Ex-Leader Yoon Presents Martial Law Meeting CCTV as Evidence

Former President Yoon Suk-yeol mentioned in court on the 21st, “There is growing public sentiment among most citizens, after viewing the CCT...

Former President Yoon Suk-yeol mentioned in court on the 21st, “There is growing public sentiment among most citizens, after viewing the CCTV footage of the martial law Cabinet meeting, questioning whether the meeting was conducted appropriately.” The video recording, which captured the Cabinet session held at the presidential office around the time of the emergency martial law declaration last December, had been previously released during the trial of former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo's case related to aiding insurrection last month.

During the trial conducted in the Criminal Division 35 of the Seoul Central District Court, presided over by Judge Baek Dae-hyun, former President Yoon claimed that the CCTV footage from the martial law Cabinet meeting should be considered as evidence. He is being charged with, among other things, abuse of power for allegedly violating the deliberation and voting rights of nine State Council members who were not invited to the martial law Cabinet meeting. The special prosecutor's opinion is that this Cabinet meeting was just a formal arrangement to fulfill the conditions required for martial law.

Former President Yoon remarked, “The special prosecutor argues that it was merely a formal Cabinet meeting, not a substantive one, but the constitutional requirement for a Cabinet meeting to announce martial law is not to arbitrarily call any members. The president selects eight key members, including the president, prime minister, deputy prime minister for economic affairs, and the ministers of foreign affairs, defense, unification, public administration, and justice, along with the NIS director and other ministers.” He further noted, “The CCTV is essential in verifying that a meaningful discussion took place through this process.”

In reply, the team handling the insurrection case stated, "The indictment claims that the defendant violated the deliberation rights of State Council members who were not present at the Cabinet meeting. The manner in which the meeting was held is not a central matter, so we did not ask for the CCTV footage as evidence." The court responded, "If the defendant thinks it is beneficial evidence, we hope they will formally request it."

Meanwhile, the trial continued with a review of document evidence related to the allegations that former President Yoon hindered the enforcement of an arrest warrant issued by the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) in January, utilizing the Presidential Security Service. This included examining written evidence provided to the court.

During the document examination, communications between former President Yoon and Kim Sung-hoon, former deputy head of the Security Service, around the period when the CIO's arrest warrant was being executed were revealed. On January 7 last month, former President Yoon sent a message saying, "I only focus on the safety of the military commander-in-chief," to which Kim responded, "I will make sure this message is delivered and carry out my solemn duty without hesitation."

The court also disclosed internal documents indicating that former first lady Kim Keon-hee went to the Security Service's family department and scolded officials, stating, "What are you doing with guns? You should prevent such actions (arrests)." As per the reports, she informed security personnel, "The CIO lacks investigative power, and the president is fully aware that the warrant is unlawful. You are not safeguarding Yoon Suk-yeol but the president, and I am deeply disappointed that the Security Service took no action."