By Ju-min Park and Hyunsu Yim
SEOUL (Reuters) -A South Korean court cancelled impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol’s arrest warrant on Friday, potentially paving the way for his release from jail while he faces trial on insurrection charges over a brief imposition of martial law.
The Seoul Central District Court said in a statement that its ruling was based on the timing of the indictment that came after the initial detention period had expired, and noted “questions about the legality” of the investigation process that involved two separate agencies.
The ruling did not dismiss the criminal charges that led to Yoon’s arrest on January 15, and the case is separate from his impeachment, which is still pending before the Constitutional Court.
Both were triggered by his December 3 martial law declaration that also led to the impeachment of the prime minister, who had taken over as acting president.
South Korea’s Finance Minister Choi Sang-mok is now acting head of state, and has sought to calm economic markets and reassure international partners amid chaos in government leadership.
Yoon’s lawyers and his presidential office welcomed the district court decision, saying it showed the case against Yoon had been pursued for political purposes with no legal justification.
“The court’s decision to cancel the arrest showed this country’s rule of law is still alive,” Yoon’s lawyers said in a statement.
Yoon’s lawyers called for his immediate release, though conceded he may not be immediately freed because prosecutors could appeal. The prosecutors’ office did not immediately comment on the ruling.
Protesters, both in support of and against Yoon, soon gathered in Seoul following the court decision.
“It will move the hearts of the public. Our president has suffered so much,” Lee Yoon-nam, a 44-year-old pro-Yoon protester, told Reuters.
Yoo Seong-min, a 31-year-old anti-Yoon protester, said he came out to protest because “anger shot through” his head.
Yoon’s defence team had argued that a warrant issued on January 19 that extended Yoon’s detention was invalid because the request filed by prosecutors was procedurally flawed.
It has also claimed that the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials, which conducted the first stage of the criminal investigation against Yoon, had no legal authority to do so on insurrection charges.
NOT A VINDICATION
Legal experts said that, while Friday’s decision by the district court was not a vindication for Yoon, it did raise questions about the integrity of the indictment and touched on legal issues that do not have a clear precedent.
If “questions about the legality of the investigation process” are not cleared up, it may become grounds for a higher court to overturn any trial court ruling, the Seoul Central District Court said in its statement.
Arguments ended in the separate impeachment trial last week and the court was expected to issue a decision in the next few days on whether to remove Yoon from office permanently or reinstate him.
If Yoon is removed, a new presidential election will be held within 60 days to elect a new leader.
“This court decision has nothing to do with the Constitutional Court’s impeachment trial of Yoon Suk Yeol,” opposition Democratic Party spokesman Han Min-soo said. “There will be no impact.”
Yoon said his martial law declaration was needed to root out “anti-state” elements but lifted the decree six hours later after parliament voted to reject it. He has said he never intended to fully impose emergency military rule.
Weeks later he was impeached by the opposition-led parliament on accusations he had violated his constitutional duty by declaring martial law.
(Reporting by Ju-min Park, Jack Kim, Hyunsu Yim, Joyce Lee, Daewoung Kim and Jisoo Kim; Editing by Ed Davies, Josh Smith, Raju Gopalakrishnan and Alex Richardson)
