Yoon's presidency in turmoil

Feb 134 min read

By Ariel Lee & Melvin Najarian Feb. 12, 2025

The South Korean President, Yoon Suk Yeol, shocked his nation as he proclaimed martial law on Dec. 3, 2024. Despite martial law being lifted soon after being declared, his action became widely interpreted as a means of maintaining power, sparking protests and laying the grounds for his eventual impeachment. The opposing Democratic Party considered Yoon’s proclamation of martial law treason.

Yoon justified the martial law as an effort to eliminate “anti-state forces” in the opposition government, which were supposedly “pro North [Korea],” in an attempt to undermine the democratic system, per Arms Control Association. This was a turning point in South Korea’s history, as it marked the first time martial law was declared since the nation became a democracy. According to the opposition legislators, the Democratic Party, argued that Yoon’s declaration of martial power demonstrated an insurrection since he sent troops to the National Assembly. They stated that Yoon’s actions were an attempt to prevent the legislators from voting against a bill. After the Democratic Party won the general election in 2024, he became a lame-duck president.

Yoon has had previous scandals; First Lady Kim Keon-Hee faced numerous accusations that damaged Yoon’s reputation even before Yoon’s election in 2022. In 2021, Kim admitted to fraud on her resume, and was recently confirmed to have plagiarized in her master’s thesis. She also faced allegations of stock manipulation, election interference and accepting bribes.

President Yoon, running for the People Power Party (PPP), came to office in May 2022, winning by a slim 0.7% margin. However, Yoon’s approval quickly plummeted, and his approval rating fell below 20% before declaring martial law. He continuously struggled to achieve his agenda’s goals and his opponents, the Democratic Party, have accused him of imposing martial law due to anger and the desire to gain personal power.

“Presidents should listen to their people’s opinions because theyare the ones who voted them into office, and if they do not follow the their wishes it seems like they are trying to become a dictator,” Sophomore Chunhwee Choi said.

Impeachment proceedings, accusing Yoon of treason, began on December 7, and legislators proposed impeaching Yoon, calling his actions treasonous. The motion to impeach him would require a vote of two-thirds of the National Assembly. The first impeachment motion failed after the PPP boycotted the vote. The second attempt on Dec. 14 was successful, with 12 members of Yoon’s party voting in favor of the impeachment motion—the opposition only required eight members of Yoon's party to approve it. The approval of the motion meant that Yoon’s presidential powers would be suspended for six months, and the authority to remove the President from office was given to the Constitutional Court. Yoon's Prime Minister, Han Duck-soo, became acting president after Yoon’s impeachment, but himself was impeached shortly after on Dec. 27 after failing to take the steps required to conclude Yoon’s impeachment.

A Seoul court has issued an arrest order for him after he repeatedly refused to appear for interrogation. According to BBC, 100 police and Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) investigators visited Yoon’s residence on January 3 and faced his security staff. After six hours of waiting, the CIO stopped the procedure. On January 19, Yoon was arrested at his presidential residence in Seoul, and could face time in prison for his proclamation of martial law.

“In any democratic system no one should be above the law. If anyone is, then it is not a true democratic system. Because the government functions on trust and the systems are more truthful in democratic systems, they tend to foster more accountability. If there’s no trust in the systems in place — then we are effectively turning away from democratic systems. Going towards dictatorships and totalitarianism,” Brian Marchetti, Social Science Department, said.

The use of military force to suppress dissent underscores a troubling global trend of democratic backsliding, where leaders manipulate state mechanisms to cling to power, often at the expense of constitutional norms. Such actions erode trust in governance and embolden further authoritarian tendencies, threatening the very foundation of democracy. Leaders such as Hungary’s Victor Orban, who has brazenly referred to his tenure as prime minister as an “illiberal democracy,” have used democratic means to pass new policies and even constitutions to hold power.

From South Korea’s recent crisis to Hungary’s systematic weakening of democratic institutions, these examples highlight the fragility of democratic systems in the face of unchecked executive overreach. Addressing this trend requires vigilance, transparency, and robust civil resistance to safeguard democratic values against authoritarian encroachment.

About the Contributors