South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol delivers an emergency national address at the presidential office in Yongsan, Seoul, on the night of Dec. 3, 2024. / Presidential Office

South Korea’s court issued an arrest warrant for President Yoon Suk-yeol on Dec. 31 over allegations linked to his involvement in the declaration of emergency martial law on Dec. 3, marking the first time in the country’s history that an arrest warrant has been issued against a sitting president.

The Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO), which sought the warrant, said in a press release at 9:24 a.m. that it had confirmed the issuance of both an arrest and search warrant earlier that morning. “When the arrest will take place hasn’t been decided yet,” the office said.

The joint investigation team, comprising the CIO, the National Police Agency’s National Investigation Headquarters, and the Ministry of National Defense’s Investigation Headquarters, filed the request for the warrant with the Seoul Western District Court at midnight on Dec. 30.

The arrest warrant accuses President Yoon of being the ringleader in an insurrection and abusing his authority. The team also sought a search warrant for the presidential residence in Hannam-dong, indicating their intent to search the premises as part of the arrest operation.

Oh Dong-woon, head of the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials, arrives at the government complex in Gwacheon, Gyeonggi Province, on the morning of Dec. 31, 2024. / News1

The CIO had summoned Yoon on three occasions—Dec. 18, 25, and 29—but he declined to comply each time. Yoon refused to accept the summons documents and did not coordinate on scheduling the investigation. As a result, the investigation team opted to seek the arrest warrant instead of issuing a fourth summons.

Yoon’s attorney, Yun Gap-geun, filed a statement and notice of legal representation with the Seoul Western District Court on Dec. 30, arguing against the validity of the warrant. “The arrest warrant filed by the CIO is unjust,” he said. “This request comes from an agency that lacks the authority to handle this case.”

He also asserted that the warrant does not meet the procedural requirements set out in S. Korea’s criminal procedure laws. “I am not in a position to discuss which agency should have sought the warrant,” he added, “but the CIO has no jurisdiction to investigate insurrection charges.”