Pres. Yoon’s resistance raises questions about accountability

President Yoon Suk Yeol, currently under investigation on charges of insurgency, is defying requests for questioning issued by investigative authorities. Attempts to deliver requests for questioning to the president's official residence have been rejected, with mail sent to the secretary of general affairs at the Presidential Office also returned due to the recipient's unknown whereabouts. A direct delivery effort was thwarted when the Office of the President and the Presidential Security Service declined to accept the documents, claiming it was outside their responsibilities.

Yoon's legal team has argued that subpoenas from multiple agencies and the incomplete appointment of defense counsel make it impossible to proceed. However, the Constitutional Court's inability to deliver even basic documents related to the impeachment trial suggests deliberate stalling tactics from Yoon's camp.

In a public address last Thursday, President Yoon declared his intent to fight the impeachment and investigations in a dignified manner. Yet, his refusal to receive official documents raises questions about whether his "dignified fight" equates to evading legal and political accountability. If his defense team requires more time, Yoon could accept the summons and then formally request a suspension of attendance. By failing to cooperate with investigative authorities or the Constitutional Court, President Yoon undermines his promise to face the situation responsibly.

Meanwhile, the insurgency investigation continues to progress, uncovering evidence of a conspiracy involving former Defense Intelligence Commander Noh Sang-won and Intelligence Commander Moon Sang-ho, who were seen conspiring at a fast-food restaurant. Noh is now facing an arrest warrant, while Moon has been placed under emergency detention. As key figures in the alleged plot are brought in for questioning, President Yoon remains the only major figure yet to respond to the investigative authorities. Yoon’s legal team has pushed back fiercely, downplaying the charges as "uproar" rather than insurgency and framing the investigation as excessive.

However, President Yoon's own words during his December 12 address—“Where on earth is a two-hour long insurgency?”—have drawn criticism. Observers note that the short duration of the situation reflects an unsuccessful attempt, not a lack of intent. Yoon's claim that he merely sought to "inform the public of a crisis and plead for help in the form of martial law" has been widely dismissed as nonsensical.

While every criminal suspect has the right to self-defense, few go so far as to refuse delivery of official documents. President Yoon, a former prosecutor, risks coming across not as a dignified leader but as someone using legal maneuvers to evade accountability. As president, he has a duty to set an example by cooperating with investigations and the impeachment process. An accurate display of dignity, borrowing from Yoon's own words, would involve engaging with the legal process, addressing the charges directly, and providing a transparent explanation of his actions.