A South Korean court has sentenced former President Yoon Suk-yeol to life in prison for leading an “insurrection” after he declared martial law and deployed military forces to block elected lawmakers from performing their constitutional duties. Martial Law Declaration Triggers Constitutional Crisis Yoon Suk-yeol declared martial law in December 2024, citing a “national emergency” amid allegations of electoral fraud. The conservative president deployed military forces to physically prevent National Assembly members from accessing the legislature. South Korea’s National Assembly quickly nullified the martial law order and passed an impeachment bill on December 14, 2024. The Constitutional Court immediately prioritized the case, beginning proceedings just two days later. This marked the first attempted martial law declaration since 1980, raising alarms about democratic backsliding in a nation still recovering from its authoritarian past. Court Rejects Presidential Immunity Defense Throughout hearings spanning January and February 2025, Yoon’s legal team attempted to invoke U.S.-style presidential immunity, citing the 2024 Trump v. United States Supreme Court decision. The Constitutional Court firmly rejected these arguments, with Justice Jeong Hyeong-sik—ironically a Yoon appointee—presiding over proceedings that examined surveillance footage and witness testimony. Former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun testified that he recommended martial law but denied ordering forces to storm the Assembly. The court ultimately ruled that Yoon committed “serious violations” including assembly interference, judicial pressure, and unauthorized intrusions into the National Election Commission offices. Criminal Trial Proceeds After Impeachment Upheld Following the Constitutional Court’s decision to uphold impeachment, South Korea held a snap election on June 3, 2025, which progressive candidate Lee Jae Myung won. Yoon’s criminal trial for insurrection began April 14, 2025, with prosecutors seeking accountability for what they characterized as an attempted coup against democratic institutions. The former president faces potential life imprisonment, though South Korea has maintained a moratorium on executions since 1997. Yoon’s defense team cited safety concerns and alleged media bias as reasons for his non-attendance at proceedings, arguments the court dismissed while admitting additional evidence from National Election Commission surveillance footage. Implications for Constitutional Governance This conviction strengthens precedents for holding executives accountable when they exceed constitutional authority. The case echoes the 2016-2017 impeachment of President Park Geun-hye for corruption, but Yoon’s deployment of military force against elected representatives represents a more severe threat to democratic institutions. The ruling clarifies that emergency powers cannot justify obstruction of legislative functions or deployment of armed forces against the people’s representatives. For Americans watching political polarization intensify globally, South Korea’s swift judicial response demonstrates how constitutional guardrails can function when courts prioritize institutional integrity over political allegiances, even when presiding justices were appointed by the accused. South Korean Court Sentences Former President Yoon Suk-yeol to Life in Prison for Leading “Insurrection” https://t.co/IOBFFKPTbu — The Gateway Pundit (@gatewaypundit) February 20, 2026 The trial outcome sends a clear message that military action against democratic institutions will result in severe consequences, regardless of claims about electoral fraud or national emergencies. This case may influence how other democracies address executive overreach, particularly regarding the limits of presidential immunity and the use of emergency powers to circumvent elected legislatures. Sources: Impeachment of Yoon Suk Yeol – Wikipedia