South Korea's top court formally ousts President Park Geun-hye

March 10, 2017

Seoul, Mar 10: In a historic, unanimous ruling Friday, South Korea's Constitutional Court formally removed impeached President Park Geun-hye from office over a corruption scandal that has plunged the country into political turmoil, worsened an already serious national divide and prompted calls for sweeping reforms.

GeunIt was a stunning fall for Park, the country's first female leader and the daughter of a dictator who rode a lingering conservative nostalgia for her father to victory in 2012, only to see her presidency descend into a scandal.

The ruling by the eight-member panel opens her up to possible criminal proceedings and makes her South Korea's first democratically elected leader to be removed from office since democracy came in the country in the late 1980s.

Park's "acts of violating the constitution and law are a betrayal of the public trust," acting Chief Justice Lee Jung-mi said. "The benefits of protecting the constitution that can be earned by dismissing the defendant are overwhelmingly big. Hereupon, in a unanimous decision by the court panel, we issue a verdict: We dismiss the defendant, President Park Geun-hye."

South Korea must hold an election within two months to choose Park's successor. Liberal Moon Jae-in, who lost to Park in the 2012 election, currently enjoys a comfortable lead in opinion surveys. Whoever becomes the next leader will take over a country facing a hostile North Korea, a stagnant economy and deep social and political divides.

Pre-verdict surveys showed that 70 to 80 percent of South Koreans had wanted the court to approve Park's impeachment. But there have been worries that Park's ouster would further polarize the country and cause violence between her supporters and opponents.

Sensing history, thousands of people — both pro-Park supporters, many of them dressed in army-style fatigues and wearing red berets, and those who wanted Park gone — gathered around the Constitutional Court building and a huge public square in downtown Seoul.

A big television screen was set up near the court so people could watch the verdict live. Hundreds of police were on hand for any protests, wearing helmets with visors and black, hard-plastic breastplates and shin guards. The streets near the court were lined with police buses and barricades.

Park's parliamentary impeachment in December came after weeks of Saturday rallies that drew millions who wanted her resignation. Overwhelmed by the biggest rallies in decades, the voices of Park supporters were largely ignored. But they've recently regrouped and staged fierce pro-Park rallies since.

People on both sides have threatened not to accept a Constitutional Court decision that they disagree with. One of Park's lawyers told the court last month that there will be "a rebellion and blood will drench the asphalt" if Park is booted from office. Many participants at anti-Park rallies had said they would stage a "revolution" if the court rejected Park's impeachment.

"If Park accepts the ruling and soothes those who opposed her impeachment, things will be quiet," said Yoon Tae-Ryong, a political scientist at Seoul's Konkuk University. "But looking at what she's done so far, I think that might be wishful thinking."

Others disagreed, saying violent protests won't be supported by the general public.

Prosecutors have arrested and indicted a slew of high-profile figures over the scandal, including Park's confidante Choi Soon-sil, top Park administration officials and Samsung heir Lee Jae-yong. But Park has avoided a direct investigation thanks to a law that gives a sitting president immunity from prosecution for most of the alleged crimes.

Since she's now no longer in power, prosecutors can summon, question and possibly arrest her. Her critics want to see Park appear on TV while dressed in prison garb, handcuffed and bound like others involved in the scandal. But some analysts worry that could create a backlash by conservatives.

Even after the election, imprisoning Park could still be a burden for a new government, which must pursue national unity to overcome security, economic and other problems, said Chung Jin-young, a professor at Kyung Hee University. Others say it won't be difficult.

Among the most serious problems facing South Korea is China's retaliation against the deployment of a US high-tech missile defense system in the South. Ties with North Korea are terrible, with Pyongyang seeking to expand its nuclear and missile arsenal. Japan hasn't sent back its ambassador, which it recalled two months ago over history disputes. South Korea also worries about the Trump administration asking for a greater financial contribution for US troop deployment in the South.

Park rose to power in 2012 largely thanks to the support of voters who believed her father guided the country out of poverty after the 1950-53 Korean War and that his daughter would show the same charismatic leadership to revive the economy.

But her father was also a burden because there are many who remember the senior Park as a ruthless thug. These critics have linked her alleged unclear and high-handed decision-making and attempts to infringe upon freedom of speech to her father's high-handed style.

"The nostalgia for Park Chung-hee's developmental dictatorship, which has existed as a sort of myth since the '60s, has been shattered along with Park Geun-hye's impeachment," said Lim Jie-Hyun, a professor at Sogang University. "When people voted for Park Geun-hye, they didn't do so because of her."

Park Geun-hye has offered a public apology several times and acknowledged she got some help from Choi for editing speeches and on the issue of public relations. But Park has denied any legal wrongdoing.

The two women became friends in the 1970s, around the time when Park began serving as first lady after her mother was killed during a failed 1974 assassination attempt on her father. Park Geun-hye said Choi helped her "when I had difficulties" in the past. The two women had 573 phone calls between 18 April, 2016 and 26 October, 2016, according to an investigation report by prosecutors.

Prime Minister Hwang Kyo-ahn has led the government as acting leader since Park's impeachment and he will continue to do so until South Korea elects a new president by May. Some media reports said Hwang might run for the presidency as a conservative candidate. If that happens, he should resign to run and a deputy prime minister will serve as another interim leader.

In 2004, then President Roh Moo-hyun was impeached by parliament for alleged election law violations and incompetence, but the Constitutional Court later reinstated his power.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 22,2020

May 22: A Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) flight on its way from Lahore to Karachi, crashed in the area near Jinnah International Airport on Friday, according to Civil Aviation Authority officials.

Geo News reported that the plane crashed at the Jinnah Ground area near the airport as it was approaching for landing. There were more than 90 passengers on board the Airbus aircraft. Black smoke could be seen from afar at the crash site, say eye witnesses.

There were no immediate reports on the number of casualties. The aircraft arriving from the eastern city of Lahore was carrying 99 passengers and 8 crew members, news agency AP said, quoting Abdul Sattar Kokhar, spokesman for the country’s civil aviation authority.

Witnesses said the Airbus A320 appeared to attempt to land two or three times before crashing in a residential area near Jinnah International Airport.

Flight PK-303 from Lahore was about to land in Karachi when it crashed at the Jinnah Garden area near Model Colony in Malir, just a minute before its landing, Geo News reported.

Local television reports showed smoke coming from the direction of the airport. Ambulances were on their way to the airport.

News agency said Sindh’s Ministry of Health and Population Welfare has declared emergency in all major hospitals of Karachi due to the plane crash.

It’s the second plane crash for Pakistani carrier in less than four years. The airline’s chairman resigned in late 2016, less than a week after the crash of an ATR-42 aircraft killed 47 people. The incident comes as Pakistan was slowly resuming domestic flights in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, Bloomberg reported.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 3,2020

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 2,2020

Jul 2: Democratic presidential candidate and former US vice-president Joe Biden has said that if he wins the November elections, strengthening the relationship with India which is America’s "natural partner", will be a high priority for his administration.

"India needs to be a partner in the region for our safety's sake and quite frankly for theirs," he said in response to a question on India-US relationship during a virtual fundraiser event on Wednesday.

At the fundraiser hosted by Chairman and CEO of Beacon Capital Partners Alan Leventhal, the former vice president said that India and the United States were natural partners.

"That partnership, a strategic partnership, is necessary and important in our security," Biden said when asked by an attendee whether India is critical to the US' national security.

Referring to his eight years as the vice president, he said, "In our administration, I was proud to play a role more than a decade ago in securing Congressional approval for the US-India Civil Nuclear Agreement, which is a big deal".

"Helping open the door to great progress in our relationship and strengthening our strategic partnership with India was a high priority in the Obama-Biden administration and will be a high priority if I'm elected president,” Biden said.

Both as the vice president and a senator from Delaware, he was a big supporter of India-US relationship.

About the November polls, Biden said that the character of the country is on the ballot. The upcoming election is the most important poll of a lifetime and that the country is currently engaged in a battle for its soul, he claimed.

Biden also slammed President Donald Trump and his administration over the handling of the coronavirus pandemic.

"Trump ignored warnings from the very beginning, refused to prepare and failed to protect the country. Not just now but throughout his presidency, undermining the very core pillars of ours, what I would argue, moral and economic strength.

"I really do believe that our country is crying out for leadership and maybe even more important, some healing. Today, we have an enormous opportunity not only to rebuild but to build back better than before. To build a better future. That's what America does," he added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.