NewKerala.com

Key Points

Former President Yoon Suk Yeol's legal team is pushing back against a public interrogation, calling it a political stunt rather than a legitimate investigation. The standoff centers on allegations he ordered phone records deleted related to December's controversial martial law declaration. This comes just days after courts denied prosecutors' request to detain the ex-leader, citing procedural issues. The case echoes past political battles, with Yoon's lawyers pointing to preferential treatment given to former Justice Minister Cho Kuk during his own probe.

Key Points: Ex-President Yoon Seeks Private Hearing in Martial Law Probe

  • Yoon's lawyers argue public questioning is politically motivated
  • Special counsel seeks probe into martial law phone record deletions
  • Court rejected detention warrant citing procedural flaws
  • Case draws parallels to ex-Justice Minister Cho Kuk's closed hearing
3 min read

South Korea: Ex-President Yoon's lawyers ask for his private appearance before special counsel

Former South Korean leader Yoon Suk Yeol's lawyers request closed-door questioning over martial law allegations as tensions rise with special counsel.

"An open and humiliating summoning is not an investigation but a political act - Yoon's legal team"

Seoul, June 26

Former South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol's lawyers said on Thursday that he wishes to appear in private at Special Prosecutor Cho Eun-suk's office on Saturday to be questioned about charges related to the December 3 martial law imposition.

Earlier this week, Cho's team demanded that Yoon appear in public at its office in the Seoul High Prosecutors Office in southern Seoul at 9 a.m. Saturday to be questioned as a suspect after a court rejected its detention warrant request for him.

But Yoon's lawyers requested that his appearance at the special counsel's office not be made public and be delayed about an hour to around 10 a.m.

"An open and humiliating summoning is not an investigation but a political act," they said in a statement, noting the special counsel's office did not have prior consultations about the time and place of questioning the suspect, nor give any notice about the prosecutor in charge of the case.

They added that the prosecution allowed a closed-door appearance for former Justice Minister Cho Kuk in the past.

Cho's team seeks to investigate Yoon on charges of ordering the Presidential Security Service to block the execution of a detention warrant against him by the state anti-corruption investigation agency in early January and delete his phone records with military commanders over his December 3 martial law imposition.

The Seoul Central District Court dismissed the special counsel's request to detain Yoon on Wednesday, Yonhap news agency reported.

Earlier on June 25, Yoon Suk Yeol's lawyers had said that an independent counsel's request for a detention warrant for him is an unlawful act that lacks procedural legitimacy and violates his right to defence.

They made the claim in a written opinion submitted to the Seoul Central District Court, which is expected to decide whether to approve the warrant to detain Yoon on Wednesday at the earliest.

Special Prosecutor Cho Eun-suk's team filed for the detention warrant with the Seoul Central District Court on Tuesday, accusing Yoon of ordering the Presidential Security Service to block the execution of a detention warrant against him by the state anti-corruption investigation agency in early January and delete his phone records with military commanders over his December 3 martial law imposition.

Cho's team also cited Yoon's refusal to comply with three summons from the police for questioning over the allegations.

"Former President Yoon has not received a single summons notice from the special prosecutor to date. He has not even been given any information about the location of the special prosecutor's office, the prosecutor in charge and the prosecutor's office to be questioned," Yoon's lawyers said in the written opinion, Yonhap news agency reported.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

R
Rajesh K.
Interesting to see how South Korea handles its political accountability. In India, we've seen similar situations where former leaders face investigations. The key is ensuring due process while maintaining public trust. Hope they find the right balance 🇮🇳
P
Priya M.
Why is he resisting public appearance if he has nothing to hide? Transparency is crucial in democracies. We Indians know this well after seeing so many corruption cases. Leaders must set examples!
A
Amit S.
The martial law angle is concerning. As someone who grew up hearing Emergency stories from 1975, I know how dangerous such powers can be when misused. South Korea should be careful not to repeat history's mistakes.
S
Sunita R.
Both sides seem to be playing politics here. The lawyers have a point about equal treatment (mentioning Cho Kuk's case), but deleting phone records? That's suspicious behavior anywhere in the world 🤔
V
Vikram J.
South Korea's judicial system seems quite efficient compared to ours. Their courts acted quickly on the detention warrant request while our cases drag for years. Maybe we can learn something from them about speedy justice.
N
Neha P.
The mention of military commanders is worrying. Civilian control over military is fundamental to democracy. Hope South Korea maintains this principle strongly, just like India has done since independence.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50