What's Next for South Korea? | The Capital Cable

[@dotorybul]

Recently, Rep. Lee Hwa-young, a close aide of Lee Jae-myung, the leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, was sentenced to seven years and eight months in prison for remittance to North Korea. Rep. Chung Jung-rae, a close aide of Lee Jae-myung, is the chairman of the National Assembly Judiciary Committee. He is a college student who campaigned against the U.S. and is an arsonist who set fire to the U.S. Embassy in Korea. Suspicions have been raised that judges who impeach Yoon Suk Yeol were similar anti-U.S. activists.

[@bluewings8218]

Delusional. Only 13% of whole Korea believe what you saying

[@nunuabiznus]

Great coverage on a complex and complicated event. Thank you all!

[@jeff-onedayatatime.2870]

Jumping back to the Israeli position on civilians in Gaza and Lebanon: Hamas and Hezbollah are embedded within the structure so the people living in the structure, at the end of the day, are the ones responsible for expelling the terrorist groups. If they do not expel Hamas and Hezbollah, they become combatants themselves, no longer civilians. Therefore, no war crimes are being committed. There are no civilians.

[@david24442]

Yoon’s gambit failed. Severe consequences are required to re-establish confidence in order. God help the people of Korea if the consequences are not enough to satisfy justice in their eyes. They don’t deserve to have their lives be treated by their elected leaders like a K-Drama. God bless you all.

[@Aurekbeshisk]

I think one question that still needs to be answered is why did Yoon declared martial law to persecute his political opponents? What kind of ideological bubble was he in so that he thougth it was a good idea? There have been some pro-Yoon/pro-martial law protests in South Korea these days. As well as comments in news articles and social media posts in favour of the coup (including this same video). So we have to guess that there is a part of the SK rigth or far-rigth in favour of Yoon narrative for its application. I feel that this is a very underresearched aspect of what has happened.

[@im2b1234]

Good day

[@유희석-j6u]

Okay!

[@TheReasonMatrix]

The first proclamation following the martial law prohibits all political activities of National Assembly members. Currently, South Korea operates under the Sixth Republic's constitutional framework. In the past, there was a power to dissolve the National Assembly, but that authority no longer resides with the president. The issue at hand is the conflict between this first proclamation and the authority to lift martial law.

[@kichulhan7614]

In the process of transition from military rule to civilian rule in 1987, the constitution of Korea was amended in order to ensure that the power of president is thoroughly checked by the legislature. The amendment actually deprived the president of almost all the power, especially the power to check the legislature. Under this amended constitution, a president can become a lame duck soon after his or her inauguration, especially when the opposition party is bigger than the ruling party. President Yoon Seok-Yeol, as a lame duck, had to face not just a hostile leftist oppostion party but also his own party which also became a critic when Han Dong-Hoon came as as the the ruling party chair. Yoon, a de-facto lame duck, became isolated and deprived of the momentum for pushing forward his reform agendas.This situation might have nourished his thoughts about a martial law, as a possible breakthrough. But, it might have been better for him to have given second thoughts about a martial law before declaring it.

[@kev2582]

I disagree with Tim's assessment/characterizations on several important aspects. 1) It's likely that President in place Han will not appoint 3 additional constitutional judges. This is a bit of grey area, but there is a precedent where when President Park was impeached President in place Hwang was not able to appoint constitutional judge for a couple of reasons a) President in place is supposed to continue the policies of the elected President, so he can not appoint someone Yoon will not appoint b) Congress plays the role of the prosecutor, so for these specific appointments that Congress recommends, it would be tantamount to prosecutor appointing judges which is against the principle of fair trial. 2) Majority of constitutional scholars have come out and said that Yoon's actions do not justify impeachment legally. The primary reason is President as top executive is entitled to actions of chief executive according to Trump versus US (2024) which gives very high degree of immunity to executive interpretation of law (if you are strict about this then President can only do what is strictly in the law). Therefore, President is impeachable only for insurrection (내란) or treason (외환). Korean law has very strict requirements for insurrection and there are a number of clear precedents. Yoon's actions are very mild compared to these standards. 3) Constitutional court proceedings are that of criminal rather than civil court so the evidences are important. The impeachment occurred without any real investigation, so it is just the impeachment resolution and bunch of newspaper articles. Prosecution will have very little substance to back its case. In President Park's impeachment in comparison had months of lead up where a number of journalistic investigations occurred. That said, some scholars believe constitutional court rulings are influenced heavily by people opinion, so this is a challenge that Yoon will have to overcome. Opinions in Korea are sharply divided, so I suggest getting opinions from both sides to ensure that you are well informed. No offense to Tim, but he seems center left and they typically are not well informed on factual or legal matters. Tim, Camp David was attended by Biden, Yoon and Kishida. Not Ishiba.

[@alicewonder8000]

Opinions in Korea are divided with 80 to 20. 80% of Korean people disagreed your opinion.

[@sigorgang]

No offense to you but you seem to be far right and delusional at that 😂 For anyone reading w/o context: NO, these kinds of comments are the ones that hurt the most - it's not the bias, it's the complete disconnect with reality. 1. PM Han literally has no choice. The Constitutional Court and the nominees for judges said that the acting president has the authority to appoint on 12/18. Yes, he can choose not to appoint but he himself will be impeached both by the National Assembly and the court of public opinion. 2. "Majority of constitutional scholars... do not justify impeachment legally." LMAO I'm not even going to comment on this. What world are you living in? 3. "... evidences are important." "Prosecution will have very little substance to back its case." My guy, troops stormed the National Assembly and the NEC and it was broadcast LIVE. The declaration itself is unconstitutional. Testimonies are coming out left and right. "Opinions in Korea are sharply divided"? His approval ratings are in the 10% range and near 80% of the country polled in support of impeachment, let alone immediate arrest. He doesn't even have his own attorneys at the moment bc law firms are turning him down. What a joke of a comment man. Don't come out here pretending you're representing Korea. Seriously, it's one thing to have your own political views but this was neither a right or left issue. Yoon literally attempted a self coup and you're here saying his actions "are very mild." Wake up.

[@kev2582]

@@alicewonder8000 Legislature passed the impeachment resolution without any investigation. How is that possible? Where is the rule of law? Too many people are brainwashed and are acting as if they are in the movie Spring of Seoul.

[@KSPBagk-ee6zl]

Majority of the constitutional scholars have come out blah blah blah??? You mean yoon‘s cronies?? When the events were plying oit right in front of people’s eyes etc, if it’s not treason or self-coup, what does constitute treason?

[@ph_h463]

@@alicewonder8000how do you know that figures?

[@poiukj100]

The constitutional court needs to have seven judges to even review!!! With 6, they can't even look at the case!! It's per our constitution!!

[@unknown5624]

No. The Constitutional Court changed the system in October to allow a trial with only six judges due to a shortage of judges and that system will be maintained for impeachment trials so now regardless of how many judges there are if six vote in favor impeachment will pass.

[@Outis___]

The truth of martial law is hardly known outside of Korea, so I tell you the real story with the help of a translator. It may sound strange, but this martial law was a legal act guaranteed by the Korean Constitution. According to the Korean Constitution, martial law should be initiated through a Cabinet meeting, and the end of martial law is subject to the decision of the National Assembly. At the Cabinet meeting, most members of the State Council opposed the start of martial law, but martial law began. The reason is that the legitimacy of the initiation of martial law is not the result of the cabinet meeting, but the fact that the cabinet meeting was held. Of course, the law is strange, but the fact that it was followed is important. In addition, within three hours of martial law, the decision to lift martial law was made by the resolution of the National Assembly, and the president accepted the decision. The President has met all the legal forms and requirements related to martial law. This martial law is not illegal, at least under Korean constitution. Isn't that strange, then? Why did the president forcefully start martial law, which would be lifted soon? This may be the weirdest part, but many Koreans have already noticed why. In the Sonja Byeongjeom, the classical military book of the East, the word 'Seongdong Gyeokseo' is said. It is a military code to make the east loud and attack the west. The president tried to use the Sungdong Command. The National Assembly had a minimum number of troops, It didn't stop most lawmakers from entering the main building of the National Assembly. There were some lawmakers who went over some walls, but they just had to enter the main gate. Many lawmakers presented identification cards to soldiers, entered the National Assembly and voted to suspend martial law. When all the opposition parties were concentrating on the National Assembly, the President sent more troops to the Election Commission than the National Assembly. They included a significant number of IT professionals, The soldiers seemed to be trying to extract some evidence from the central server of the Election Commission. And, though not exactly everything is known, the mission seems to have succeeded. Let's conclude. The president aimed to catch evidence of fraudulent elections prevalent in Korea. China is behind the election fraud. Opposition forces with China have brought electronic ticket machines and electronic ticket systems to Korea, It is suspected of being easy to manipulate: at least two parliamentary and one presidential election, In other words, it is believed that there was election fraud in the election of the previous president of Moon Jae In. The Election Commission is a constitutional independent body that rejects audits by the Board of Audit and Inspection, The search and seizure warrant submitted to the court was repeatedly rejected. The only practical way to investigate the Election Commission is martial law. It uses both democratic procedures and methods, The Election Commission investigation has been repeatedly blocked, and numerous accusations of election fraud have all been rejected, There have been cases in which those who have monitored and exposed fraudulent elections have been sentenced to prison when evidence has been fabricated. Rather, DNA extracted from the exposed was placed in a space that didn't even go and was manipulated and imprisoned as if it had penetrated the space. Only that part of the evidence of the fraudulent election was destroyed by fire in a specific investigation room of the prosecution. Powerful and huge forces are involved in rigged elections and have prevented rigged election investigations. It is speculated that these fraudulent elections may have involved Chinese intervention, Many countries in the Belt and Road trade with China have been involved in controversy over fraudulent elections since the late 2010s due to Korean electronic counting machines. In Kyrgyzstan, Romania, El Salvador, and other countries, there were fraudulent elections, and all of them were Korean electronic indicators, It was China intervening behind the scenes. This fight is not just a martial law incident that took place in Korea, a particular country, Two big battles around the world, the conflict between the United States and China, a microcosm of the war in which liberal forces fight against authoritarian forces. So, there may be further background to the question of why Yoon Suk Yeol's president did martial law at this point. The big opposition party, which has 190 seats out of 300 due to rigged elections, has cut the administration's budget in almost every way, They impeached 22 officials of the administration and made them disappear. They were actually plotting a state paralysis. In particular, the special activity expenses in the budget related to the presidential office were made to zero. This background may have encouraged the president's martial law. Also, it means "reflective behavior therapy." That is, if the opposition party uses the right of the law to run a legislative riot, it makes the president realize that the right of the law can do martial law. If you test what's possible by law to the limit, you let the opposition party realize what's happening to each other. If the opposition's indiscriminate impeachment is justified by law, then the president's martial law is justified by law. However, the essential reason is to end rigged elections. If we fail to prevent the election fraud, the opposition party will continue to maintain its power in a negative way, It means that China's influence in Korea will grow. Unlike what is known abroad, support for power in Korea is 50-50. There are over 80 polls saying martial law is wrong, but if you're asking who you're going to support, it's 50-50. The president's martial law does not immediately shift to the support of the opposition. The public is looking at the situation relatively coldly. And, little is known about the inside story of rigged elections yet. Yoon Suk Yeol's martial law would not have happened if Harris or Biden had been elected. Only after President Trump was elected would he have thought he could investigate the election fraud. I'm not saying Harris was rigged, Some of the forces who supported her tend to turn a blind eye to benefiting from the rigged elections, which are set in China, This is because Korea's martial law leads to election fraud investigations, and we are wary of it affecting the Democratic Party of the United States. Please keep an eye on this issue in Korea. This fight is larger than expected, and the question of overcoming rigged elections and winning the free world depends.

[@mgronich948]

Yoon had ordered the army to arrest key members of both his party and many of the opposition party. This was a coup and illegal. The cry of rigged elections is totally fake news. Even before the coup attempt Yoon's favorability was 18% with 82% against him. After the coup attempt over 90% of S. Koreans hate Yoon. There was no rigged election. 2 million S. Koreans went into the streets and celebrated Yoon's impeachment. US neocons think the opposition party is pro-china and are deathly afraid of them comming into power. But there's another interpretaion, S. Korean don't want to have anything to do with a US attack on China, either military or economic. They think if US neocons want a war, don't involve S. Korea.

[@mgronich948]

Given how extremely unpopular Yoon is, one wonders if there was fraud in his winning the presidency in the first place.

[@musicloverblues7943]

Yes. This is real truth. Serious election fraud by corrupted politicians, bureaucracy, medias, supreme court, central election commission contaminated by CCP.

[@shinhogeun]

❤❤😂

[@padioneal]

You guys don't talk about why Yoon did it.

[@bluewings8218]

What reason can justify the martial law??

[@mgronich948]

When the US State dept was asked at a press conference does the US condemn the imposition of martial law, there was no answer. When asked does the US support the lifting of martial law, there was no answer. One S. Korean reporter said S. Korea has had multiple coups/martial laws invoked, and everyone had the US govt's blessing. The role of the CIA should be discussed, and why do our neocons want to destroy democracy in S. Korea?

[@thehealthinsight4587]

There are many, many Korean-Americans that have obviously been keeping close on this situation and prior decades' of events there, and we do not want S. Korea to become the socialist country. Many think that "Lee Jae-Myung" is one of these leaders that will take it to the socialist direction.

[@mgronich948]

One Korean american friend when asked about this crisis could not stop saying insulting things about Yoon.

[@ph_h463]

@@mgronich948 The friend might prefer the socialist SK.

[@bluewings8218]

There is no any clear evidence that Lee will make our country like that. All made up stories by prosecutors and Yoon was their head

[@TheReasonMatrix]

I believe the basis for the first proclamation under martial law, which restricts all political activities of National Assembly members, is that if there is evidence of election fraud, then at least Lee Jae-myung and the opposition party should not hold the qualifications to be lawmakers. Therefore, as President Yoon stated, it is justified to prohibit their political activities from this point onward.

[@toniecambel4431]

I cannot agree more.

[@세상의빛-y2v]

맞습니다!! 부정선거가 밝혀지기 전까지 의원들 활동을 정지해야 합니다. 특히 이씨는 더욱요

[@lobstereleven4610]

Fantastic discussion covering the ROK situation! Fantastic experts and perspectives. Is there an audio version of this podcast for those of us who commute? 😂😂 thanks again!

[@TheReasonMatrix]

France, the UK, and Japan all have the power to dissolve their parliaments. If there is no such power, how can we prevent the legislative branch, or the National Assembly, from abusing its authority? This is the core of the issue.

[@언니곰-u7u]

왜 한국은 없는지 생각을 해보고 말하길 바란다. 원래 있었는데 독재자들에 의해 3번 국회가 해산되었고, 수많은 사람들이 실종되었고 고문당했고 죽었다. 그래서 1987년에 국회 해산 조항이 삭제되었다. 한국은 한국이지 프랑스나 영국, 일본이 아니다. Please think about why Korea deleted that law. Parliament was dissolved three times by dictators, and many people went missing, tortured, and died. So, in 1987, the dissolution clause was removed. Korea is Korea, not France, the United Kingdom, or Japan.

[@TheReasonMatrix]

In summary, the current constitution, which lacks the power to dissolve the National Assembly, is problematic. If lawmakers can request the lifting of martial law, how can we prevent the National Assembly from abusing its power or engaging in misconduct? This is the crux of the issue.

[@kev2582]

Yes, the 1987 constitution weakened the power of presidency and I believe this is due to the dictatorships that preceded. Korean parliament has never been one side dominated as today, so the stakeholders probably did not foresee that current situation. Currently it's fair to say that the legislature has far more power than executive. There is also the issue of election integrity where there are very convincing statistical arguments for election fraud. Coincidently, the National Election Commission is adamant about refusing any investigation.

[@HealthZo]

😊😊😊

[@TheReasonMatrix]

FYI, this is my short video clip for martial law kzbin.info/www/bejne/q4rYk5Wbnd6cb5osi=sgURjiFmRqM_XZlE