South Korea: Yoon’s lawyers demand exclusion of constitutional court justice over fair ruling concern

3

Seoul, Jan 13 (IANS) The legal representatives of South Korea’s impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol on Monday demanded the Constitutional Court exclude one of its eight justices in trials over Yoon’s failed martial law bid last month.

Yoon’s lawyers made the request as they say Constitutional Court Justice Jeong Gye-seon will make it difficult for the court to come up with a fair ruling due to her progressive inclinations.

The court can reject the request if it is apparently aimed at delaying the trials.

Last month, the Opposition-controlled National Assembly voted in favor of the appointment of three Constitutional Court judges — Jeong and Ma Eun-hyuk, both nominated by the main opposition Democratic Party, and Cho Han-chang, recommended by the ruling People Power Party.

Acting President and Finance Minister Choi Sang-mok approved the appointment for two of them, Jeong and Cho.

Yoon’s legal team also filed an objection against the court’s decision to set Yoon’s first date for pleading on January 14. They said the trials on impeached acting President Han Duck-soo should be held first, Yonhap news agency reported.

Previous acting President and Prime Minister Han Duck-soo was impeached after refusing to appoint the justices to the Constitutional Court.

Yoon made a martial law declaration on December 3, citing removal of anti-state forces, which lasted only six hours before lawmakers voted to lift the measure at the National Assembly. The Assembly impeached Yoon on December 14 and accused him of insurrection.

Earlier on January 12, South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol did not attend the first formal hearing in his impeachment trial that week due to concerns for his safety.

Yun Gap-geun, Yoon’s defence attorney, made the announcement as the Constitutional Court held the first oral arguments in Yoon’s impeachment trial on Tuesday, while investigators sought to detain the impeached president for questioning in a separate case related to his short-lived martial law imposition.

–IANS

int/jk/as

Disclaimer
The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. They do not reflect the views of the website and this website does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.