Power, masked in the guise of legality, is dismantling the separation of powers—the very foundation of our liberal democratic constitution. Dictatorship disguised as law, and a powerless opposition party—this is the true face of a "hybrid coup." Hanmiilbo Graphic

The Lee Jae-myung administration is shaking the structure of power by pushing through bills such as the Special Court Act and amendments to the Government Organization Act.

While these actions wear the mask of procedural legality, in substance, they constitute a "hybrid coup" that destroys the constitutional order. The institutional opposition party has lost the power to stop this, and even the criteria for insurrection are being applied selectively at the whim of those in power.

Ultimately, it has always been the public, awakening, however late, who has defended freedom. South Korean democracy now stands at that very crossroads.

The essence of insurrection is the destruction of the constitutional order. Traditionally, insurrection has been understood as the act of usurping power through military force—that is, through arms and violence.

However, 21st-century dictatorships wield legislation instead of weapons and occupy the parliamentary floor through majority votes rather than tanks.

The legislative abuse by the majority party and the pressure exerted on the judiciary are today’s forms of force, which is why this is termed a "hybrid coup." It wears a mask of legality, but the outcome is the same.

Historical precedents support this.

Hitler secured unlimited power by passing the "Enabling Act" through parliament, and Stalin legalized his purges through party congresses and the People's Commissariat.

The Chavez and Maduro regimes in Venezuela weaponized their parliamentary majority to seize control of the judiciary and the electoral commission, while North Korea has explicitly enshrined the "leadership of the Workers' Party of Korea" in its constitution. Dictatorship has always arrived under the guise of legality.

South Korea today is no different.

The Democratic Party is seeking to neutralize the prosecution's investigative powers through amendments to the Government Organization Act and turn the judiciary into a political tool via the Special Court Act. The attempt to summon the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to hearings without cause is an overt threat to judicial independence. The form is legal, but the substance is the destruction of the constitution.

The case of former President Yoon Suk-yeol’s declaration of martial law highlights this imbalance.

He declared emergency martial law on December 3, 2024, citing the paralysis of the National Assembly, but rescinded it within 150 minutes once the Assembly passed a resolution to lift it. While this was a case of institutional checks functioning, the former President was indicted for insurrection on the grounds of that very declaration.

Conversely, the Democratic Party is forcing through legislation that directly undermines the constitutional order, yet it remains excluded from discussions of insurrection. The reality that the crime of insurrection is applied differently depending on who holds the power is clear evidence that the rule of law is collapsing.

This legislative recklessness is believed to be fueled by "confidence in future elections." If they were not certain of election victories or did not believe they could control the outcomes, they would hardly dare to engage in such runaway behavior.

Many citizens are frustrated by the impotence of the main opposition, the People Power Party. However, one must acknowledge that they effectively lack the legal means to check this onslaught.

A petition to dissolve a political party is a government prerogative, and the statute of limitations for filing lawsuits to invalidate elections has already expired. Regarding President Lee Jae-myung’s trial for violating election law, the National Assembly’s attempt to narrow the scope of the crime of publishing false information makes it difficult for the courts to uphold the Supreme Court’s intent for remand. Legal mechanisms have been blocked, and political leverage is weak.

While some argue that discussions regarding a "Prosecution Agency" or an "Anti-Corruption Investigation Agency" might offer a path forward, they are practically non-functional. Even if investigation seems possible, the monopoly on the power to prosecute ultimately renders all procedures toothless. The crux of the problem is not legal interpretation, but whether one can withstand political pressure.

Little can be expected from the courtroom.

The Constitutional Court has a strong political character, and the judiciary is powerless in the face of legislation pushed by a majority party.

In the end, what remains is the awakening of the people and the solidarity of civil society.

Academia must expose the constitutional dangers of this legislative overreach, the media must document it, and civil society must raise its voice in the streets. The ultimate bastion for protecting liberal democracy is the public.

What we are witnessing now is not mere political strife, but a hybrid coup that is dismantling the Constitution.

In this situation, the limitations of institutional political parties are clear.

It has always been the people who awoke, however late, to change history. French citizens toppled absolute monarchy, the people of Eastern Europe ended communist dictatorships, and Korea’s April 19 Revolution and June Struggle reclaimed freedom. South Korean democracy now stands on that same path.

#KimYoungHanColumn #HybridCoup #LegislativeCoup #ConstitutionalOrder #InsurrectionControversy #JudicialIndependence #PublicAwakening #DefendingDemocracy #PeopleWhoChangedHistory