On December 3, 2024, South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol declared a state of emergency and imposed Emergency Martial Law, citing political deadlock and national security concerns. The move came amid escalating tensions between the government and the National Assembly, led by the 192-member opposition bloc, which had been pushing for the impeachment of several high-ranking officials and delaying budget approvals. This unprecedented action marked the first martial law declaration in South Korea since 1980, sparking nationwide protests and international condemnation.

Following the announcement, the military established a martial law command, taking control of key government institutions. The decree included restrictions on political activities, media censorship, a ban on public gatherings, and expanded military authority to detain individuals without warrants. The proclamation's wording, particularly the phrase "those disturbing public order will be dealt with decisively," drew sharp criticism for its similarity to past authoritarian-era crackdowns.

Immediately after declaring martial law, the government attempted to block National Assembly members from entering the legislature using military and police forces. Additionally, troops and police were deployed to institutions such as the National Election Commission, where they sought to detain officials and seize control of facilities. This martial law was widely perceived as a self-coup, orchestrated by the president to maintain power and suppress political opposition. The international community, including major democratic allies such as the United States and the European Union, issued strong statements condemning the move, with some nations threatening sanctions if the democratic order was not restored.

In response, the National Assembly swiftly convened an emergency session, where 190 members participated and unanimously passed a resolution demanding the immediate lifting of martial law. By around 1:00 AM on December 4, the National Assembly formally approved the resolution to terminate Emergency Martial Law. Subsequently, at approximately 4:30 AM, the Cabinet convened and officially declared the end of martial law. Despite the swift reversal, the political and legal repercussions were immediate, with opposition leaders and legal experts calling for President Yoon’s impeachment and prosecution under South Korea’s constitutional laws on abuse of power and unlawful use of military force.

Martial Law in South Korean Constitutional Law

The South Korean Constitution outlines the conditions under which martial law can be imposed and the mechanisms for its termination.

• Article 77 of the Constitution (Martial Law Provisions):

  1. The President may declare martial law in times of war, insurrection, or when national security and public order are at significant risk.

  2. Martial law consists of two types: Security and Public Order Martial Law (경비계엄, Gyeongbi Gae-eom) and Emergency Martial Law (비상계엄, Bisang Gae-eom).

  3. The President must report the martial law declaration to the National Assembly without delay.

  4. If the National Assembly votes by a majority to lift martial law, the President must comply.

This constitutional provision ensures that martial law is not solely at the discretion of the President but is subject to parliamentary oversight, preventing potential abuse of power. However, the rapid implementation of martial law under President Yoon raised concerns about the effectiveness of these safeguards, as military forces moved swiftly to consolidate control before the National Assembly could respond.

South Korea’s Martial Law Act: Types and Conditions

Martial law in South Korea is governed by the Martial Law Act, which defines its scope and implementation.

1. Types of Martial Law:

   • Security and Public Order Martial Law (경비계엄, Gyeongbi Gae-eom): Implemented to assist law enforcement in maintaining public order and security, allowing the military to support police efforts while keeping civilian institutions operational. Under this form of martial law, civil institutions continue functioning, but military forces may be granted temporary powers to reinforce local security measures, restrict certain public movements, and oversee crisis management operations.

   • Emergency Martial Law (비상계엄, Bisang Gae-eom): Declared in extreme situations, granting the military authority over civilian governance, enforcing media censorship, suspending political activities, and subjecting civilians to military courts. This form of martial law enables the military to take full control over governmental functions, override civilian jurisdiction, and enact emergency decrees that can suppress constitutional freedoms in the name of national security. South Korea's history has shown that Emergency Martial Law is particularly vulnerable to misuse, as seen in past instances where it was used to consolidate power rather than respond to legitimate crises.

2. Conditions for Declaration:

   • War, internal rebellion, or a severe national security threat.

   • A state of public disorder that endangers governmental functions or national stability.

   • In practice, past instances suggest that political instability has also been used as justification for martial law, often under contested circumstances.

3. Conditions for Termination:

   • The President may lift martial law if deemed unnecessary.

   • If the National Assembly votes for termination, the President is constitutionally obligated to revoke it. This provision played a crucial role in reversing the December 3, 2024, martial law, demonstrating the power of legislative oversight.

Historical Cases of Martial Law in South Korea

South Korea has experienced several instances of martial law, often associated with political crises and military interventions:

• 1948 Jeju 4.3 Uprising: Martial law was imposed to suppress communist uprisings, leading to mass casualties.

• 1961 May 16 Coup: Military leaders, led by Park Chung-hee, declared martial law to justify their takeover of government.

• 1972 Yushin Martial Law: Park Chung-hee imposed martial law to establish a dictatorial system under the Yushin Constitution. This martial law was primarily aimed at consolidating his power through a self-coup, ensuring that his authoritarian rule remained unchallenged by political opposition.

• 1979 Post-Assassination Crisis: Following Park’s assassination, martial law was maintained, allowing the military to consolidate power.

• 1980 May 17 Nationwide Martial Law: General Chun Doo-hwan expanded martial law nationwide to suppress pro-democracy movements, leading to the Gwangju Uprising and brutal military crackdowns.

These historical cases illustrate how martial law has often been utilized as a tool for political control rather than solely for national security purposes. The December 3, 2024, event is now seen as a continuation of this pattern, reinforcing concerns that South Korea’s martial law framework remains susceptible to exploitation.

The Legal and Democratic Implications

The December 3, 2024, martial law crisis reignited concerns about the potential misuse of emergency powers in South Korea’s democratic system. While the Constitution and Martial Law Act establish checks and balances to prevent abuses, this incident highlights the need for stronger democratic safeguards. The swift response of the National Assembly and civil society demonstrated the resilience of South Korean democracy, reinforcing the principle that emergency measures should never be used to undermine constitutional governance. Moving forward, legal experts argue that South Korea must consider reforms to prevent the executive branch from unilaterally deploying military force in domestic affairs, ensuring that martial law is strictly confined to true national emergencies.