The presidential guard and military forces in South Korea prevented the authorities from arresting deposed President Yoon Suk-yul on Friday in a tense confrontation that lasted six hours inside the Yoon Complex in the heart of Seoul.
Yoon is under criminal investigation for rebellion over his attempt to impose martial law on December 3, which took South Korea by surprise and led to the issuance of the first arrest warrant for a sitting president.
“It was ruled that it was practically impossible to execute the arrest warrant due to the ongoing standoff,” the Senior Corruption Investigation Office (CIO) said in a statement.
CIO officials and police evaded hundreds of Yoon's supporters who gathered in the pre-dawn hours near his residence on Friday, vowing to prevent arrest “with our lives.”
Some chanted, “President Yeon Suk-yeol will be protected by the people,” and called for the arrest of the head of the Information Bureau.
Officials from the Information Bureau, which is leading a joint team of investigators into possible rebellion charges related to Yoon's brief declaration of martial law, arrived at the doors of the presidential complex shortly after 7 a.m. and entered on foot.
An official with the Director of Central Intelligence told reporters that once inside the compound, the number of members of the Presidential Security Service was greater than that of the Presidential Security Service, in addition to the military forces assigned to the Presidential Security.
The official added that as many as 200 people formed a human chain to obstruct the CIO and the police.
South Korea's Ministry of National Defense said the forces were under the control of the Preventive Security Service.
The IT director called off efforts to arrest Yoon around 1:30 p.m. over concerns about his employees' safety due to the obstruction, and said he “deeply regrets” Yoon's position of non-compliance.
The IT director said he would consider his next steps.
Mutiny is one of the few criminal charges from which the South Korean president is not immune.
The warrant for his arrest, which was approved by the court on Tuesday after Yoon ignored several summonses to appear for questioning, will remain in effect until January 6.
Yoon has been isolated since he was removed from power on December 14.
In a statement after the arrest efforts were suspended, Yoon's legal team said the CIO had no authority to investigate the insurrection, and it was unfortunate that he attempted to “forcefully execute an unlawful and illegal arrest and search warrant” in a sensitive security area.
The statement warned police not to support arrest efforts.
The interim head of Yoon's People Power Party welcomed the comment and said the investigation should be conducted without Yoon being arrested.
The current arrest warrant gives investigators only 48 hours to detain Yoon after his arrest. Investigators must then decide whether to request an arrest warrant or release him.
Surprising military law
Yoon sent shockwaves through Asia's fourth-largest economy and one of the region's most vibrant democracies with his late-night announcement of imposing martial law to overcome political deadlock and root out “anti-state forces.”
But within hours, 190 lawmakers defied troop and police cordons to vote against Yoon's order. About six hours after his initial decree, Yoon rescinded it.
He later issued a defiant defense of his decision, saying domestic political opponents were sympathetic to North Korea and citing unconfirmed allegations of election fraud.
Yonhap reported on Friday that two South Korean military officials, including Army Chief Park In-soo who was appointed martial law commander during the short-lived declaration, were charged after being detained by prosecutors investigating accusations of rebellion.
Kim Young-hyun, who resigned as defense minister in Yoon's government after playing a key role in the martial law decree, was detained and charged last week with rebellion and abuse of power.
Separately from the criminal investigation, his impeachment case is currently before the Constitutional Court to decide whether to reinstate him or remove him permanently.
A second hearing in the case is scheduled for later Friday.
