Unrest Against Martial Law in South Korea

Syllabus: GS2/Polity and IR

Context

• Recently, South Korea experienced significant political turmoil following President Yoon Suk-yeol’s declaration of martial law.

About

• The President was impeached on 15th December.
  • The criticism against the President was on rise since he took office in 2022.
  • He was criticised for several of his domestic and foreign policies, including reports of interference in investigations into allegations of corruption against his wife.
• The declaration of Martial Law by the President was seen as an attempt to subvert the democratic system.

Political History of South Korea

• Between 1910-1945, S.Korea was subjected to brutal colonial rule under the Japanese Empire. 
• Towards the end of the Second World War, the US proposed dividing the Korean peninsula into two occupation zones divided at the 38th parallel: the Soviet Union controlling the North and the US controlling the South.
• Post Independence: The United States appointed and supported the former head of the Korean Provisional Government, Rhee Syngman, as leader.
  • In 1948, Rhee won the first presidential elections of the newly declared Republic of Korea, but engaged in authoritarian control.
• End of Autocratic Rule: For the next 12 years, Rhee would rule South Korea as an autocratic leader, till a student uprising in 1960 forcing him to resign.
• Military Coup: In 1961, Major-General Park Chung Hee organised and led a military coup.
  • He remained South Korea’s president for 18 years, and introduced the Yushin Constitution, which created dictatorship. He was assassinated in 1979.
  • Chun Doo-Hwan, a brigadier general, came into power by a military coup, he forced South Korea’s national cabinet to extend martial law to the whole nation. 
• Gwangju Uprising 1980: A student-led protest against the military government, the military committed brutal violence against protestors.
  • Authoritarian rule under Chun continued in South Korea till 1987.
• June Democratic Struggle of 1987, led to the democratisation of South Korea.
  • In 1988, with the appointment of Roh Tae-woo as President of South Korea, the country began moving on the path of becoming a liberal democracy.
• The memories of the years of dictatorship, is why Yoon’s political survivability became uncertain even though he lifted martial law a day after imposing it. 

What is Martial Law?

• It refers to a temporary imposition of direct military control over civilian administration.
  • The military takes over functions such as policing, judicial processes, and even governance.
• Grounds: Emergencies, such as war, rebellion, or natural disasters.
  • It has been invoked to maintain order when governments are overwhelmed or incapacitated.
• Critics: It often undermines democracy, as it can lead to abuses of power, suppression of dissent, and prolonged authoritarianism.
• Countries Having Provisions: South Korea, the United States, the Philippines, Pakistan, and Thailand.

Does India have Martial Law?

• The term “martial law” is not explicitly defined in the Indian Constitution. 
• Article 34 mentions restriction on rights while martial law is in force in any area.
  • It does not provide explicit grounds or a process for declaring martial law itself.
• It is considered a last resort, and India has never officially declared martial law since independence.
• Emergency Provisions: India relies on constitutional emergency provisions under Article 352 (national emergency), 356 (state emergency), and 360 (financial emergency) to manage extraordinary situations.
  • These measures have drawn criticism for overreach in the past, such as during the Emergency of 1975-77.
• SC Ruling: The Supreme Court has ruled that even during emergencies, certain rights, such as habeas corpus, cannot be suspended outright, indicating that any future invocation of martial law would still be subject to judicial scrutiny.

Conclusion

• Martial law is a double-edged sword. While it may restore order in chaotic situations, it risks violating fundamental rights and eroding democratic norms. 
• For citizens, understanding its implications is crucial, as history shows that it often walks a fine line between necessity and authoritarianism.

Source: IE