Former President Yoon Suk-yeol's side filed a constitutional complaint challenging the mandatory broadcasting of trials and the sentence reduction for judicial cooperators under the special counsel act on insurrection. Earlier, they also asked the criminal court to refer the law for a constitutionality review on the same grounds.
According to legal sources on the 29th, the legal team for former President Yoon filed a constitutional complaint with the Constitutional Court on the 24th seeking a ruling of unconstitutionality on Article 11 paragraphs 4 and 7 and Article 25 of the special counsel act on insurrection. Article 11 paragraphs 4 and 7 require, in principle, broadcasting of the first trial for cases indicted by the special counsel on insurrection, and Article 25 provides for sentence reductions for judicial cooperators, commonly known as "plea bargaining."
In Oct., Yoon's side also sought a referral for a constitutionality review from the Seoul Central District Court Criminal Division 25 (presiding judge Jee Kui-youn), which is hearing the alleged ringleader of insurrection case. If the court accepts the referral and asks the Constitutional Court to review the law's constitutionality, the criminal trial in question is halted until the court's decision. The bench has not yet ruled on the referral request.
Yoon's side has argued that the mandatory broadcasting provision infringes the right to a fair trial. The representatives said it would subject participants to "excessive public pressure," predicting "doxxing, threats, and criticism" against judges, defense attorneys, and witnesses. They also argued it would infringe judicial independence, saying that if "every detail of the trial is made public and judges face criticism and ridicule, they will be influenced by public reaction."
On witness examination, they said, "Testifying in public is difficult," adding there is a high likelihood witnesses "will give false testimony or refuse to testify" to avoid criticism. Yoon's side also plans to challenge the constitutionality of the sentence reduction for judicial cooperators by including that provision within the scope of the review.