The Right to Civil Resistance: Misuse by South Korea's Ruling Party

Threats of ‘Right to Civil Resistance’ and the Ruling Party’s Pressure on the Constitutional Court
Introduction
The ruling People Power Party (PPP) in South Korea is facing growing criticism for its actions regarding President Yoon Suk-yeol’s impeachment trial. Recently, 82 PPP lawmakers submitted a petition to the Constitutional Court, and more than 60 lawmakers have been staging a 24-hour sit-in protest in front of the court. This move has raised concerns about judicial independence and political interference.
Additionally, a forum was held discussing the “right to civil resistance,” with some suggesting that if the Constitutional Court rules against President Yoon, resistance could be justified. This has led to accusations that the ruling party is deliberately fueling public sentiment against the judiciary, potentially making the Constitutional Court a target.
This report examines the actions of the PPP, the potential threats they pose to South Korea’s legal system, and why their approach is problematic.

Pressure on the Constitutional Court and the Risk to Judicial Independence
One of the most significant concerns is the ruling party’s direct pressure on the Constitutional Court.
82 lawmakers submitted a petition calling for a “wise decision” but effectively demanding that the court dismiss or reject the impeachment trial.
60 lawmakers are holding a 24-hour relay protest in front of the Constitutional Court, a clear attempt to create public pressure on judges before their ruling.
The PPP insists that their actions are “earnest appeals” rather than coercion, but the scale and organization of these efforts strongly suggest otherwise.
The judiciary must remain independent and free from political influence to function properly. However, the PPP’s aggressive tactics suggest an attempt to sway the court’s decision through organized political pressure. If this continues, it could set a dangerous precedent where court rulings are influenced not by law, but by political campaigns and public pressure.

Misinterpretation and Misuse of the ‘Right to Civil Resistance’
During a forum hosted by PPP lawmaker Kang Seung-kyu, historian Jeon Han-gil, a speaker at far-right rallies, was invited to discuss the right to civil resistance.
Jeon suggested that people could resist the Constitutional Court’s ruling if they disagreed with it.
He openly stated, “I believe I have the right to resist in order to protect my fundamental rights,” implying that resistance could be justified depending on the court’s decision.
This distorts the legal concept of civil resistance.
Civil resistance is meant for extreme situations, such as when a government violates constitutional principles or oppresses fundamental rights.
However, in this case, the PPP is implying that resistance is justified simply if the court rules against them, which is not a valid use of this right.
This logic effectively rejects the judicial system itself, undermining the foundation of democracy and the rule of law.
By promoting such ideas, the PPP is fostering distrust in the legal system and encouraging potential defiance or even unrest against a legitimate court ruling.

Inciting Extremism Through Far-Right Figures
The forum on civil resistance was not an isolated event but part of a broader pattern of aligning with far-right narratives.
The guest speaker, Jeon Han-gil, has been involved in spreading conspiracy theories about election fraud and promoting authoritarian ideologies.
Hosting such figures in a government setting lends credibility to these dangerous ideas, making them seem legitimate to the public.
By associating with extremists, the ruling party risks encouraging radical actions in response to the court’s decision.
This approach is not responsible governance but a deliberate attempt to manipulate public sentiment by spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories.

Contradictory Behavior of the Ruling Party
The PPP leadership publicly denies that they are trying to influence the Constitutional Court, yet their actions suggest otherwise:
They filed a petition to the court,
They organized protests outside the court,
They held discussions justifying resistance against an unfavorable ruling.
Despite these actions, PPP floor leader Kwon Sung-dong dismissed concerns, arguing that the opposition party, the Democratic Party of Korea (DPK), was also engaging in political activities:
“The DPK holds meetings every day, marches, goes on hunger strikes, and shaves their heads. Isn’t that real pressure on the Constitutional Court?”
However, this argument is flawed. Political protests by opposition parties do not threaten judicial independence in the same way that direct pressure from the ruling party on the judiciary does. The ruling party wields institutional power, and its influence over the judiciary can have serious consequences if misused.

Conclusion: Undermining the Rule of Law Under the Guise of ‘Civil Resistance’
The People Power Party is distorting the concept of civil resistance to justify actions that challenge judicial independence and promote political unrest.
Pressuring the Constitutional Court with protests and petitions undermines judicial neutrality.
Misusing the right to civil resistance as an excuse to oppose a court ruling weakens the legitimacy of the legal system.
Aligning with far-right conspiracy theories increases public distrust and potential for unrest.
In a democracy, political leaders must respect the independence of the judiciary. Courts must make decisions based on law, not political pressure. The PPP’s actions are a direct threat to this principle, and if left unchecked, could destabilize South Korea’s legal and political institutions.
The rule of law must be upheld, and political parties must accept judicial decisions, even when they are unfavorable. Encouraging resistance against a legal ruling undermines democracy and sets a dangerous precedent for future governance.

The Right to Civil Resistance: Misuse by South Korea’s Ruling Party

South Korea’s Nuclear Debate: Risks and Implications

Public Skepticism on Fukushima’s Decommissioning by 2051

Retrieving the Latest 10-K Report URL from SEC EDGAR

Evolution of Image Signal Processors: 2000s to 2020s

미국 세금 신고 가이드: 기본 개념부터 신고 방법까지

Fukushima’s Wastewater Release: U.S. Concerns Grow

Similar Posts