Yoon's Side: "Martial Law Proclamation No. 1 Was Poorly Copied by Kim Yong-hyun... Expression Was Inadequate"

President Yoon's Legal Team Reveals Position on Martial Law Proclamation No. 1 in Second Written Response
Proclamation Banning Political Activities of National Assembly Addressed
Martial Law Troops Who Broke National Assembly Windows Claimed to Be "Preventing an Excited Crowd"

In the second written response submitted by President Yoon Suk-yeol's side to the Constitutional Court, it was claimed that Martial Law Proclamation No. 1, announced immediately after the declaration of martial law under the name of Martial Law Commander Park An-su (Chief of Staff of the Army), was "a mistaken copy of a past precedent by former Minister of National Defense Kim Yong-hyun." On the 15th, JTBC reported, "This content was included in the approximately 60-page second written response submitted by President Yoon's impeachment trial legal team to the Constitutional Court the day before."

President Yoon Suk-yeol declared martial law on the night of December 3 last year, and in the early hours of the 4th, martial law troops attempted to enter the National Assembly main building. Photo by Kim Hyun-min

According to JTBC, President Yoon's side stated in the response that regarding the proclamation, "When the president had the authority to dissolve the National Assembly, former Minister Kim copied the precedent as it was," and added, "All procedures were intended to be carried out peacefully and swiftly, and to end upon the resolution to dissolve the National Assembly, but the wording error was overlooked due to (President Yoon's) carelessness." The response also reportedly included that "the expression in the proclamation was immature."

Martial Law Proclamation No. 1, declared on December 3 last year, prohibited "all political activities including the activities of the National Assembly, local councils, political parties, and political gatherings and demonstrations," and has been at the center of constitutional and legal controversies in the legal community. Regarding this, Kim Jung-won, Secretary General of the Constitutional Court, stated during an emergency inquiry held at the National Assembly on the 9th that Proclamation No. 1 "does not conform to the current constitution."

President Yoon's side appears to argue that the proclamation lacked the element of "disturbing the national order," which is a requirement for the crime of rebellion, and that responsibility lies with former Minister Kim. However, according to the prosecution's investigation, the proclamation was drafted by former Minister Kim and directly reviewed by President Yoon.

President Yoon's side also reportedly claimed that the martial law troops breaking the glass windows of the National Assembly main building and entering inside during the December 3 martial law declaration was "to prevent an excited crowd." However, former Special Warfare Commander Kwak Jong-geun previously stated during a National Defense Committee inquiry at the National Assembly that "(President Yoon) said, 'Quickly break the door of the main assembly hall and pull out the people inside.'"

The Constitutional Court will hold the second oral argument session for President Yoon's impeachment trial at 2 p.m. on the 16th. The first oral argument on the 14th ended in just four minutes after confirming the attendance of both parties and their representatives. However, President Yoon, who was arrested by the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials the day before, is expected to be absent from the argument. President Yoon's lawyer Seok Dong-hyun questioned President Yoon's attendance at the second oral argument, saying, "The Corruption Investigation Office has effectively forced the sitting president to appear under the pretext of executing a warrant," and asked, "Would he attend the impeachment trial?"