Kim made a legal analysis that the emergency martial law is unconstitutional in two major respects. First, procedurally, the Cabinet meeting’s deliberations as stipulated in Article 89, Section 5 of the Constitution are unconstitutional.
In addition, the content of the bill was found to be a violation of Article 77, Clause 1 of the Constitution, which provides for the declaration of martial law in times of war, emergency, or a similar national emergency, by declaring emergency martial law during "peaceful everyday life."
In particular, Kim drew attention to the fact that an airborne force soldier was deployed to the National Assembly. Kim said, "Even if a state of emergency is declared, it is necessary to wait for the National Assembly's consent procedure within 72 hours.
"The Constitution requires that the military must take measures to protect the country, and such actions were taken despite the military's lack of power to intervene in this process," he said, adding that this was an "attack aimed at overthrowing order through physical violence by a large number of people (civil war)."
) and is indeed subject to criminal prosecution under Article 84 of the Constitution.” Kim also cited precedents from the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court, stating, “No matter how big an unconstitutional or invalid order is,
"There is no obligation to obey the orders of the president," he said, emphasizing, "rather, if one obeys such an unconstitutional and invalid order, one will be subject to criminal liability."
"We will begin impeachment proceedings against President Yoon, who has blatantly violated the Constitution," Kim said.
"An investigation should be launched to bring criminal charges of treason."
2024/12/04 11:43 KST
Copyrights(C) Edaily wowkorea.jp 85