A Review on the President Impeachment of Korea

Abstract

A Review on the President Impeachment of Korea On Dec 9, 2016, the National Assembly of Korea passed the impeachment resolution of President Park Geun-hye. The main alleged corruption and illegality related with Park’s old secretive confidant Choi Soon-sil. Particularly, President Park abused her power for the private purpose, which is not matched with the principle of republic. President Park seemed not to understand the meaning of ‘res publica’ namely commonwealth or public property. The Constitutional Court should have approved the impeachment resolution of President Roh Moo-Hyun in 2004. In 2016 President Park Geun-hye impeachment case, although unlikely, the Court needs to discard “gravity” violation requirement. According to the Article 65 (1) of the Constitution of Korea, violation against the Constitution or other Acts is the cause of impeachment. It means any violation could be a valid ground for impeachment. In the 2004 Presidential Impeachment case, however, the Constitutional Court added arbitrarily “gravity” violation requirement. Such decision is not matched with legal interpretation principle: statute should basically be interpreted in accordance with the terms of the statute. Moreover, it is not proper decision that certain violation against the Constitution, the basic order of a State, could not be serious enough to be impeached. Based on such an affirmative interpretation, the Constitutional Court might try to expand its power to reduce that of the National Assembly. The Article 1 (2) of the Korean Constitution provides that all state power emanates from the national. The member of the National Assembly elected by direct vote of the people whereas the judge of the Constitutional Court is appointed by the President. So, compared to the National Assembly, the power of the Constitutional Court is more derivative. There is another reason that the Constitutional Court should not consider “gravity” of violation. According to the Article 65 (3), if a motion for impeachment passed, the president should be suspended from exercising his/her power until the impeachment is adjudicated at the Constitutional Court. During the suspension, the Prime Minister will serve as the acting president. The period could be described as vacancy of leadership. Moreover, the acting president and Prime Minister, the main assistant of the President, could not be free from partial responsibility of the violation to be impeached. So, the shorter period of leadership vacancy is the better for national interest.