Weight of history on the shoulders of Constitutional Court

The impeachment bill against President Yoon Suk Yeol was passed in the National Assembly Saturday afternoon afternoon, 11 days since martial law was declared on December 3. The event marks the third time in Korea’s constitutional history of the passage of a presidential impeachment bill, following former Presidents Roh Moo-hyun and Park Geun-hye. The National Assembly's impeachment resolution was immediately submitted to the Constitutional Court, which assigned a case number and commenced investigations for the impeachment trial. The Constitutional Court plans to hold a meeting on Monday to confirm‎ the ‘presiding judge’ through electronic distribution and designate two ‘representative judges’ who will oversee the preparation of the defense.

The ruling party could not turn a blind eye to the public’s desire for impeachment. The outcome of the vote included the failed leadership of leader Han Dong-hoon, engulfing the People Power Party in internal chaos that makes it difficult to predict the future direction of the party. At the same time, however, such confusion appears to be inevitable, as the political party is sharing its fate with the president. The crisis of the People Power Party spells a crisis for the conservative party. There is an urgent need for efforts to reform the existing framework based on introspection and self-reflection.

Now that the impeachment bill has passed the National Assembly, the clock of the Constitutional Court has begun ticking. It is fortunate that the interim state of President Yoon refusing to resign voluntarily and delegating state affairs to the ruling party and the government has been addressed, with the system being transferred to an acting authority system in accordance with constitutional procedures. Still, the government’s capabilities are limited in addressing the current state of confusion, which highlights the importance of the Constitutional Court reaching a quick decision.

For more than 10 days, the declaration of martial law took the Korean people back to a point in history. President Yoon's sudden declaration of martial law brought us back to dark memories since the start of the military regime 45 years ago. The people were taken back by the declaration of martial law late at night and were relieved when it was canceled by the National Assembly's opposition. As reports of President Yoon's actions during the declaration were made public, people shook their heads in disbelief as they listened to President Yoon's address, including justification of his act.

Following the National Assembly's political judgment on President Yoon's unconstitutional and illegal declaration of martial law, the Constitutional Court will decide whether to remove President Yoon from office through judicial judgment as leader of the rebellion. During the impeachment trial, Korea may show extreme ideological and partisan division and conflict. The voices of those pushing far-right claims, such as the conspiracy theory of election fraud believed by President Yoon, may be more vocal than ever.

As the guardian of the Constitution, the Constitutional Court must demonstrate prudence in accordance with legal principles and agility to end confusion. The Constitutional Court’s decision will be a crucial opportunity to look back on Korea's strenuous journey of democratization and correct the regressive departure. Each judge will bear a sense of responsibility heavier than others. History beckons us to go “Back to the Future.”