South Korea’s democracy faced a grave test on Wednesday as President Yoon Suk Yeol’s ill-conceived decision to impose martial law triggered public outrage and institutional pushback. The shocking move, a dramatic attempt to bypass the opposition-controlled legislature and consolidate power, has left his presidency in freefall. With impeachment proceedings underway and growing calls for his resignation, Mr Yoon’s political fu t – ure hangs by a thread. South Korea’s journey from de cades of military rule to a vibrant democracy has been hardfought. The wounds of its authoritarian past, including the Gwangju massacre of 1980, remain etched in the na tion’s memory.

In this context, Mr Yoon’s attempt to suspend democratic norms was an affront to the principles cherished by South Koreans. His claim that the opposition-led National Assembly posed a threat to national stability not only rang hollow but also revealed a fundamental misjudgment of the electorate’s commitment to democratic values. Mr Yoon’s martial law declaration not only alarmed South Koreans but also sent shockwaves internationally, raising concerns about the stability of a key Western ally in the region. South Korea’s democratic model is often cited as a success story, making this abrupt authoritarian turn all the more unsettling for observers abroad.

Advertisement

The backlash was swift and decisive. Protesters flooded the streets, lawmakers convened to vote down the order, and members of Mr Yoon’s own People Power Party reportedly began discussing his expulsion. The President’s approval ratings, already languishing below 20 per cent, plummeted further as the country united against what many saw as an authoritarian overreach. Mr Yoon’s motives appear rooted in desperation. Facing mounting scandals, including criticism over his government’s response to a deadly crowd crush in 2022 and allegations surrounding his wife, he has struggled to maintain legitimacy. His position was further weakened when his party lost control of Parliament in recent elections, leaving him politically isolated. There are also whispers that Mr Yoon feared post-presidency prosecution ~ a common fate for South Korean leaders.

Former presidents Park Geun-hye and Lee Myung-bak were both imprisoned for corruption, while Roh Moo-hyun took his own life under the weight of bribery allegations. Mr Yoon’s martial law gamble may have been an attempt to shield himself from such a fate, but it has only ensured greater scrutiny of his actions. The strength of South Korea’s democratic institutions and civil society was on full display in the aftermath of Mr Yoon’s announcement. Parliamentarians, regardless of party affiliation, acted swiftly to reject the decree, while citizens mobilised en masse to defend their rights. This collective response reaffirms South Korea’s democratic maturity and its people’s unwillingness to tolerate authoritarianism. President Yoon’s gamble will go down as a cau tionary tale of overreach and miscalculation. His legacy, already tarnished by controversy, now risks being de fined by a failed power grab. As impeachment proceedings gather momentum, his options are narrowing: step down voluntarily or face the judgment of an emboldened Parliament and an outraged public.