South Korean prosecutors have requested a court warrant to detain impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol, alleging that his brief imposition of martial law on December 3 constitutes rebellion. The Corruption Investigation Office for High-Ranking Officials (CIO) confirmed on Monday that the request was filed with the Seoul Western District Court as part of a joint investigation involving police and military authorities.
Yoon is accused of abusing his presidential authority and orchestrating a rebellion during the martial law decree, which lasted only a few hours. His lawyer, Yoon Kap-keun, criticized the warrant request, calling it invalid and arguing that the CIO lacks jurisdiction over rebellion charges.
“An incumbent president cannot be prosecuted for abuse of power,” the lawyer stated, acknowledging, however, that academic interpretations on the matter vary. He declined to elaborate on the legal team’s course of action should the court approve the warrant.
The investigation gained momentum after Yoon repeatedly refused to cooperate, declining to appear for questioning and blocking searches of his offices. Although sitting presidents enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution, exceptions exist for allegations of rebellion or treason.
The warrant request follows reports that Yoon deployed heavily armed troops to encircle the National Assembly, allegedly to prevent lawmakers from repealing martial law. Despite this, lawmakers managed to enter the chamber and voted unanimously, 190-0, to terminate the decree just hours after Yoon’s late-night televised announcement of martial law.
Yoon has defended his actions, describing the martial law declaration as a “temporary warning” against the liberal opposition Democratic Party, which he accused of obstructing his agenda. He denied any plans to arrest opposition politicians or incapacitate the National Assembly, insisting that troops were deployed solely to maintain order. However, testimony from Kwak Jong-keun, the detained commander of the Army Special Warfare Command, contradicts this claim. Kwak alleges that Yoon ordered him to “quickly destroy the door and drag out the lawmakers who are inside.”
The investigation also examines claims that Yoon directed military forces to target the National Election Commission in Gwacheon, citing unsubstantiated accusations of fraud in April’s parliamentary elections. The commission has strongly denied the allegations, maintaining there is no evidence of misconduct.
Yoon’s presidency remains in limbo as the Constitutional Court deliberates on whether to uphold his impeachment, which was approved by the National Assembly on December 14. A ruling to permanently remove Yoon from office requires the support of six of the court’s nine justices.
Political instability has deepened following the impeachment of Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, who had been acting as president since Yoon’s suspension. Deputy Prime Minister Choi Sang-mok now holds interim leadership but has not yet addressed the pressing issue of filling three vacant Constitutional Court seats.
Authorities have already detained Yoon’s defense minister, police chief, and several military commanders linked to the martial law decree, which has drawn parallels to South Korea’s authoritarian history.
The decision on whether to grant the arrest warrant remains pending, with concerns rising over potential clashes between law enforcement and Yoon’s presidential security service if attempts are made to detain him.
This case continues to evolve, intensifying South Korea’s political tensions and raising questions about the future of its democratic institutions.