Constitutional Court wraps hearing on justice minister's impeachment case

Justice Minister Park Sung-jae speaks to reporters as he arrives at the Constitutional Court in Seoul, Tuesday, for the first hearing of his impeachment case. Joint Press Corps

The Constitutional Court concluded the highly anticipated impeachment hearing of Minister of Justice Park Sung-jae on Tuesday afternoon after holding only one official hearing session.

Park was suspended from duty after the National Assembly passed an impeachment motion against him on Dec. 12, citing his alleged involvement in the Dec. 3 martial law declaration. He was reportedly present at a hastily convened Cabinet meeting chaired by President Yoon Suk Yeol just before the declaration, raising concerns about his potential role in the decision-making process.

Arriving at the Constitutional Court around 1:40 p.m., Park stressed the importance of the judiciary exercising checks and balances against what he described as the main opposition Democratic Party of Korea's (DPK) excessive impeachment actions.

"I believe that the Constitutional Court, as a guardian of the Constitution, will promptly intervene against the majority party’s abuse of impeachment powers, which disregards the principles and values of democracy and the rule of law," the minister told reporters.

Rep. Jung Chung-rae, center, chairman of the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee, who assumes the role of the impeachment prosecutor of the National Assembly, answers questions from reporters before attending the first hearing of Justice Minister Park Sung-jae's impeachment trial at the Constitutional Court in Seoul, Tuesday. Joint Press Corps

DPK Rep. Jung Chung-rae, who assumed the role of the impeachment prosecutor representing the Assembly, countered Park's argument.

"The National Assembly exercised its impeachment power within the legal framework established by the Constitution and parliamentary law. Since the Constitution mandates that parliamentary decisions be made by majority vote, opposing the majority decision itself is a direct violation of Article 49 of the Constitution," Jung said.

The court has identified three key issues from the National Assembly's impeachment motion: first, whether Park actively participated in an act of treason by failing to prevent the declaration of martial law; second, whether his refusal to submit requested documents to the National Assembly constitutes a legal violation; and third, whether his mid-session departure from the National Assembly’s full session violated constitutional or legal provisions.

Park has consistently argued that the impeachment lacks sufficient legal and evidentiary grounds, urging the case's dismissal.

The lasted about two hours. The session lasted about two hours, during which both sides presented their arguments on the grounds for impeachment. It then moved to closing arguments and final statements. After hearing the final statements from both parties, the Constitutional Court concluded the proceedings, announcing that the ruling date would be scheduled and communicated later.