The National Assembly approved the impeachment motion against Acting President and Prime Minister Han Duck Soo on December 27, with all 192 attending lawmakers voting in favor. 

This decision comes just 13 days after Yoon Suk Yeol was impeached and suspended from office, marking an unprecedented situation in South Korea's constitutional history where both the president and the acting president have faced impeachment.

The main opposition Democratic Party (DP), holding 170 of the 300 seats in the National Assembly, introduced the impeachment motion against Han Duck Soo a day earlier. This move followed Han’s refusal to appoint additional justices to the Constitutional Court, which is set to preside over President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment trial.

The Democratic Party (DP) listed several reasons for Han’s impeachment. These include his role in Yoon’s alleged attempt to impose martial law and his refusal to approve two special counsel bills aimed at investigating President Yoon and First Lady Kim Keon Hee. These were part of a total of five reasons outlined in the motion.

Following the passage of the impeachment motion, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy and Finance Choi Sang Mok will assume the role of acting president.

Before the vote, National Assembly Speaker Woo Won Shik, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea, addressed the chamber, stating, “This motion concerns the impeachment of ‘Prime Minister Han Duck Soo.’ Therefore, in accordance with Article 65, Clause 2 of the Constitution, it will be decided by a majority vote of the current members.” Article 65, Clause 2 stipulates that the impeachment of the prime minister or other cabinet members requires a majority of registered lawmakers (151 votes), whereas the impeachment of the president requires a two-thirds majority (200 votes). Speaker Woo aligned with the Democratic Party’s interpretation, applying the majority rule applicable to the prime minister for the impeachment of Han Duck Soo in his capacity as acting president.

Speaker Woo further explained, “The Speaker has the authority under Article 10 of the National Assembly Act to organize parliamentary proceedings. After reviewing opinions from constitutional scholars and the National Assembly’s legislative research office, I determined the quorum for this motion.” Article 10 of the National Assembly Act grants the Speaker the power to represent the assembly, organize proceedings, maintain order, and oversee its operations. Woo’s statement effectively asserted his authority to interpret the procedural requirements amid the ongoing dispute over the quorum.

In contrast, the People Power Party (PPP) argued that the two-thirds majority rule for presidential impeachment should also apply to the acting president. The PPP members boycotted the vote, attending the session only to protest Speaker Woo by chanting phrases such as “Null and void” and “Resign as Speaker” before walking out. 

The PPP announced plans to challenge the decision by filing a constitutional petition with the Constitutional Court and requesting a stay of execution to halt the motion's effect. They criticized Speaker Woo’s decision to apply the simple majority rule, asserting it violated constitutional norms.

SEE ALSO: Arson suspect dies after setting fire to apartment building following noise complaints