SEOUL - A South Korean court late on the night of Jan 16 dismissed impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol’s request to review the legality of his detention, effectively maintaining him under custody for investigation into insurrection charges.
The decision by the Seoul Central District Court was made after two hours of deliberation since 5pm local time, with Mr Yoon’s legal representatives taking issue with the legality of the probe led by the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO).
They had argued that the warrant to detain him was issued by the Seoul Western District Court, which they said makes it invalid due to jurisdictional issues.
With the court’s decision, the CIO is expected to seek the formal arrest of Mr Yoon on Jan 17.
Mr Yoon and investigators have been in a tense stand-off since he was taken into custody on Jan 15, as the President refused to speak or attend interrogations until Jan 16, citing health issues.
Mr Yoon’s legal team took a step further on Jan 16 by requesting that the court review the legality of his detention.
After refusing to cooperate with questioning in the morning, the President’s legal team notified investigators that Mr Yoon would not attend in the afternoon either.
South Korea’s sitting President had spent the night at the Seoul Detention Centre after hours of questioning on the first day, during which he remained silent.
The court convened a hearing at 5pm to review Mr Yoon’s request concerning the legality of his detention.
The 48-hour deadline for holding Mr Yoon in custody for interrogation was automatically extended as the court reviewed documents and evidence submitted by the CIO to justify his detention. Mr Yoon was due to be released in the morning unless the CIO filed for another warrant to keep him longer.
“The Seoul Central District Court requested us to send the records for the court review. When the court registers our files, the time for the investigation will be put on hold until the records are returned to us after the ruling,” the CIO official had said.
Mr Yoon’s request for a detention review also delayed by several hours the CIO’s decision on whether to file for another formal warrant to hold him for eight more days. If the formal warrant is issued, the CIO is likely to transfer the case to the prosecution, which holds the authority to indict the suspect.
“The CIO and the prosecution agreed to spend 10 days each for investigations, but the schedule can be adjusted according to the changing situation,” the CIO official said.
Article 31 of the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials Act dictates that cases pursued by the agency are first under the jurisdiction of the Seoul Central District Court.
However, the CIO may institute prosecution with the competent court under the Criminal Procedure Act, considering the site where the corruption is suspected to have occurred, the location of evidence and the circumstances of the defendant.
Mr Seok Dong-hyeon, one of Mr Yoon’s legal representatives, has insisted that the CIO has no legal authority to investigate Mr Yoon’s insurrection charge.
The Seoul Western District Court had rejected a previous appeal from Mr Yoon’s legal team on Jan 6, explaining that while the suspect can request a court review to challenge the validity of the arrest, he cannot argue the legality of the warrant.
The court stressed that both the presidential office and the presidential residence are located in an area under the jurisdiction of the Seoul Western District Court, meaning the warrant does not violate Article 31 of the CIO Act.
It also said the CIO filed the warrant to investigate Mr Yoon on suspicion of abuse of power, which is defined as a form of corruption to be investigated by the agency.
The court said the inclusion of the insurrection charge in the warrant, which is closely related to the charge of abuse of power, does not make the warrant invalid or illegal. THE KOREA HERALD/ASIA NEWS NETWORK
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.