Asia | Rule of eight

South Korea’s president is impeached

Now for a snap election

|SEOUL

SHE blocked investigators from entering the Blue House, the presidential residence where she had holed up after the National Assembly asked the constitutional court to remove her from office in December. She refused to be questioned, and attended none of the 20 hearings at which the court heard evidence against her. Three weeks ago she demanded the ejection of one of the justices hearing the case.

It all did Park Geun-hye more harm than good. On March 10th she became the first president of South Korea to be removed from office by the court, which upheld the assembly’s impeachment motion. It determined that she had not only conspired with a confidante to extort money from big firms, but had also attempted to conceal her wrongdoing. Ms Park was permanently removed from office, cutting short her five-year term by 11 months.

For the time being Hwang Kyo-ahn, the prime minister at the time of Ms Park’s impeachment, will stay on as acting president. But the court’s decision means that an election for a replacement must be held within 60 days; it was set this week for May 9th. Moon Jae-in, a former head of the opposition Minju party, who ran against Ms Park in 2012, is the favourite to win. His approval ratings hover around 32%, a full 15 percentage points ahead of the next-most-popular contender, Ahn Hee-jung, another progressive. Mr Moon says he can bring jaejosanha: a rebuilding of the country, after nearly a decade of conservative rule.

But Mr Moon remains divisive. Many associate him with “old-school leftism”, according to Choi Jin of the Institute of Presidential Leadership, a think-tank in Seoul—cooler on South Korea’s alliance with America, warmer on talking to North Korea. That puts off older voters, who see his approach as a threat to the country’s security (many carried the American flag at rallies protesting against Ms Park’s impeachment). Others among the millions of South Koreans who agitated for Ms Park’s removal from office expect the next president to satisfy their demands for a fairer political system.

Three parties have formed a coalition to call for a separate referendum to be held alongside the vote on May 9th, to limit the presidential term to four years with the possibility of a single re-election, as in America. Mr Moon says he supports some such reform in principle, but does not want to rush the decision or muddy the election campaign with it. Mr Choi says the question of whether there should be institutional checks on the head of state will be at the heart of the election.

For Ms Park’s successor, building consensus will be crucial, says Park Hyung-jun of Sungkyunkwan University (no relation). Hard generational divides have surfaced in the scandal: in recent weeks police have set up barricades at large demonstrations to stop Ms Park’s friends and foes clashing. A vocal, mostly older minority feels that Ms Park has been the victim of a left-wing witch hunt: on hearing the verdict outside the constitutional court, many wept and blared out the national anthem in defiance. Cheers rose from the jubilant anti-Park camp, as they struck gongs and danced to chants of “We won!”

The court was unanimous in its verdict, even though five of the eight judges had a conservative bent and two had been appointed by Ms Park. The charges fell into five broad categories: abuse of authority in the appointment of government officials; failure to protect citizens’ lives; violation of press freedom; receiving bribes; and extortion in conjunction with Choi Soon-sil, a friend of many years. The justices concluded that there was not enough evidence to prove the first three claims, and did not even address the allegations of bribery. But Ms Park could not be trusted to uphold the constitution, they said, since she had divulged state secrets to Ms Choi (who held no official position) and colluded with her to coerce conglomerates to funnel donations to two cultural organisations that Ms Choi controlled.

The court also said that Ms Park’s attempts to hide the truth had hindered a parallel investigation by a special prosecutor, whom she herself had appointed in December after accusing the state prosecutors of bias. The justices noted that she had repeatedly pooh-poohed the accusations against her, “damaging the rule of law and representative democracy”. The aloof and imperious style that characterised Ms Park’s presidency also cut it short; Choi Jong-kun of Yonsei University says she “looked down on the entire legal process”.

Three-quarters of South Koreans approved of Ms Park’s impeachment—an extraordinary reversal for a dynast whose ascent to the presidency had long seemed inevitable. She herself believed she owed it to her parents: Park Chung-hee, who served as president for 18 years after seizing power in a coup, and Yuk Young-soo. Both were assassinated in separate incidents in the 1970s. Ms Park became an MP in 1998, and the leader of the main conservative party in 2004. Much of her support stemmed from a stubborn reverence for her father felt by older voters.

On March 15th state prosecutors summoned Ms Park, who has lost her immunity from criminal investigation along with her job, as a suspect in the months-long investigation into her alleged abuse of power and the sordid collusion between political and corporate elites. High-ups in the chaebol, family-owned conglomerates which prospered under Ms Park’s father, have routinely been convicted of criminal wrongdoing, then offered presidential pardons. Ms Park herself granted dozens, despite a campaign pledge to limit a practice that “undermined the rule of law”.

This time Lee Jae-yong, heir to the Samsung empire, has been put behind bars while being tried for bribery. Samsung was the biggest donor to Ms Choi’s foundations—handing over 43bn won ($38m)—in return, prosecutors allege, for government support for a controversial corporate restructuring in 2015. Samsung admits it gave the funds, but says the donations were not in return for any favours. Ms Choi (who, the special prosecutor revealed, owns 36 properties and whose personal wealth stands at 23bn won) is also on trial.

South Koreans will expect to see swift progress on these momentous trials, and due punishment. Every president since the country’s democratic transition in the 1980s has been ensnared by corruption scandals. The shift to a fresh political set-up fit for a modern, vibrant democracy has been too long delayed, says Mr Park of Sungkyunkwan University. In the early days of the scandal protesters, outraged by what they saw as a complete institutional breakdown, held placards asking, “Is this a country?” The day after the verdict, hundreds brandished new ones: “This is a country. This is justice.”

This article appeared in the Asia section of the print edition under the headline "Rule of eight"

On the up

From the March 18th 2017 edition

Discover stories from this section and more in the list of contents

Explore the edition

Discover more

What next for Pakistan?

The new government faces polarised politics, a faltering economy and terrorist threats

The Islamic State’s branch in Afghanistan is at war with the world

The group which claimed responsibility for the Crocus City Hall attack is increasingly worrying


Arvind Kejriwal’s imprisonment is a stain on India’s democracy

He is the first sitting chief minister in the country’s history to be arrested