BBC: <\/p>\n\n\n\n
SEOUL, South Korea —\u00a0South Korea\u2019s opposition parties Wednesday submitted a motion to impeach President Yoon Suk Yeol over the shocking and short-lived\u00a0martial law<\/a>\u00a0that drew heavily armed troops to encircle parliament before lawmakers climbed walls to reenter the building and unanimously voted to lift his order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Impeaching Yoon would require the support of two-thirds of parliament and at least six justices of the nine-member Constitutional Court would have to support it to remove him from office. The motion, submitted jointly by the main opposition Democratic Party and five smaller opposition parties, could be put to a vote as early as Friday.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yoon\u2019s senior advisers and secretaries offered to resign collectively and his Cabinet members, including Defense Minister Kim Yong Hyun, were also facing calls to step down, as the nation struggled to make sense of what appeared to be a poorly-thought-out stunt.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In his speech announcing the abrupt order Tuesday night, Yoon vowed to eliminate \u201canti-state\u201d forces and continued to criticize parliament\u2019s attempts to impeach key government officials and senior prosecutors. But martial law lasted only about six hours, as the National Assembly voted to overrule Yoon and the declaration was formally lifted around 4:30 a.m. during a Cabinet meeting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The liberal opposition Democratic Party<\/a>, which holds a majority in the 300-seat parliament, said Wednesday that its lawmakers decided to call on Yoon to quit immediately or they would take steps to impeach him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cPresident Yoon Suk Yeol\u2019s martial law declaration was a clear violation of the constitution. It didn\u2019t abide by any requirements to declare it,\u201d the Democratic Party said in a statement. \u201cHis martial law declaration was originally invalid and a grave violation of the constitution. It was a grave act of rebellion and provides perfect grounds for his impeachment.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Impeaching him would require support from 200 of the National Assembly’s 300 members. The Democratic Party and other small opposition parties together have 192 seats. But the rejection of Yoon\u2019s martial law declaration in a 190-0 vote included the votes of 18 lawmakers from Yoon\u2019s ruling People Power Party, according to National Assembly officials.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The leader of the People Power Party, Han Dong-hun, who has long ties with Yoon dating to their days as prosecutors, criticized Yoon\u2019s martial law declaration as \u201cunconstitutional.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon, seen as a potential presidential hopeful for the People Power Party, said Yoon\u2019s martial law declaration went against the \u201cfundamental spirit of democracy\u201d and that the deployment of troops to the National Assembly was an act that violated the separation of powers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cRight now, the most urgent task is a thorough investigation. Through this, we must clearly hold accountable those who participated in destroying democracy,\u201d Oh said in a televised statement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If Yoon is impeached, he\u2019ll be stripped of his constitutional powers until the Constitutional Court rules. Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, the No. 2 position in the South Korean government, would take over his presidential responsibilities. As calls mounted for Yoon\u2019s Cabinet to resign, Han issued a public message pleading for patience and calling for Cabinet members to \u201cfulfill your duties even after this moment.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Constitutional Court has only six justices following three retirements, which is one below the minimum seven needed to handle a presidential impeachment case, requiring lawmakers to speed up the process of naming new justices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yoon\u2019s martial law declaration, the first of its kind in more than 40 years, harkened to South Korea\u2019s past military-backed governments<\/a> when authorities occasionally proclaimed martial law and other decrees that allowed them to station combat soldiers, tanks and armored vehicles on streets or at public places like schools to prevent anti-government demonstrations. Such scenes of military intervention had not been seen since South Korea achieved a genuine democracy in the late 1980s until Tuesday night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n After Yoon\u2019s declaration, troops carrying full battle gear, including assault rifles, tried to keep protesters away from the National Assembly as military helicopters flew overhead and landed nearby. One soldier pointed his assault rifle at a woman who was among protesters outside the building demanding that the martial law be lifted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It wasn\u2019t clear how the 190 lawmakers were able to enter a parliamentary hall to vote down Yoon\u2019s martial law decree. Opposition leader Lee Jae-myung<\/a> livestreamed himself climbing over the wall, and while troops and police officers blocked some from entering they didn\u2019t aggressively restrain or use force against others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n No major violence has been reported. The troops and police personnel were later seen leaving the grounds of the National Assembly after the parliamentary vote to lift the martial law. National Assembly Speaker Woo Won Shik said: \u201cEven with our unfortunate memories of military coups, our citizens have surely observed the events of today and saw the maturity of our military.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Han, the People Power Party leader, demanded that Yoon explain his decision and fire Defense Minister Kim Yong Hyun, who he said recommended the martial law decree to Yoon. The Defense Ministry has not commented.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Under South Korea\u2019s constitution, the president can declare martial law during \u201cwartime, war-like situations or other comparable national emergency states\u201d that require the use of military force to restrict the freedom of press, assembly and other rights to maintain order. Many observers question whether South Korea is currently in such a state.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The constitution also states that the president must oblige when the National Assembly demands the lifting of martial law with a majority vote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Some experts say Yoon clearly violated the constitution in how he imposed martial law. While martial law allows \u201cspecial measures\u201d to restrict individual freedoms and the authority of agencies and courts, the constitution does not permit the functions of parliament to be restricted. But in following Yoon\u2019s declaration on Tuesday, South Korea\u2019s military proclaimed parliamentary activities were suspended and deployed troops to try to block lawmakers from entering the National Assembly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Park Chan-dae, the Democratic Party\u2019s floor leader, called for Yoon to be immediately investigated on charges of rebellion over the way he deployed troops to the parliament. While the president mostly enjoys immunity from prosecution while in office, the protection does not extend to alleged rebellion or treason.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Washington, the White House said the U.S. was \u201cseriously concerned\u201d by the events in Seoul. A spokesperson for the National Security Council said President Joe Biden\u2019s administration was not notified in advance of the martial law announcement and was in contact with the South Korean government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Pentagon spokesman Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder said there was no effect on the more than 27,000 U.S. service members based in South Korea.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Seoul, the streets seemed busy like a normal day Wednesday.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Tourist Stephen Rowan, from Brisbane, Australia, who was touring Gyeongbokgung Palace, said he was not concerned at all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cBut then again, I don\u2019t understand too much about the political status in Korea,\u201d he said. \u201cBut I hear they are now calling for the current president\u2019s resignation, so … apparently there\u2019s going to be a lot of demonstrations. … I would have been concerned if martial law had stayed enforced.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n