Summary of the 6th Impeachment Trial Session of President Yoon (February 6, 2025)
📌 Summary of the 6th Impeachment Trial Session of President Yoon (February 6, 2025) ⚖️
The 6th session of President Yoon’s impeachment trial was held on February 6, 2025, at the Constitutional Court’s main courtroom. 🏛️
Key witnesses included military officers involved in the emergency martial law implementation and the President’s economic advisor.
During this session, the testimony of military officials revealed critical details regarding the execution of martial law, the use of force, and direct orders from President Yoon. ⚠️
The economic rationale behind the emergency measures was also challenged in court.
🛡️ Key Testimonies from Military Officials
Colonel Kim Hyun-tae, commander of the 707 Special Mission Unit, testified about the operational details of the martial law implementation.
His testimony centered on whether direct orders to remove lawmakers were given and if military force was authorized.
Kim stated that he received an instruction from former Special Warfare Commander Kwak Jong-geun that “the number should not exceed 150,” which appears to reference the 150-vote threshold required to annul martial law.
He further revealed that his unit was deployed with live ammunition and discussed potential use of tasers and power cuts. ⚡
🔍 General Kwak’s Confirmation of Direct Orders
Former Special Warfare Commander Kwak Jong-geun provided a critical testimony, directly implicating President Yoon in ordering military intervention against the National Assembly.
Kwak confirmed that he received explicit instructions to "remove lawmakers" from the assembly building.
Furthermore, he stated that President Yoon personally ordered security forces to "break the doors and enter the National Assembly." 🚪
This statement contradicts the President’s legal defense, which claims the orders were related to security personnel, not lawmakers.
🚨 Deployment of Armed Troops to the National Assembly
Testimonies confirmed that nearly 200 special forces soldiers were stationed at the National Assembly on the day of the martial law enforcement.
Initial deployment consisted of 97 personnel, but an additional 101 troops were sent before the Assembly’s annulment vote.
Kim testified that operational commands were relayed through an open microphone, allowing lower-ranked officers to hear orders in real time.
This raised concerns about the extent of coordination and deliberate planning behind the intervention.
💰 Economic Justifications Under Scrutiny
Presidential economic advisor Park Chun-seop argued that the martial law was partially justified due to economic risks stemming from opposition-led budget cuts.
He pointed to the drastic reduction in funding for the “Grand Whale Project” as an economic threat. 🏗️
However, his argument lost credibility when the Ministry of Industry and Trade released an official statement on the same day, declaring the project economically unviable.
This contradiction weakened the administration’s rationale for implementing emergency measures.
⚖️ President Yoon’s Reactions in Court
President Yoon displayed visible discomfort and agitation throughout the session, particularly during General Kwak’s testimony.
Observers noted that he repeatedly sipped water, interrupted his legal team, and exhibited signs of frustration. 😡
At one point, Yoon took the microphone himself, accusing military officials of fabricating a political conspiracy against him.
His emotional response contrasted with the controlled demeanor typically expected in legal proceedings.
🔮 Implications for the Upcoming Sessions
The impeachment trial is expected to conclude after the 7th and 8th hearings, scheduled for February 11 and 13, respectively.
The final testimonies will be crucial in determining the court’s ruling.
Upcoming witnesses include former officials from the Ministry of Interior, National Election Commission, and National Intelligence Service.
These testimonies will provide further insight into whether martial law was intended to suppress opposition forces rather than maintain public order.
🏛️ Final Verdict and Constitutional Implications
Legal experts predict that the Constitutional Court may reach a final decision shortly after the last hearing.
The case has significant implications for South Korea’s democratic institutions and military governance.
Regardless of the outcome, the trial will serve as a landmark case in the nation’s legal and political history, shaping future interpretations of presidential powers and constitutional law. 📜
댓글
댓글 쓰기