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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@TheReasonMatrix]

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