On the previous day, the leadership and members of the People Power Party (PPP) opposed the withdrawal related to the martial law vote. Special Prosecutor Cho Eun-seok’s team, investigating suspicions concerning the obstruction of the National Assembly’s decision to lift martial law during the December 12-3 emergency martial law incident, is attempting a second day of compulsory investigation of the PPP’s floor leader’s office and the parliamentary administration office.
According to the legal community on the 3rd, the special prosecutor team is in discussions with the National Assembly to execute search and seizure warrants on the PPP’s floor leader’s office and parliamentary administration office at the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul. Yesterday, the prosecution conducted a search and seizure on former PPP floor leader Choo Kyung-ho’s residence, his district office in Dalseong County, Daegu, and the office of the same party’s lawmaker Cho Ji-yeon.
The search warrant for Choo reportedly specified charges such as “engaging in important duties related to insurrection” and “abuse of power to obstruct the exercise of rights.” The warrant also included details that “former floor leader Choo changed the location of the parliamentary general assembly several times to hinder the vote.”
The special prosecutor is reviewing whether Mr. Choo and the PPP leadership deliberately obstructed the vote by repeatedly changing the general assembly location during the resolution vote to lift martial law on December 4 last year. On the day martial law was declared, December 3, Mr. Choo is suspected of having a seven-minute phone conversation with former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo while moving to the National Assembly at 11:12 p.m.
Lawmaker Cho is also suspected of having a phone conversation with former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun hours before the martial law was declared. The special prosecutor attempted to search and seize the PPP’s floor leader’s office and the parliamentary administration office, but withdrew due to opposition from PPP leadership and lawmakers. The PPP argues that the National Assembly is a “protected facility” and access is not granted without the Speaker’s permission. The two sides agreed to continue discussions on the submission of materials.