Seoul: Legal representatives of impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol announced on Saturday that Yoon has chosen to attend a court hearing regarding an arrest warrant filed against him. The hearing will allow him to clarify the legitimacy of his brief martial law decree.
According to Yonhap News Agency, Yun Gap-keun, one of Yoon's lawyers, conveyed this decision through a text message to reporters. Yoon aims to explain the legitimacy of the martial law declaration and rehabilitate his reputation, which was damaged after the unsuccessful declaration on December 3.
The hearing is scheduled for 2 p.m., where Yoon is expected to refute the insurrection charges brought against him by the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO). At around 1:30 p.m., Yoon's vehicle left a detention center for the hearing. The vehicle is anticipated to pass a designated media photo area and directly enter the court building.
The anti-corruption agency sought a formal arrest warrant for Yoon from the Seoul Western District Court on Friday. This move came two days after CIO investigators apprehended him at his residence and placed him in custody following questioning. The CIO is conducting a joint investigation with the police and military to determine if Yoon's martial law declaration constituted an attempted insurrection.
Yoon's legal team argues that the CIO lacks the authority to investigate insurrection allegations. If the court issues the warrant, Yoon will be the first sitting president in South Korea's constitutional history to be formally arrested. However, if the warrant is denied, Yoon will return to the presidential residence, reinforcing his claims that the investigations into his martial law decree and impeachment are baseless.
Yoon's imposition of martial law on December 3 shocked the nation, plunging South Korea into severe political turmoil. The martial law was lifted within hours after lawmakers voted against it. Yoon's lawyers contend that the decree was an act of governance aimed at overcoming a national crisis triggered by opposition-led impeachments, legislative gridlock, and budget cuts.
Following his detention, Yoon declined to participate in questioning regarding his martial law attempt. On the same day, his legal team requested the Seoul Central District Court to evaluate the legality of the detention warrant issued by the Western District Court. The central court dismissed this challenge, maintaining his custody status.
Despite this ruling, Yoon's legal team is expected to continue arguing that the CIO lacks legal authority to investigate insurrection charges and that the Western District Court does not have proper jurisdiction over the martial law case. Regarding concerns of evidence tampering and flight risk, the team argues that investigators have already gathered most of the necessary evidence and that Yoon, as the sitting president, poses no flight risk.