undefined | Better HN

0 pointsAnimalMuppet1y ago0 comments

Which means that the president is ignoring the constitution. And so is the military.

Very much not good...

0 comments

The military are technically correct here.

As the constitution is written, the nullification vote doesn't directly end martial law. It simply binds the president to withdraw martial law.

In hindsight, that might be a slight flaw, there doesn't seem to be any time limit or mechanism for what happens if the president doesn't. I'm not sure their constitution was written with an autocoup in mind.

In the end it wasn't an issue. The President did eventually withdraw martial law, I wonder what pressure was put on him to do so. And by who.

falseprofit1y ago

I’m not sure the military is ignoring the constitution. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe they’re supposed to follow the president’s orders.

soraminazuki1y ago

Militaries in liberal democracies should protect the constitution, even if that means disobeying the president.

michaelt1y ago

The thing is, if you're planning a coup with military backing, you don't do it when your most rule-abiding, law-respecting general is in town. You send that guy to guard the Alaskan border or whatever, and instead recruit a general who's a maverick rules-breaker and who gets on well with you personally.

So the military should respect the constitution, but when it comes to a coup you'll get whichever general respects the constitution the least.

1 more reply

paxys1y ago

Can't say about South Korea, but plenty of militaries, including in the USA, are obligated to reject unconstitutional orders.

numpad01y ago

Said military was also filmed live with empty pistols and training magazines on chest rigs, so it was clear that they were never on the President's side. SK has mandatory military conscription and so implication of waving around scary but empty guns was immediately understood and shared by local citizens.

AnimalMuppetOP1y ago

I'm not an expert on South Korean constitutional law. But from the parts that others have quoted here, if the legislature declares an end to the martial law, that's the end of the martial law. The military should not then be obeying the president's orders to impose martial law, because the martial law is over.

In the US, military officers take their oaths to obey the constitution, not the president. I don't know if that's true in South Korea.

hugh-avherald1y ago

The Korean Constitution says that once the legislature declares an end to martial law, the President "shall comply". The military has to obey the President's orders until that time though, and 'shall comply' has two flaws: (a) it doesn't contemplate what happens if he doesn't and (b) it contemplates time passing, but doesn't specify the duration. These flaws are moot, because the President has complied.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse