Jung Chung-rae, chairman of the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee, makes his final statement during the final hearing of President Yoon Suk-yeol’s impeachment trial at the Constitutional Court in Seoul on February 25 (left picture). Then, President Yoon makes his final statement. Courtesy of the Constitutional Court

The final hearing of President Yoon Suk-yeol’s impeachment trial at the Constitutional Court ended on February 25. The National Assembly argued that Yoon’s declaration of emergency martial law on December 3 last year was unconstitutional for lack of justification and that Yoon should be removed from office. Yoon argued that the martial law declaration was inevitable due to the opposition's obstruction of government administration, adding, “It was an appeal to the public that borrowed the form of martial law.” He declared unconstitutional and illegal martial law, including an attempt to block the National Assembly by mobilizing the military and warrantless raids of the National Election Commission, and insisted that it was justified until the end, let alone remorse.

The Constitutional Court held the 11th hearing of Yoon's impeachment trial later in the day and heard the final arguments of the petitioner, the National Assembly, and the respondent, President Yoon. It has been 84 days since the declaration of martial law and 73 days since Yoon was impeached by the National Assembly.

“There is a person who trampled on the democracy secured with blood and tried to destroy the Constitution written with blood as ink,” said Jung Chung-rae, chairman of the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee, in his closing argument. “The person is the respondent Yoon Suk-yeol in this court." Jung added, “After the martial law declaration, the respondent refused an arrest warrant issued by a judge, making law enforcement lawless. He is a very dangerous person, enough to be suspected of declaring martial law again if he is reinstated."

On the other hand, Yoon insisted that the martial law declaration was “not for oppressing the people by force,” but a “desperate appeal for the people, who are the sovereign power, to face the situation and join together to overcome it.” “There were wounded soldiers, but not a single civilian was harmed,” Yoon said, criticizing the opposition's claims of starting the insurgency as ”a political propaganda campaign to somehow drag me down from the presidency.” He also said that “if I return to work, I will do my best to work on constitutional and political reforms, and not dwell on the rest of my term.”

The National Assembly emphasized the need for prompt dismissal. “The moment the martial law was declared, the respondent gave up on his own to be the president of Korea,” said Lee Kwang-beom, a lawyer for the National Assembly. "We need to solidify the foundation of the democratic republic by putting an end to the conspiracy theory of fraudulent elections, which is a national blight.” Kim Gye-ri, a lawyer for President Yoon, refuted, “It the martial law to inform the public about the current situation of the anti-state forces' takeover of society, the Democratic Party of Korea's attempt to take control of the media, the legislative sabotage, judicial paralysis, and the one-party dictatorship's fascism to control the independence of the Board of Audit and Inspection.”

Eight judges gather opinions through consultations and decide whether to impeach President Yoon by a verdict. The ruling will likely be made in mid-March.