The four-month-long political drama in South Korea finally came to an end as the Constitutional Court pronounced the ruling to dismiss President Yoon Suk-Yeol on 4 April 2025, at 11:22 am. The Court reprimanded Yoon’s declaration of martial law as a ‘serious betrayal of the trust of the people,’ acknowledging that it was ‘citizens’ resistance’ that helped lawmakers promptly lift the martial law.
The decision was widely accepted as a victory for the people – the sovereign members of the Republic of Korea – which echoes the civic activism that followed the martial law. And indeed, Seoul’s streets have always been a stage for a powerful symbol of resistance, as shown by the rhythmic chants of K-pop lightsticks that were flaring at the anti-president protest scenes. What also filled the air of the streets was ‘Into the New World,’ a joyful song that sings about teenage girls’ wish for a brighter future, which has now turned into an ‘anthem of solidarity’ among young Korean protesters.
With its upbeat melody and lyrics filled with hope, the ironically festive vibe it brings is nothing new. Now that the country is about to elect a new leader, however, one can wonder about what kind of new world these citizens are calling for. In this article, a recollection of some of the iconic moments and voices from the anti-president street rallies may hint at the resolute yet diverse aspirations of the citizens, ranging from young feminist voices to calls for reforms of justice systems.
Yeoui-do (Parliament) – Young women fighting for democracy
Traditionally, trade unions have been indispensable actors in such pro-democracy protest scenes. The latter have undoubtedly played a pivotal role not only in achieving basic labour standards, but also in ushering in a democratic regime. For example, the 1987 June Democratic Struggle saw 1.2 million workers on strike for three months, leading to the fall of the then authoritarian regime.
This time, these conventional protest forces were joined by much younger participants, the so-called ‘MZ’ – the amalgamation of the ‘Millennials’ and ‘Gen Z’ terms – women. Born and raised in a largely democratic society, these young women, mostly in their twenties and thirties, joined the movement, simultaneously voicing their anger against Yoon – who, at best, never paid attention to women’s issues and, at worst, only introduced adverse policies against women.
Unlike other groups, MZ women formed a mass of individuals instead of an organised group. These young women were not calling for any specific legislation, despite facing a list of issues, such as a stark gender pay gap of 29,3% for the same job, glass ceiling or sex crime, just to name a few.
Rather, it was their accumulated grudge against sexism and misogyny that are inveterate in Korean society that triggered them to resist and protest, especially amid the gender divide that was sprouting up during Yoon’s election campaign, when he strategically sought – and gained – young men’s votes by promising to abolish the Ministry of Gender Equality.
With a strong presence, these young women became the pedestal of the impeachment protests for their unwavering support for change, making other groups sympathise with their struggle and align with their anger. The young and cheerful energy of MZ women enthralled the wider Korean society and sparked a cross-generational and cross-sectoral solidarity for democracy.
Namtaeryeong – Farmers fighting for their livelihoods
This cross-generational coalition building culminated at Namtaeryeong, a hill located on the fringe of Seoul, when young protesters extended their solidarity to the farmers of the Korean Peasants League, who had taken their tractors out on the road in protest against Yoon. When these farmers were nearing Seoul, however, they were stopped by police at Namtaeryeong for disrupting and causing inconvenience to the capital’s residents.
Upon hearing the news, their fellow urban protesters flocked to Namtaeryeong to support the farmers and pressurise the police. After 28 hours of confrontation, on 22 December 2024, police gave in to the citizens’ pressure and unlocked the roads for the farmers to continue their march into the Presidential Palace – for the first time in 130 years.
Behind the farmers’ tractor protest lies the amendment of ‘the Grain Management Act,’ known to be the first of the President’s countless vetoes – namely, 25 times in two and a half years – that ignited the very political unrest throughout his term. The proposed new bill was in response to the tremendous losses farmers suffered when rice prices plummeted in previous years. The essence of the bill was to oblige the state to purchase the surplus yields in case crops – specifically rice – are overproduced, to ensure price stability and fair profits for farmers.
Alongside four other opposition-backed agricultural bills, central to the farmers’ claims are food security and the protection of domestic farmers from foreign imports. Yoon refused the bill, using the pretext that the law may be a breach of the WTO agreement. The bill is still pending to this day, with some of the lead farmers called upon police questioning some months after the protest.
Hangangjin (the Presidential Palace) – The marginalised fighting against discrimination
Likewise, the president upset many by abusing his right to use vetoes. This alone may be enough to label him an anti-democratic abuser of constitutional order. The abrupt declaration of martial law, which is deemed an act of insurrection, added criminal charges to his record, thereby becoming the first incumbent president to be issued an arrest warrant.
When the police and the Anti-Corruption Agency failed their first attempt to arrest him on 3 January 2025, it sparked the throng to rally once again in front of the Presidential Palace near Hangangjin. Infuriated by the failed arrest, the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions initiated an ‘all-nighter’ rally. Building on the recent inspiring solidarity building with young feminists, the impeachment coalition increasingly expanded its allyship to include other minority groups, most notably the LGBT+ community.
Unlike women, though, these groups had a specific agenda in mind: the legislation of the Anti-discrimination Law. The bill proposed in previous regimes is an independent umbrella law against all forms of discrimination. In this regard, what makes the law controversial is its advocacy of sexuality, both sexual orientation and gender identities, which somewhat remains taboo among certain groups in Korean society.
Consequently, with many politicians taking a leave-it-to-social-consent approach, the law has remained unlegislated since the UN Human Rights Council’s recommendation in 2007, despite some attempts. Notwithstanding this challenging environment, minority rights protesters, while supporting tackling the status quo, simultaneously took the opportunity to take their agenda forward.
Gwanghwamun (the Constitutional Court) – All the precarious lives calling for safety and security
Yoon was finally arrested and detained on 15 and 19 January, respectively. Seeing him in police custody might well have assuaged the people, leading to decreased popular anger after his arrest. Even so, the rallies never entirely stopped and kept on engaging more and more popular voices – this time, gathering at the Gwanghwamun Square, a usual assembly point for citizen-led movements. Coincidentally, the Constitutional Court is only a few blocks away, making it a perfect spot to pressure the court for its final verdict.
Platform workers, irregular workers, the self-employed, immigrant workers, families of the Itaewon crowd crush victims, and Marine Corps veterans, among others, joined the continuous weekly rallies. Precarious living conditions were arguably the common thread that pushed these disparate groups to unite in the streets.
On public safety and accountability, South Korea had undergone numerous disasters that claimed many innocent lives throughout Yoon’s term, despite the ‘Serious Accidents Punishment Act’ that was introduced to protect workers and citizens from deadly man-made disasters. When the public tried to hold Yoon accountable for the aftermath of these events, Yoon continued his abuse of power – rejecting a special act that calls for an independent investigation into the Itaewon crowd crush (though the law was eventually passed) and the death of a young marine.
On economic security, the political turmoil quickly slid into an economic recession, with the South Korean stock market index falling by 6.5 per cent shortly after the martial law. This led to many local small businesses and mom-and-pop shops suffering. Irregular workers still suffer from unfair contract terms, such as delivery riders who are not even protected through basic accident insurance. Similarly, immigrant workers are almost invisible, thus particularly impacted by the absence of the aforementioned anti-discrimination law.
Doing justice and restoring democracy
‘Is this even a country?’ is a lamenting tagline Koreans ask themselves when they fear the state is failing to protect its citizens, when the president in power abdicates the responsibility to protect their people. It seems that the Yoon administration ignored women’s voices, refused to protect farmers and workers in their livelihoods, refused to provide minorities with equal opportunities and non-discriminatory environments, and failed to protect hundreds of innocent lives by not protecting citizens from deadly accidents that could have been avoided.
The sudden release of the president on 8 March 2025 by the Supreme Court and the Prosecutor’s Office added fuel to popular frustration. In response, with the court’s final decision fast approaching, the coalition of citizens, civil society and politicians was at full throttle to escalate pressure, turning the weekly rallies into daily ones until the impeachment day. Naturally, popular voices converged back to one of Korea’s most fundamental problems – the prosecution and justice systems.
South Korea’s prosecution is an extraordinarily powerful agency, controlling both investigation and indictment. Though it started as a countermeasure against police corruption, the concentration of power naturally translated into the corruption of the prosecution services per se. As a decisive arbiter of laws, prosecutors reign over the country’s justice system, flouting rules and undermining human rights and democracy. They are also prone to collude with political elites for political retaliation.
This disproportionate power led to attempts to reform the prosecution system in previous regimes. However, Yoon, a former prosecutor who served as Head of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office in the preceding regime, squashed these efforts. The decision to release him was only possible when there was already a strong will to do him a favour from the prosecution’s side, which is testimony to its power.
Into the new world
Would the new world settle all the above discontent, then? Led by a coalition of various opposition parties and civil society groups, the aforementioned rallies represent the voices of an even wider range of groups and individuals whose specific interests might not always align with each other. Of course, some of these issues are not always supported by others, and some might appear less urgent than others.
Still, any friction or fragmentation will only give courage to the extremists that defy democracy itself. After all, what brought these people together to the square was one common goal: challenging the president for the menaces he caused and to restore democracy, and so despite such diverse voices.
As Lee Jae-Myung, the opposition leader, said at one of the rallies, ‘the fact that you, the people, are the owner of our nation is not only written in Article 1 of the Constitution. You are proving it, at the site of life, at this very site of strife.’ Another lead protester from a progressive party cites the late law scholar Paul Freund, saying that ‘the courts should never be influenced by the weather of the day, but inevitably they will be influenced by the climate of the era.’
If the aspirations of the citizens drive the climate of the era, the Constitutional Court has proved the country’s democratic resilience – at least for now. That said, considering the wide spectrum of issues and people involved, the new world will be just a beginning, not the end of broader societal discussion. As both politicians and citizens prepare for a new presidential election, they will likely face the new challenge of uniting society with wise and sound policies that appeal to all. Whether politics will rise to meet that call remains to be seen.