3 ms·

This is obviously a bit pedantic but technically she was already impeached. This article is about her being convicted in the impeachment trial. The post title a

This is obviously a bit pedantic but technically she was already impeached. This article is about her being convicted in the impeachment trial. The post title also doesn't match with the article title which more correctly states that she's been ousted.

pcurve 10y ago
Technically, she wasn't impeached. But the way impeachment process works in SK, once the process begins, you are no longer able to function as president. So 'effectively', she was already impeached. Obviously I'm the one being pedantic. lol.
- lifthrasiir 10y ago
  More accurately speaking, in South Korea both the congress and the president is elected by direct nationwide voting, therefore it takes a separate process for the congress to fully impeach the president: the congress votes to impeach and the constitutional court decides whether to approve it. Therefore she has not been impeached, but merely has been suspended til the decision (Roh Moo-hyun [1] is currently a sole example to survive this process). This is quite different to how the impeachment works in USA. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roh_Moo-hyun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roh_Moo-hyun
- dllthomas 10y ago
  Impeachment is the bringing of charges.
  - true_religion 10y ago
    As a legal processes, the definition and order or procedures vary wildly between different countries. Some countries for example charge you with a crime, but don't actually arrest you until they're bringing it to trial. Some countries don't have a prosecution, or a defence but a system where multiple government officials advocate for the truth. You can set up a legal system anyway you want, and define the terms however you like---it'll be legal and valid in your country.
    - dllthomas 10y ago
      It's certainly the case that procedures, their order, and attendant consequences of any given step will vary. Those have no bearing at all on what was said - it would still be the case that impeachment was the bringing of charges, and would not depend upon conviction and removal from office. It is also possible that Korea may have explicitly defined this particular English word differently than the rest of the world. If that's the case, it seems worth calling out explicitly.

pcurve 10y ago

Technically, she wasn't impeached. But the way impeachment process works in SK, once the process begins, you are no longer able to function as president. So 'effectively', she was already impeached. Obviously I'm the one being pedantic. lol.

lifthrasiir 10y ago
More accurately speaking, in South Korea both the congress and the president is elected by direct nationwide voting, therefore it takes a separate process for the congress to fully impeach the president: the congress votes to impeach and the constitutional court decides whether to approve it. Therefore she has not been impeached, but merely has been suspended til the decision (Roh Moo-hyun [1] is currently a sole example to survive this process). This is quite different to how the impeachment works in USA. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roh_Moo-hyun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roh_Moo-hyun
dllthomas 10y ago
Impeachment is the bringing of charges.
- true_religion 10y ago
  As a legal processes, the definition and order or procedures vary wildly between different countries. Some countries for example charge you with a crime, but don't actually arrest you until they're bringing it to trial. Some countries don't have a prosecution, or a defence but a system where multiple government officials advocate for the truth. You can set up a legal system anyway you want, and define the terms however you like---it'll be legal and valid in your country.
  - dllthomas 10y ago
    It's certainly the case that procedures, their order, and attendant consequences of any given step will vary. Those have no bearing at all on what was said - it would still be the case that impeachment was the bringing of charges, and would not depend upon conviction and removal from office. It is also possible that Korea may have explicitly defined this particular English word differently than the rest of the world. If that's the case, it seems worth calling out explicitly.