South Korea ex-minister's lawyers defend martial law as Yoon faces impeachment trial
Ex-defence minister Kim Yong-hyun was the first of a series of officials to be arrested and is likely to be the first to face indictment on accusation of being a central figure in President Yoon Suk Yeol's surprise martial law declaration on 3 December
The lawyers for a former South Korean defence minister under investigation on insurrection charges said today (26 December) a short-lived martial law decree imposed earlier this month was to raise alarm on opposition parties' abuse of the democratic process.
Ex-defence minister Kim Yong-hyun was the first of a series of officials to be arrested and is likely to be the first to face indictment on accusation of being a central figure in President Yoon Suk Yeol's surprise martial law declaration on 3 December.
In a press conference on Thursday, two lawyers for Kim echoed much of the argument made by Yoon after the declaration that he lifted barely six hours later, saying it was a decision necessary to eradicate anti-state elements that were threatening the country's democracy.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
"The martial law was to raise alarm, and what's very clear is that there were no casualties and troops were withdrawn in an orderly manner after it was lifted," lawyer Yoo Seung-soo told reporters.
Yoo also said Yoon overruled Kim's attempt to impose a curfew as part of the martial law, which was proof that the president did not intend any harm for the public.
Rhee Ha-sang, the other lawyer, said the accusations of insurrection against Kim and Yoon were "ludicrous" and ignored the president's constitutional power to impose martial law when deemed necessary.
Kim, who attempted suicide while in detention on 11 December, has previously said he took full responsibility for the concern caused by the martial law decree, but argued the investigation against him and the president was illegal.
Yoon was impeached by parliament on 14 December in a vote joined by some members of his ruling People Power Party and now faces a Constitutional Court trial that will determine whether to restore or remove him from office.
Yesterday (25 December), he did not respond to the latest summons for questioning in a separate criminal investigation and has not submitted legal briefs requested by the Constitutional Court, which is set to hold the first hearing tomorrow (27 Deecmber).
