Previous 62 / 62 Next

of presidential authority and power. Through this case, the public newly recognized that even the President is subject to possible removal from office for violating the Constitution and statutes, and yet, the removal process should also proceed pursuant to the Constitution and statutes. In this regard, it is the analysis within the legal profession that the 'impeachment adjudication of the President served as a precious opportunity for the public to learn the importance of the rule of law and democracy.' The Constitutional Court's decision in this case mainly received positive review throughout the media as the 'decision committed to both the spirit of the Constitution and the will of the public reflecting the Court's completed mission as the final bulwark of the Constitution,' and the 'historic decision that set a new landmark of constitutionalism and the rule of law.' The announcement of the decision in this case was televised nationwide by live broadcasting. - 202 -

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Impeachment of Roh Moo-hyun

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether the violations of the electoral code and the Constitution are sufficient to remove the President from office.

Alleged Acts: The National Assembly presented a resolution to the Constitutional Court impeaching the President on the following grounds: (1) supporting a particular political party; (2) acting in contempt of constitutional institutions; (3) receiving illegal campaign funds; (4) corruption; and (5) public remarks as to the retirement from politics. First, the President allegedly made several supporting statements in favor of the Uri Party. Second, failing to express neutrality regarding the National Election Commission's decision. Third, the President allegedly received 100 million Won from the Sun & Moon Group and members of the election camp received 900 million, 700 million, and 1 billion Won which was forwarded to the election camp. Fourth, the President made remarks concerning the amount of illegal funds exceeding that of the Grand National Party would result in their retirement. That amount exceed the amount and the respondent did not act accordingly.

Procedural history: The Assembly passed a resolution alleging that the aforementioned actions violated the Constitution and were grounds for impeachment. The resolution suspended the President's duties.

Summary: The court found that the violation of the law was primarily failure to maintain neutrality. The court further found that other violations failed to surmount to to affirmative violations of the law. An actionable removal of the President requires a balancing test between the gravity of the violation and the impact of removal. For the presidency to removed the gravity of the violation must "overwhelming outweigh" the decision to remove. The President's methodology for ascertaining the political office must constitute a threat to the democratic functioning of the nation.

Conclusion: The violations are not sufficient to remove the siting President from office.

Legal Issue(s)

Campaign Finance
Disputing Results
Electoral Integrity

Applicable Law(s): Daehanminikik Hunbeob [Hunbeob][Constitution] art 65 (S. Kor.).

Region: Asia-Pacific

Country: South Korea

Language of Decision

English

Court: Constitutional Court

Election Type: Presidential

Date of decision: May 14, 2004

Geolocation

Latitude: 37.6937359

Longitude: 126.878427

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

e2004n1_1.pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Impeachment of Roh Moo-hyun

Primary Documents

Notifications