For the jubilant crowd that gathered outside South Korea’s Constitutional Court on Friday, Yoon Suk Yeol’s removal as president offered hope that the crisis sparked by his attempt to impose martial law was finally drawing to a close.
“The country will be better now that the parasite Yoon is gone.” said Han Dong-won, a 46-year-old insurance salesman celebrating in the spring sunshine outside the court in Seoul after it upheld parliament’s impeachment of the president by an 8-0 margin.
But while South Korea’s democratic institutions have withstood Yoon’s shock declaration of martial law in December, analysts said both the episode itself and its aftermath had exposed troubling weaknesses in the nation’s body politic — and that more turbulence lies ahead.
“Just because South Korean democracy survived doesn’t mean it is healthy,” said Karl Friedhoff, an expert on Korean politics at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. “The deep polarisation in the country is going to continue to fester.”
National Assembly speaker Woo Won-shik said Yoon’s removal would “serve as a stern precedent for future generations, guiding the Republic of Korea towards becoming a stronger democratic country”.
“Even in a state of shock, we have restored constitutional order through democratic means, showcasing to the world the resilience of our democracy,” said Woo, who was elected to parliament as a member of the opposition Democratic Party of Korea.
But if the court’s decision represented the end of what Woo called a “long, dark tunnel”, it also showcased just how dark things might have been.
In a ruling broadcast on big screens for the thousands of demonstrators gathered outside, acting chief justice Moon Hyung-bae described how Yoon had sent soldiers to the National Assembly to “break down the door and drag the lawmakers out” to prevent them voting down his martial law decree.
Yoon’s defence minister had instructed counter-intelligence services to monitor the location of Woo and the leaders of the main political parties — including his own — as a precursor to arresting them, Moon said.
Erik Mobrand, a political scientist at Seoul National University, said that while Yoon and his inner circle had been removed from power, the autocratic tendencies they represented live on in parts of society and the Korean establishment.
“We should remember that this democracy was built on top of a troubled past of dictatorship, and the structures of authoritarianism were only party dismantled,” said Mobrand.
He added that while leaders across the political spectrum had condemned Yoon in the immediate aftermath of his martial law decree, within days many members of his conservative People Power party had begun to equivocate or openly defend his actions.
Whereas 60 conservative lawmakers voted to impeach conservative president Park Geun-hye over corruption allegations in 2017, only 12 voted to impeach Yoon in December.
“Unlike in 2017, the PPP muddied the waters between upholding the constitution and doing what they felt was necessary to give them a better chance of winning a future presidential election,” said Mobrand.
That growing partisanship was evident in subsequent months, as increasingly wild conspiracy theories circulated on social media claiming that North Korea and China were coordinating efforts to have the president impeached and removed. When Yoon was detained on criminal insurrection charges in January, a mob stormed the courthouse where his arrest warrant had been issued.
On Friday, many Yoon supporters continued to echo his claim to have been acting to defend South Korean democracy from a shadowy “anti-state” coalition of leftwing opposition parties and North Korean sympathisers.
“The country will soon be taken over by North Korea,” said Choo Ok-ryun, a 70-year-old pastor. “I am worried about how I can continue to live in a place occupied by leftwingers like cockroaches and poisonous mushrooms.”
Gi-wook Shin, professor of contemporary Korea at Stanford University, said that after Yoon withdrew his martial law decree within hours, “I too was optimistic, believing in the inherent resilience of South Korean democracy”.
“However as events have unfolded, my optimism has decreased,” he said. “I am concerned that the social divisions have become so apparent and entrenched that the country’s ability to achieve national reconciliation is increasingly uncertain.”
Choi Jin, head of the Institute of Presidential Leadership in Seoul, said Yoon would forever be stigmatised as an “anti-democratic leader who mobilised troops in this modern era”.
But he added the now ex-president was likely to “continue to do his utmost to influence politics and the next election”.
Yoon still faces criminal insurrection charges relating to his martial law decree that carry a maximum life sentence or even the death penalty, while his wife has been targeted for investigation by opposition parties over a series of corruption allegations. Both deny all wrongdoing.
“He and his wife will soon face a barrage of criminal cases,” said Choi. “[He will fight] for his own survival.”
Analysts said Lee Jae-myung, leader of the leftwing opposition Democratic party and frontrunner to succeed Yoon as president, was also unlikely to heal South Korea’s political divisions.
A highly polarising figure who narrowly survived an assassination attempt last year, Lee went on hunger strike in 2023 to protest what he described as Yoon’s “prosecutorial dictatorship”.
The former factory worker is due to stand trial this month on charges relating to the alleged channelling of funds to North Korea. Prosecutors are also appealing a recent high court verdict clearing him of making false statements during an election campaign. Lee denies all wrongdoing.
The DPK leader, who has appeared in public in recent weeks wearing a bulletproof vest, warned ahead of Friday’s ruling that there might be “horrific mass bloodshed” if Yoon was restored to office.
“Lee has governing experience and would have a much savvier approach than Yoon to his use of the powers of the president,” Friedhoff said. “But even with Yoon out of the picture, Korean democracy and politics is in for a very rough ride.”
