Acting President Choi Sang-mok’s has refused to appoint Judge Ma Eun-hyeok to the Constitutional Court of South Korea. Photo by Yonhap/EPA-EFE
Feb. 5 (UPI) -- The Constitutional Court of South Korea unexpectedly postponed its ruling Monday regarding the constitutionality of Acting President Choi Sang-mok's refusal to appoint Judge Ma Eun-hyeok to the court.
The announcement, originally scheduled for that afternoon, was delayed without any official explanation. This sudden postponement has fueled speculation that the court may be responding to strong public opposition to President Yoon Seok-yeol's impeachment, a development that has become one of the most polarizing political issues in recent South Korean history.
At the center of the controversy is Judge Ma, whose judicial philosophy and political affiliations have drawn scrutiny. Critics argue that his past involvement in progressive legal circles and his track record of rulings sympathetic to anti-establishment figures make his appointment highly consequential.
His nomination comes at a time when the Constitutional Court is set to rule on Yoon's impeachment, leading some to speculate that his inclusion could tilt the court's decision.
His supporters argue that he is an experienced and principled judge, but opponents claim that his ideological background aligns too closely with left-wing political factions, raising concerns about judicial neutrality.
Judicial neutrality under scrutiny
The debate over judicial independence is not new. For decades, ideological divisions have shaped South Korea's judiciary, particularly through organizations like the Our Law Research Association, a progressive judicial research group established in 1989.
While its members make up less than 5% of the judiciary, they hold key positions and have influenced the courts, particularly since the administrations of Kim Dae-jung, Roh Moo-hyun, and Moon Jae-in.
The debate over Ma's nomination has reignited concerns that political factions are seeking to use judicial appointments to steer legal rulings in their favor. Adding to these concerns is the perception that the Constitutional Court has handled cases inconsistently.
Critics point to the fact that while more than 20 earlier impeachment-related cases, involving other Yoon administration officials, remain unresolved, Yoon's case appears to be advancing swiftly.
Many believe the opposition Democratic Party is eager to finalize Yoon's removal before a verdict is reached in DP leader Lee Jae-myung's appeal of his conviction last November of a breach of the public election laws.
If Lee's conviction is upheld, he would be barred from running in the next presidential election. If Yoon is removed before Lee's case is decided, it would pave the way for a new presidential election, reshaping the political landscape in the DP's favor.
Public reaction has been intense. Even individuals who were previously indifferent to politics or critical of Yoon have begun to participate in mass demonstrations against the impeachment. Reports suggest that the scale of anti-impeachment rallies has far surpassed those supporting impeachment.
Unlike protests organized by the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions and other political organizations, many of the demonstrators who oppose impeachment are unaffiliated citizens, who see the current process as unjust and politically motivated.
Legal controversies, growing public distrust
The impeachment itself was contentious from the beginning. Initially, it was justified on the grounds that Yoon's short-lived declaration of martial law -- an authority granted to the presidency under the Constitution -- amounted to an act of insurrection.
However, the charge of insurrection was later removed from the impeachment bill. Despite this, proceedings on the insurrection charge have continued without a new vote in the National Assembly, raising serious legal concerns.
Many legal experts argue that this does not conform to constitutional procedures, further eroding trust in the judiciary. This perception of legal inconsistency is compounded by the handling of cases involving opposition figures.
While Yoon's impeachment trial has moved forward with speed, trials of DP-affiliated figures, including Lee Jae-myung, have faced repeated delays. The contrast has fueled suspicions that the judiciary is being influenced by political considerations rather than legal principles.
As a result, trust in South Korea's legal institutions has reached an all-time low. Calls for judicial reform, and even for the abolition of the Constitutional Court itself, have emerged from conservative and moderate voices.
Public confidence in the mainstream media also has declined sharply. Many South Koreans believe that major media outlets are working to portray Yoon's impeachment as a foregone conclusion, even as public opinion increasingly shifts against it.
Because of political calculations behind the impeachment amid Yoon's rising approval ratings and indirect signals from the U.S. administration, the DP appears to be adjusting its strategy.
Observers note that the party has taken a more defensive stance, possibly in response to the growing public backlash. Some analysts suggest that the DP is seeking to shift ultimate responsibility for Yoon's fate onto the Constitutional Court, distancing itself from any potential fallout.
If the court upholds Yoon's impeachment, the backlash could be significant, potentially damaging the DP's political standing. However, if the court rejects impeachment, the DP could shift blame onto the court, arguing that it failed to hold Yoon accountable.
In either scenario, the DP appears to be positioning itself to minimize political damage. The ruling People Power Party, meanwhile, has struggled to navigate the situation. While some members initially distanced themselves from Yoon, the massive public outcry against impeachment has forced them to reconsider their stance.
Many PPP lawmakers now face pressure from their constituents to more actively oppose the impeachment, highlighting the growing divide between political elites and ordinary citizens.
Cultural resistance through music
One of the most unexpected developments in this crisis has been the emergence of a cultural resistance movement. In recent weeks, protest songs across various genres --including rock, ballad, soul, trot and hip-hop -- have gained popularity on YouTube.
These songs sharply criticize the political establishment and reflect widespread public discontent. Their popularity underscores the deep emotional and cultural impact of the impeachment crisis.
Some of these songs depict Yoon's declaration of martial law as a moment that awakened the public to what they see as an attempt to undermine democracy, rather than an abuse of power. Others criticize the PPP for failing to stand firmly against what they view as an unjust process.
This explosion of artistic expression demonstrates the unique way South Koreans are processing their political frustrations. In an era of digital media, in which information spreads rapidly, music has become a powerful tool for mobilizing public sentiment.
At the crossroads
The postponement of the Constitutional Court's ruling has added another layer of uncertainty to an already volatile situation. With legal disputes, political maneuvering and mass protests shaping the national discourse, the impeachment of President Yoon has become more than just a legal battle.
It is a test of South Korea's democratic institutions. The outcome of this crisis will have far-reaching implications, not only for Yoon and the DP but also for the credibility of the judiciary and the political stability of the nation.
As public trust in institutions continues to erode, South Korea stands at a crossroads, where the rule of law and the voice of the people must ultimately determine the country's future direction.
Im Myoung-Shin is a deputy director of the international culture department at Sky Daily newspaper.
