On December 3, 2024, at 10:50 P.M., South Korea’s President Yoon Suk Yeol held an emergency address to the nation. Yoon vowed he would protect his country from communists and pro-North Korea sentiments, ultimately declaring martial law and shocking the country. He immediately sent military troops and tanks to surround the National Assembly, barring lawmakers from entering the National Assembly despite having proof of their identities. In the next few hours that ensued, lawmakers were forced to jump past gates and create blockades from inside the National Assembly in an attempt to stop soldiers from breaking in. By 1:00 A.M., the National Assembly had passed a resolution to end the martial law with all 190 of the 300 present lawmakers voting in favor. Yoon was later arrested on the 15th of January, after another previous failed attempt to arrest him over a week before. In response, his supporters gathered both outside of his house and at the Corruption Investigation Office, where Yoon was being questioned. Since then, Yoon has been indicted with charges of insurrection, yet to be sentenced.
Yoon’s martial law was the first in 40 years for South Korea and just one of at least 15 other declarations. The last time martial law was declared in South Korea, it was by Chun Doo Hwan and his private military organization, Hanahoe or Shingunbu. Hanhoe went on to overtake Korea’s democracy and, in the process, repressed all opposition and killed hundreds. Yoon and Chun are just two of many Korean presidents that have been embroiled in political scandal. In 2017, Park Geun Hye was impeached following charges of bribery, abusing presidential power, and leaking confidential documents. In 2020, former President Lee Myung Bak was jailed for charges of bribery and abuse of power. And yet, of all convicted presidents, not a single president has completely fulfilled their sentence. The longest imprisonment period was Park Geun Hye’s 1,737 days, which still wasn’t even ⅕ of her original 22-year sentence.
These numbers are the result of presidential pardons. By numbers alone, there have been only four presidents that have been pardoned. And each time a former president was pardoned, the current president cited the importance of the country’s unity. Despite this, the responses to these pardons have been polarizing. Chun Doo Hwan and Roh Tae Woo’s pardons incited particular controversy. Chun Doo Hwan was especially infamous for his role in the Gwangju Uprising, a protest that directly fought against his 12.12 coup. Chun responded to the protest by sending his own military forces to Gwangju, killing hundreds. To this day, the exact number of deaths is unknown. Chun, Roh, and the rest of Hanahoe ruled South Korea with a brutal iron fist for years, but in 1997, both were pardoned together. Some argued that Kim Dae Jung, the president who’d pardoned both men, had been an important voice for democracy throughout Chun’s authoritarian rule, and if anyone could move past Chun’s actions, it must be him. Others, including human rights groups like Mingahyup, argued that Chun’s pardon was a massive step back and would not mend the wounds of those affected by Chun or Roh’s rule.
There is nothing wrong with wanting to unite the country through healing old wounds. However, these pardons have only seemed to dig deeper cracks into the country. In 2022, when former President Park Geun Hye was released after her pardon, supporters flocked to her residence in Daegu, waving national flags and balloons. However, a 2021 poll showed 48% of respondents disagreed with pardoning Park Geun Hye and Lee Myung Bak. Among voters, traditionally conservative regions like Daegu and Busan overwhelmingly supported Park and Lee’s pardons, while regions like Jeonju and Gyeonggi-do were mostly unsupportive. And the division doesn’t seem to stop there. After the news of Yoon’s arrest, his supporters took to the streets of Seoul to protest, yelling in frustration: “Don’t call us stupid far-rights,” and “don’t taunt us!” all while anti-Yoon supporters cheered his arrest. Yoon’s arrest also failed to account for the growing gender divide in South Korea, further flamed by Yoon during the last presidential election. Polarization, though a normal part of the democratic process, has become increasingly difficult to ignore, and it continues to branch out into new manifestations for old crimes.
It’s also not that pardons themselves are the problem. Pardons themselves have been used globally since medieval times and continue to be used in multiple countries around the world. In theory, pardons can help restore rights and become an important check on the justice system’s power. Furthermore, it isn’t necessarily the pardons that have become an issue, but the lack of accountability. Korea’s politicians seem to value political expediency far more than the voices of their people, pushing the country’s democratic institutions to their very limits. Since then, the general public has begun to feel alienated from these important closed-door decisions, and a lack of trust is rising in the government. According to an OECD survey on Koreans’ trust in their public institutions, 37% of Koreans placed their trust in the national government, 20% in political parties, and 21% in the national parliament. Since 2021, Koreans’ trust in nearly every aspect has fallen, including national government, local government, news media, and national parliament. Furthermore, in another survey consisting of 1643 Koreans, 55% voted that special presidential pardons must be abolished. When asked why, 65.69% of voters claimed these special presidential pardons were an ‘abuse of presidential authority’.
Between the dipping trust in the presidential pardon and government, questions have begun to rise on what this might mean for Yoon. According to Hankook Ilbo, “Yoon must have started calculating a pardon for himself.”. And certainly, if anyone understands the power of a presidential pardon, it’s Yoon. Just last year, Yoon pardoned 450,000, including Park Geun Hye’s former chief of staff and Kim Kyoung Soo, a former governor charged with manipulating online opinions for Yoon’s predecessor, President Moon Jae In. The Ministry of Justice claimed the special pardons were meant to enhance the economy and, again, promote national unity. But until when can South Korea use national unity to pardon their criminal presidents and erode their democratic institutions? How far is too far for these special presidential pardons? If not corruption or suppression, what about martial law?
I think in this context, presidential pardons are definitely an abuse of power executive power. We see this echoed in the U.S. with Trump’s pardoning of the January 6 insurrectionists. Yoon’s use of communism as a justification for declaring martial law is also very reminiscent of rhetoric tactics seen not just in the U.S. but globally. Creating scapegoats and causing fear is an effective way of consolidating power.
I agree with the author’s point that when used correctly, pardons can be a useful tool for checks and balances as well as unifying a nation. However, as the author has already shown, excessive use of this power creates no accountability. From our class sessions already, especially the ones concerning populism and demagogues, powerful political figures who are not held responsible for their actions can quickly slide into authoritarian territory.
With the author’s showcase of evident presidential pardon abuses, I am wondering how effective the other branches of the Korean government are. This lack of accountability or ability to check the power of the executive branch seems to validate the Korean citizens’ dropping faith in all levels of the government.
I am curious to know the author’s thoughts on the long-term effects of presidential pardon abuse. How do they affect the legitimacy of these government systems? We already know that decreasing faith in government can lead to less voter turnout and less faith in democratic institutions. If this continues, what does South Korea’s democratic future look like?