[News Today]
◀ Anchor ▶
A motion to detain Representative Choo Kyung-ho, accused of obstructing a vote by lawmakers for lifting martial law on the day of the event, has been dismissed.
The court explained the dismissal, citing “a possibility of disputes regarding the allegations and legal principles.”
This is Reporter Koo Seung-eun.
◀ Report ▶
Despite the martial law forces seizing the National Assembly, the detention request for Representative Choo Kyung-ho, suspected of hindering lawmakers’ voting to lift martial law as the floor leader of the People Power Party, was rejected.
[Choo Kyung-ho/People Power Party Representative]
“I am grateful to the court for making a fair judgment today. The government should stop the political suppression and persecution of the opposition…”
Judge Lee Jung-jae, in charge of warrants, stated, “Given the potential disputes over the charges and legal principles, it is reasonable to conduct a detailed and thorough legal battle in court before achieving an appropriate judgment and punishment.”
The judge also added, “Considering the defendant’s residence, career, and the degree of evidence collection, there is no concern for flight or evidence destruction.”
During the warrant review held yesterday for nine hours, the ‘Rebellion’ Special Prosecutor Team claimed that Representative Choo Kyung-ho, who was the floor leader at the time of martial law, was contacted by former President Yoon Seok-yeol for cooperation over a two-minute call, changed the location of the lawmakers’ meeting repeatedly, and obstructed the voting to lift martial law.
They emphasized that the voting obstruction did occur, presenting testimonies from some People Power Party members who stated they were not informed properly about the situation and thus could not participate in the vote.
However, Choo’s side rebutted that there is no clear evidence of him supporting martial law or obstructing the vote, and explained that immediately after his call with former President Yoon, where Yoon allegedly failed to notify about the martial law, he instructed lawmakers to gather at a committee meeting room opposite to the main assembly hall.
Additionally, in his final statement, Representative Choo expressed, “I am sorry to the public as a person with responsibility,” but argued that the warrant request was unjust, and claimed, “There was no awareness of illegality.”
The court questioned the Special Prosecutor’s side if it was possible to conclude a discussion about martial law with a mere two-minute call between Choo and former President Yoon and asked Choo’s side what actions were taken against the person who could directly end martial law.
The Special Prosecutor’s team prepared extensive materials, including over 600 pages of opinions and 300 pages of presentations, to assert the necessity of detention forcefully, but it was not recognized by the court.
This is Koo Seung-eun from MBC News.
MBC News is always open to your reports 24/7.
▷ Phone: 02-784-4000
▷ Email: [email protected]
▷ KakaoTalk: @mbc제보