A South Korean court has re-issued an arrest warrant for impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol, the country’s Corruption Investigation Office (CIO) announced on Tuesday.
This comes as investigators face challenges in arresting Yoon, who was accused of inciting insurrection when he tried to impose martial law in early December.
Last week, hundreds of Yoon’s supporters gathered outside his residence, while a human wall of security personnel, including the presidential security guards, blocked investigators from executing an initial arrest warrant at Yoon’s residence.
The CIO eventually called off the attempt after a six-hour standoff but remained determined to apprehend the embattled leader, whose initial arrest warrant expired on Monday.
Yoon’s legal team had sought an injunction from a Seoul court to nullify the initial warrant, but the court rejected the request on Sunday, according to court officials.
Yoon, a former prosecutor, refused to cooperate with investigators three times regarding allegations of a failed martial law decree last month, which plunged South Korea into its most severe political crisis in decades.
The CIO confirmed on Monday that it had filed a request for a fresh arrest warrant at the Seoul Western District Court but did not disclose the warrant’s validity period.
If detained, Yoon would become the first sitting South Korean president to be arrested, and he could face imprisonment or the death sentence if convicted.
South Korea was thrown into political chaos on December 3, as President Yoon declared martial law in the country, causing a major rift between Yoon loyalists in parliament and opposition members who were in the majority.
He was eventually impeached on December 14 on a second attempt.
But two weeks later, the parliament voted to impeach his replacement, acting president Han Duck-soo, marking the first time an acting president had been impeached since South Korea became a democracy.
Meanwhile, the Constitutional Court has scheduled January 14 for the start of Yoon’s impeachment trial, which could proceed in his absence if he fails to attend.
The court has up to 180 days to decide whether to remove him from office.