hankyoreh

Acting Constitutional Court president Lee Jung-mi enters the eleventh session of arguments in Park’s impeachment trial on Feb. 7. (pool photo)

The Constitutional Court said it will not recall scheduled witnesses in President Park Geun-hye’s impeachment trial if they fail to appear by Feb. 22, and demanded that representatives of both sides submit “final positions” by Feb. 23.

The court’s hints at an end to arguments within February are making a March ruling appear more and more likely.

“If the witnesses scheduled for questioning do not appear, we will not recall them as a rule,” said justice and acting Constitutional Court president Lee Jung-mi in the 12th session of arguments for Park’s impeachment trial on Feb. 9.

Lee also instructed the two sides to “organize the various arguments made to date into a clear format and submit them.”

At the 11th session of arguments on Feb. 7, the court accepted eight out of 17 witnesses requested by Park’s team. Having completed its questioning of four witnesses on Feb. 9, the court is awaiting four additional sessions of arguments and 13 sessions of witness questioning.

Amid fears of major delays in the trial, lawmaker and National Assembly impeachment committee member Kweon Seong-dong urged the court during the 11th session of arguments to “clearly state a position” on witness no-shows.

“The only way to have a swift trial is if the adoption of witnesses is canceled when they do not appear,” Kweon argued.

The court also asserted its authority to cancel the selection of two witnesses who had failed to comply with witness questioning three times as of Feb. 9: former Double K director Ko Young-tae and former department chief Ryu Sang-yeong.

The court played an active role in arguments on Feb. 9, making itemized comments on questions about the “position on the grounds for impeachment” stated by Park herself and blocking repeated questions on peripheral matters by Park’s team.

“Following the Chung Yoon-hoi document leak scandal [in 2015], the petitionee spoke strongly about the leaking of Blue House documents as a ‘breach of national discipline.’ How is it then that so many documents were able to reach [Choi Sun-sil] after that?” presiding justice Kang Il-won asked Park’s team at one point.

“If the [Mir and K-Sports] foundations were established with good intentions, why did [former Senior Secretary to the President for Policy Coordination] Ahn [Jong-beom] destroy evidence and order people to perjure themselves?” he asked at another.

Yet Park team attorney Lee Jung-hwan avoided giving a straight answer to Kwang’s questions, saying the team had been “too busy reading the prosecutors’ investigation records and preparing for witness interrogation.”

The response triggered a rebuke from Kang.

“These are things everyone has questions about. How could it not have been confirmed by now?” he asked.

“From the fact that you can’t answer my question at all, I have the wonder whether you’ve accurately received the President‘s wishes,” he added.

Kang raised objections a number of other times during the seven-hour process of questioning the four witnesses.

“The court cannot comprehend why you are asking that,” he said at one point.

“There are too many unnecessary things,” he commented at another, urging Park’s team to “please only ask about facts” and openly wondering, “Why are you asking questions like that?”

Meeting with reporters after the arguments, National Assembly impeachment committee attorney Hwang Jeong-geun said it was “extremely significant” that the court had decided to cancel selection of witnesses if they do not appear and order submission of general preparatory documents by Feb. 23.

“We took that to mean the arguments will be concluded around that time,” Hwang said.

Park‘s team said it would “consult about a personal appearance by the President” - a move some observers took as a strategy to draw the argument deadline out further with the promise of Park showing up.

The court also responded emphatically to recent speculation about the impeachment potentially being thrown out, with the names of specific justices cited.

“We cannot help being very concerned about the various speculation taking place outside the courtroom about the trial process and the ruling date, which could compromise the fairness of the proceedings,” said Lee Jung-mi.

Lee went on to give a stern message to the legal teams to “take care to avoid words and actions that could diminish the credibility of the trial.”

By Kim Min-kyung and Kim Ji-hoon, staff reporters

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]