By Joyce Lee
SEOUL (Reuters) -South Korea’s leadership crisis will play out in the Constitutional Court, which will decide the fate of President Yoon Suk Yeol and Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, both impeached and suspended from power over a short-lived martial law.
Han, who was impeached on Friday, had taken over as acting president from Yoon, impeached on Dec. 14. Finance Minister Choi Sang-mok now becomes acting president under the law.
Also on Friday, the court held its first hearing in a case to decide whether to reinstate Yoon or remove him permanently from power.
The ruling conservative People Power Party filed a court injunction after the vote to impeach Han, saying a simple majority was not sufficient to impeach an acting president.
WHAT NEXT?
After being impeached on Dec. 14, Yoon’s presidential powers were suspended but he remains in office, retaining his immunity from most charges except insurrection or treason.
The Constitutional Court must decide within 180 days whether to remove him from office or reject the impeachment and restore his powers. If it removes Yoon or he resigns, a presidential election must be held within 60 days.
Opposition Democratic Party lawmaker Jung Chung-rae, the head of parliament’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee, is leading the case for removing Yoon.
Yoon’s legal counsel included former Constitutional Court spokesperson Bae Bo-yoon and former prosecutor Yoon Kab-keun, who appeared at Friday’s hearing.
The court is also expected to hold a trial on whether to remove Han from office or restore him to his role.
HURDLES TO A COURT RULING?
South Korea’s constitution requires six justices to agree on the ouster of an impeached president. But the nine-member court has three vacancies, so the current justices would have to vote unanimously to remove Yoon.
The court has said it can deliberate and hear arguments with just six justices.
The three vacancies are to be filled by parliament, controlled by the main opposition Democratic Party, which approved three nominees this week, although the ruling People Power Party boycotted them.
However, Han refused to appoint the justices without bipartisan agreement, saying to do so would exceed his powers in the acting role.
Then the opposition-controlled parliament impeached him.
There is precedent for an acting president to appoint a Constitutional Court justice, as when former President Park Geun-hye was impeached in late 2016.
WHAT HAPPENS IN COURT?
In South Korea’s only previous presidential removal by impeachment, the court took three months to oust Park in 2017.
This time, the terms of two court justices expire in April, and legal experts predict it may seek to rule before that to minimise uncertainty.
On Friday Justice Cheong Hyung-sik of the Constitutional Court said it would move swiftly in the case, considering its gravity.
In the past, academics say, the justices have not voted predictably by political leaning but have decided case by case, going by their interpretation of the constitution.
Conservative attempts to rally popular support for Yoon are not expected to affect the court’s ruling, as Park was removed from office despite continued conservative rallies to keep her in power, warring with candlelight rallies seeking her removal.
In the case of Park, who like Yoon was from a centre-right party, the court voted unanimously to remove her, including some justices viewed as conservative and two Park appointees.
Yoon also faces criminal investigations related to the martial law decision.
If charged, he could ask the Constitutional Court to suspend the 180-day clock on the impeachment ruling. The court denied a similar request by Park.
In 2004, then-President Roh Moo-hyun, from a centre-left party, was impeached for falling short of the political neutrality required of a high public official, but finished his five-year term after the court rejected the motion within two months.
(Reporting by Joyce Lee; Editing by Jamie Freed and Clarence Fernandez)
