Seoul: The first formal hearing of the impeachment trial of President Yoon Suk Yeol concluded in just four minutes on Tuesday due to his absence. The Constitutional Court dismissed Yoon’s request to exclude one of the eight justices from the trial.
According to Yonhap News Agency, the next hearing is set for 2 p.m. on Thursday, and the court will continue with the trial regardless of Yoon’s presence, as stated by acting court President Moon Hyung-bae. This hearing occurred a month after the National Assembly voted to impeach Yoon following his imposition of martial law on December 3.
Yoon’s legal team indicated that the president, currently suspended from his duties, would not attend the hearing due to safety concerns amid allegations of insurrection and abuse of power related to the martial law decree. Moon announced the court’s decision to unanimously dismiss Yoon’s request to exclude Justice Chung Kye-sun, citing no particular reason for the dismissal.
The court also dismissed Yoon’s objection to the court’s scheduling of five hearing dates, stating the decision adheres to Constitutional Court regulations. The court has 180 days to rule on the impeachment, and if upheld, Yoon will be removed from office, leading to a presidential election within 60 days. If dismissed, he will be reinstated.
A team from the National Assembly, acting as the prosecutor, criticized Yoon’s absence, with Rep. Kim Gi-pyo of the Democratic Party calling it an anticonstitutional stance. The team requested five witnesses for the trial, including former and current officials from intelligence, police, and military sectors.
Yoon’s attorneys mentioned they would decide on his attendance for the next hearing after reviewing trial progress and conditions. Meanwhile, Yoon’s defense argues that the martial law imposition is a governance act, not a constitutional subversion, citing a “fraudulent election” as justification. He also accused the Democratic Party of paralyzing state functions through impeachment attempts and budget cuts, framing it as a national emergency justifying martial law, which he claims is not subject to judicial review.