3 ms·

The article points out that even some in his own party have denounced the move. I’m no expert but I find it hard to believe there’s much pro-PRK sympathy in Se

The article points out that even some in his own party have denounced the move. I’m no expert but I find it hard to believe there’s much pro-PRK sympathy in Seoul among a major political party. Considering this is making western news, it seems the president has over-played his hand. Hopefully this passes quickly.

ncr100 2y ago
As a casual non-Korean reader, this does appear to be a way for the current leadership to shut down corruption investigations against him, and to end democratic opposition to his policies. Democratic opposition can seem stifling. However the solution is to negotiate. The leader here is taking an authoritarian dictatorship path so a solution, unfortunately, it appears to my eyes.
tootie 2y ago
CNN is reporting that parliament has successfully overturned martial law.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > CNN is reporting that parliament has successfully overturned martial law National Assembly has voted to lift martial law. Yoon (and the army) would still have to recognise it.
  - SauciestGNU 2y ago
    Assume the coup fails. How does South Korea purge its military of coup participants without significantly reducing its readiness for conflict with a resurgent north Korea?
    - skissane 2y ago
      It sounds like the military has been obeying the President’s orders somewhat halfheartedly, in a manner which has deprived them of much of their effectiveness. I’m not sure in that scenario it is right to label them as “coup participants”.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > How does South Korea purge its military of coup participants without significantly reducing its readiness for conflict with a resurgent north Korea? Case by case. (And by redeploying problematic people out of the capital.)
    - tootie 2y ago
      It's not clear anyone in the military participated beyond pretending to follow orders. Soldiers guarding the National Assembly seemed to do a terrible job securing the building and it may have been intentional. A reporter on the scene reported that soldiers were scared when an Assemblyman yelled at them.
  - johnfernow 2y ago
    BBC reports "The South Korean military says it will maintain martial law until it is lifted by President Yoon Suk Yeol, despite the nation's parliament voting to block its enforcement, according to the country's national broadcaster." [1] They previously wrote that "The National Assembly speaker has just said that South Korean troops are leaving the parliament building, the Yonhap news agency reports." So I'm not sure if the military isn't unified in what to do, or if certain troops are just not enforcing the President's near certainly unconstitutional order. The Constitution gives the President many powers under martial law ("Under extraordinary martial law, special measures may be taken with respect to the necessity for warrants, freedom of speech, the press, assembly and association, or the powers of the Executive and the Judiciary as prescribed by law"), but it appears to give the President no powers over the National Assembly, so the "All political activities, including the activities of the National Assembly... are prohibited" part of his martial law declaration appears to be blatantly unconstitutional. According to the constitution, "When the National Assembly requests the lifting of martial law with the concurrent vote of a majority of the total members of the National Assembly, the President shall comply." [2] Some are saying the constitution doesn't give a timeframe for when the President has to comply, but if he doesn't soon, it definitely appears to be a self-coup. [3] 1. https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cn38321180et https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cn38321180et 2. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Republic_of_Korea_1987.pdf https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Republic_of_K... 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-coup https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-coup
  - AnimalMuppet 2y ago
    Yoon or the army would still have to recognize it.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > Yoon or the army would still have to recognize it If the army recognises it and Yoon does not, that's still a coup d'etat. It's just that the military is siding with the National Assembly. The only way for this to consittutionally resolve is Yoon recognises it as well as the army.
      - AnimalMuppet 2y ago
        I mean, if the legislature declares martial law to be over, and the military recognizes that, then Yoon can say whatever he wants, martial law is still de facto over. If the president says "martial law", and the military says "no", that's not martial law. That's the president saying some words. It may still be a coup d'etat attempt by the president, but it's not martial law. So if the military recognizes the end of martial law, the martial law is over. If Yoon recognizes it, and the military doesn't, that's a whole nother can of worms. Then it's really a coup.
- c0wb0yc0d3r 2y ago
  The AP article has already been updated too.
- School-Cotton 2y ago
  Whether their attempt to overturn it is successful remains to be seen.

ncr100 2y ago

As a casual non-Korean reader, this does appear to be a way for the current leadership to shut down corruption investigations against him, and to end democratic opposition to his policies. Democratic opposition can seem stifling. However the solution is to negotiate. The leader here is taking an authoritarian dictatorship path so a solution, unfortunately, it appears to my eyes.

tootie 2y ago

CNN is reporting that parliament has successfully overturned martial law.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> CNN is reporting that parliament has successfully overturned martial law National Assembly has voted to lift martial law. Yoon (and the army) would still have to recognise it.
- SauciestGNU 2y ago
  Assume the coup fails. How does South Korea purge its military of coup participants without significantly reducing its readiness for conflict with a resurgent north Korea?
  - skissane 2y ago
    It sounds like the military has been obeying the President’s orders somewhat halfheartedly, in a manner which has deprived them of much of their effectiveness. I’m not sure in that scenario it is right to label them as “coup participants”.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > How does South Korea purge its military of coup participants without significantly reducing its readiness for conflict with a resurgent north Korea? Case by case. (And by redeploying problematic people out of the capital.)
  - tootie 2y ago
    It's not clear anyone in the military participated beyond pretending to follow orders. Soldiers guarding the National Assembly seemed to do a terrible job securing the building and it may have been intentional. A reporter on the scene reported that soldiers were scared when an Assemblyman yelled at them.
- johnfernow 2y ago
  BBC reports "The South Korean military says it will maintain martial law until it is lifted by President Yoon Suk Yeol, despite the nation's parliament voting to block its enforcement, according to the country's national broadcaster." [1] They previously wrote that "The National Assembly speaker has just said that South Korean troops are leaving the parliament building, the Yonhap news agency reports." So I'm not sure if the military isn't unified in what to do, or if certain troops are just not enforcing the President's near certainly unconstitutional order. The Constitution gives the President many powers under martial law ("Under extraordinary martial law, special measures may be taken with respect to the necessity for warrants, freedom of speech, the press, assembly and association, or the powers of the Executive and the Judiciary as prescribed by law"), but it appears to give the President no powers over the National Assembly, so the "All political activities, including the activities of the National Assembly... are prohibited" part of his martial law declaration appears to be blatantly unconstitutional. According to the constitution, "When the National Assembly requests the lifting of martial law with the concurrent vote of a majority of the total members of the National Assembly, the President shall comply." [2] Some are saying the constitution doesn't give a timeframe for when the President has to comply, but if he doesn't soon, it definitely appears to be a self-coup. [3] 1. https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cn38321180et https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cn38321180et 2. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Republic_of_Korea_1987.pdf https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Republic_of_K... 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-coup https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-coup
- AnimalMuppet 2y ago
  Yoon or the army would still have to recognize it.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Yoon or the army would still have to recognize it If the army recognises it and Yoon does not, that's still a coup d'etat. It's just that the military is siding with the National Assembly. The only way for this to consittutionally resolve is Yoon recognises it as well as the army.
    - AnimalMuppet 2y ago
      I mean, if the legislature declares martial law to be over, and the military recognizes that, then Yoon can say whatever he wants, martial law is still de facto over. If the president says "martial law", and the military says "no", that's not martial law. That's the president saying some words. It may still be a coup d'etat attempt by the president, but it's not martial law. So if the military recognizes the end of martial law, the martial law is over. If Yoon recognizes it, and the military doesn't, that's a whole nother can of worms. Then it's really a coup.
c0wb0yc0d3r 2y ago
The AP article has already been updated too.
School-Cotton 2y ago
Whether their attempt to overturn it is successful remains to be seen.