Impeaching the Impeachment: Justice for President Park Geun-Hye

By Peter Pyungwoo Kim

Park Geun-hye was truly a political phenomenon. She was elected democratically, twice chosen as the leader of her party, and served in the South Korean legislature for over fourteen years. Her countrymen dubbed her the “Queen of Elections” for her successful leadership in winning her own elections and steering her party to great electoral victories. Yet in 2016–2017, she was impeached and subsequently removed from office. How did it happen? How could it have happened? How, why, and with what justification was President Park, South Korea’s first female president, impeached and removed from office?

In Impeaching the Impeachment, Peter Pyungwoo Kim sets the record straight and provides a unique insider’s perspective on the legal, procedural, and political issues involved in the lead-up to South Korea’s impeachment and the removal from office of its first female president. Few can better answer these questions and explain the how the impeachment came about than Kim, a well-known and respected Korean attorney who served as one of the main defense lawyers on Park’s legal team during her impeachment trial before South Korea’s Constitutional Court.

In this first book specifically devoted to the subject in English, Kim traces the historic case from the legislature’s vote to impeach Park to the beginning of the trial in which he defended her. It is a cautionary tale, a plea for justice and for the rule of law, and a fascinating description of an unfolding political crisis that is of relevance to citizens of other democratic nations.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Abbott Press
• Release date: Nov 15, 2019
• ISBN: 9781458222480

Peter Pyungwoo Kim

Peter Pyungwoo Kim is a Korean lawyer, and an attorney-at-law licensed in both South Korea and Illinois. He is a summa cum laude graduate of Seoul National University who earned a master of law degree from Harvard Law School, and served for several years as a judge in South Korea before becoming a law professor at Sogang University Law School. Kim served as chairman of the International Association of Korean Lawyers, was elected as the forty-fifth president of the Korean Bar Association, and was a visiting scholar at the University of California, Los Angeles, Law School. After the impeachment of President Park, he founded the Save Korea Foundation and published three Korean-language books about the case: Impeaching the Impeachment, The Rule of Law Is Dead in Korea, and The Impeachment Coup. He currently resides in Beverly Hills, California, with his wife.

Book preview

CHAPTER 1

Is This Fair Play?

DECEMBER 5, 2016

Political developments in South Korea became rather disconcerting in early November 2016. I asked myself, Are we witnessing a revolution, a coup d’état, or the destruction of the country? I lay awake at nights as a series of unnerving scenarios flashed before my eyes. The Korean news media behaved like frenzied sportscasters televising a boxing match where the champion is temporarily stunned by a quick uppercut by the opponent. While the champion’s guard is down, a relentless series of jabs and strikes follows suit to the point of knocking him out. The fans of the underdog are belting out victory chants, while the supporters of the champion bite their lips nervously as they watch him unable to regain the upper hand in the fight. Rather than lauding the champion’s indomitable will to hang on until the end, the sportscasters ridicule him for refusing to quit. This boxing match is a fair analogy to what is happening in Korea’s domestic politics.

As the whole country watched a vicious political game being played out in the media, newspaper columnists, university professors, the bar association, and members of the social elite had already concluded that, given the magnitude of the influence-peddling and corruption scandal involving President Park Geun-hye’s longtime confidante Choi Soon-sil, impeachment was the only acceptable outcome. In fact, they were hoping the latest scandal would lead to a complete overhaul of Korean politics. Unfortunately, none were willing to examine the constitutional ramifications of the political developments.

Impeachment is a constitutional state of emergency whereby the president is forced to step down before the term ends. During the 1960s, Korea’s first president, Syngman Rhee, was forced to step down amid widespread public protests over the corrupt electoral process. He took refuge in Hawaii, where he eventually passed away. This protest is called the April 19 Revolution, which quickly led to the May 16 military coup d’état.

Telling the president to step down needs to be backed by proper arguments and concrete evidence. What was the reasoning used by protesters who were demanding Park’s ousting? I pored over the daily news reports in search of solid arguments but was unable to find any. The only semblance of logic I found was the Choi Soon-sil gate, which was blown up by the news media. The mainstream media claimed that the public became overwhelmed by the scandal and that people’s confidence in the presidential leadership had become so paralyzed that the only recourse was for the president to resign. A statement issued by the Korean Bar Association was not much different. It failed to apply any constitutional reasoning.

Is disappointing the public a justifiable reason for the president to step down? Is Choi Soon-sil gate unprecedented for Korea?

Kim Hyon-chol, the son of former president Kim Young-sam, had pocketed a fortune after meddling in scores of business deals. Sons and aides of former president Kim Dae-jung had used their influence for money. Former president Roh Moo-hyun’s older brother was also found to have meddled in state affairs for profit, as did ex-president Lee Myung-bak’s older brother. However, none of the former leaders had voluntarily stepped down or faced impeachment. Why were journalists, civic groups, and numerous lawmakers—many of whom had been members of the same political party as Park for several decades—threatening to impeach the president while completely ignoring her constitutionally mandated five-year term? Just because she had failed to stop her aides and longtime confidante from alleged activities involving corruption? Was this reaction because she was a single woman?

The mainstream news media and the ruling party were staying eerily silent while most opposition lawmakers were threatening to drag the president down if she refused to step down.

Were we truly facing a national emergency that required us to ignore the Constitution and drag the president down immediately? If we accept the argument that the president’s term can be mandated by mass media, the constitutional democracy that was nurtured following the pro-democracy movement in 1987 will end. This will be the start of a new form of Korean-style, media-dictated democracy, in which news reports, mass protests, and meetings by elders determine the fate of our leaders. This is very similar to the path of China’s Cultural Revolution in the 1960s, whereby the press and Red Guard ousted President Liu Shaoqi and brought a decade of experimental, populist communism. If the presidential term guaranteed by the Constitution cannot be upheld, lawmakers, corporate executives, public servants, and university professors will face the same fate as Park. Lawmakers could be ousted by angry constituents, corporate executives could be dragged out of their offices by unionists, and professors could be stripped of their titles by students. Democracy and freedom of speech are worthy goals to pursue, but they fall apart if the rule of law collapses.

I simply cannot understand the events unfolding before my eyes. Are we trying to overturn our democratic system and embrace a populist form of governance that already failed in China fifty years ago? Article 70 of our Constitution states, The term of office of the President shall be five years, and the President shall not be re-elected. We cannot overlook or forget that the single five-year presidential term has been protecting Korea’s democracy and political stability for the past twenty-nine years.

CHAPTER 2

The Deplorable Forced Impeachment Prosecution

DECEMBER 7, 2016

According to the media reports today, the Korean National Assembly will decide on the impeachment motion on December 9. If the motion passes, Korea will become infamous.

First, an impeachment motion is generally a political anomaly that happens maybe once a century. But Korean lawmakers will have set a record by impeaching the president twice in the span of just twelve years! The first president who had been impeached was Roh Moo-hyun in 2004.

Second, the National Assembly proceeded with the impeachment motion against President Park days after it appointed an independent counsel to investigate the alleged influence-peddling and corruption scandal involving the president and her longtime confidante, Choi Soon-sil. However, the independent counsel had no opportunity to carry out its investigations. Why did the National Assembly bother to appoint an independent counsel if it was not going to wait for its findings? Was there no other option for the National Assembly than a rushed impeachment motion?

Third, the discussions about the impeachment motion were held secretly behind closed doors. If this process were compared to a criminal investigation, it would be described as a clandestine probe. An impeachment is the process of driving out a democratically elected president and moving to overturn the decision of the public at large. As a result, an impeachment process is markedly different from an ordinary criminal investigation. The discussions held by lawmakers must be revealed to the public. Discussions held behind closed doors are the same as a closed-door trial. In the United States, the news media offers minute-by-minute coverage of impeachment proceedings so the public can voice its opinion to lawmakers ahead of time.

Fourth, Korea adopted a single five-year-term presidential system in 1987 to safeguard against prolonged dictatorships. The opposition political camp swept the assembly elections held in April 2016, and President Park Geun-hye was in her final year in office. However, the opposition lawmakers were seeking to oust the lame duck president through an impeachment while agitating the public to take to the streets against her.

Fifth, many Saenuri Party (the ruling party) lawmakers hopped on the impeachment bandwagon against the president. People who work with a president for many years usually stand by the president’s side when that leader faces impeachment. The Uri Party had gathered steadfastly around former president Roh when he had faced impeachment. But this time, many Saenuri Party lawmakers did not stand behind the president who came from their own party.

Although the impeachment motion by the Korean National Assembly appears to be proper on surface, it is not impeachment; it is a public uprising in disguise. The reactionary public uprising stems from the rage felt by the press, opposition lawmakers, and the public toward the president who refused to step down despite accusations by the news media of corruption and influence peddling involving the president’s close confidante.

Since adopting the single five-year presidential term system, Koreans have democratically elected their leaders. The country was considered an advanced Asian nation in which democracy had firmly taken root. But this impeachment presents an odd country where constitutional order was put on hold in face of a public uprising and the public was not able to watch the proceedings patiently on the sidelines. They came out to the streets while holding candlelight protests and petition drives to pressure Constitutional Court judges. What was even more worrisome was whether the angered public would be willing to accept a ruling by the Constitutional Court if it were to reject the impeachment bill. What would happen if the public did not accept the court’s ruling? Would martial law have to be put in place—or would a bloody revolution ensue? Would history repeat itself?

Since the founding of the Republic of Korea in 1948, three of eleven presidents had resigned: Syngman Rhee, Yoon Bo-seon, and Choi Kyu-hah. One president had been assassinated by a security chief: Park Chung-hee. Two had been convicted of corruption charges: Chun Doo-hwan and Roh Tae-woo. These tragic ends probably place the Republic of Korea at the very top in terms of the level of risk faced by its incumbent presidents compared to the rest of the world.

The country was facing a sad situation. Couldn’t the news media and the public have set their emotions aside and be objective in evaluating the situation? Couldn’t they have waited and passed judgment on the president’s performance at the voting booths in December the following year? Was it right to handle the problem through a public uprising rather than by following formal democratic procedures? The irresponsible actions by the news media, politicians, and protesters were lamentable. Prominent officials in Korea, who were watching this event on the sidelines, were just as pitiful, if not more so. Was this the best the country could do?

CHAPTER 3

So Idle as to Fool Around with Impeachment over a Tiny Scandal?

DECEMBER 8, 2016

Korean news media are insisting that Park should step down due to the magnitude of the corruption and illicit acts committed by her longtime confidante Choi Soon-sil. Also, they argue that Park be forced out of office should she refuse to resign. The public, taking sides with the opposition lawmakers and left-wing news media, are protesting on the streets for more than a month. On December 9, the National Assembly put the impeachment motion to a vote.

I, however, am opposed to the impeachment. First of all, Park is the leader of our republic, the titular head of the state, and the commander in chief of our military comprised of 600,000 troops. Park represents our country on the diplomatic stage and also oversees the administrative and national security matters. She appoints the chief Supreme Court justice and makes the final decisions on major policies concerning the economy, culture, and education. In other words, the president determines the fate of our nation. These are the reasons why the country cannot afford to be without a leader for even a moment.

A revolution or impeachment is an extraordinary process that occurs perhaps once every hundred years. Such political upheaval undermines the position of the president and exposes the nation to tremendous security risks, especially a country like South Korea, which remains technically at war with North Korea. The economy also ends up facing tremendous uncertainties when such political changes occur. Can our country afford to waste time with impeachment proceedings?

I do not think this Choi Soon-sil gate is so grave as to warrant a revolution. I am not out to defend Park. In fact, the scandal is entirely her fault for letting Choi, who had no official title, commit acts of corruption and meddle in state affairs. But as I have repeatedly remarked, Choi Soon-sil gate is no different than the hundreds and even thousands of corruption scandals that had surfaced in previous administrations and during the five hundred years of the Chosun Dynasty. Choi Soon-sil gate is a minor corruption scandal that the Seoul District Prosecutor’s Office should handle instead of an independent counsel. The situation is really more of a subject of gossip rather than one worthy of national upheaval.

The president apologized sincerely to the public and repeatedly vowed to launch a thorough investigation, punish those who were guilty, and rectify all wrongdoings that were committed. What more could she do? Should she have taken her own life? Should she have sought political