers. In May, Hochman revealed details from a confidential risk assessment report that said Lyle was cited for having a cellphone several times in 2024, and Erik was found with a cellphone this January. 'The board is really big on the philosophy that if you can't follow the rules in prison, you can't follow the rules in free society,' Beckman said. 'Add to that that cellphones are one of the three big bad rules violations along with violence and substance abuse.'