Seoul, South Korea – More than a week since South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol shocked South Korea with his short-lived declaration of martial law, the country’s government hangs in limbo.
In his first public appearance since the weekend, Yoon on Thursday pledged to fight “to the end” in a defiant address that repeated his position that his actions had been legal and aimed at protecting democracy.
While Yoon reiterated his apology for causing public concern, he said the opposition had paralysed his government’s ability to function with a “highly calibrated” and “frenzied sword dance” of obstructionist moves.
He said he had sent troops to the National Assembly to ensure order in case pandemonium ensued from people gathering at the site and denied attempting to prevent lawmakers from exercising their duties.
“Whether I am impeached or investigated, I will fairly confront it,” Yoon said.
With Yoon facing a second impeachment vote on Saturday, support for the embattled president among his political allies is waning.
Han Dong-hoon, the leader of Yoon’s conservative People Power Party (PPP), on Thursday said he would call on his colleagues to support impeachment.
A first attempt to impeach Yoon on Saturday failed after all but three PPP lawmakers boycotted the vote at the 300-member National Assembly on Saturday, depriving the motion of the necessary two-thirds quorum.
Many of Yoon’s cabinet members and closest officials have resigned as prosecutors consider whether to indict Yoon and his aides for alleged crimes including rebellion, which carries a maximum penalty of death.
An attempt by police to raid the presidential office on Wednesday as part of their investigation was blocked by security guards.
All the while, tens of thousands of South Koreans continue to rally in the streets demanding Yoon’s resignation.
With Yoon’s political and legal woes leaving the government effectively paralysed, questions have swirled about who is actually running the country.
The defence and foreign ministries confirmed earlier this week that the president remains the head of the executive despite being under investigation for treason.
But when a Financial Times reporter on Tuesday asked the presidential office who was tasked with running the country, a spokesperson replied that “there is no official answer to that question”.
Before Han’s U-turn on supporting impeachment, the PPP had proposed a “resignation roadmap” that would have put the party leader and Prime Minister Han Duck-soo in charge of governance.
Under the plan, Yoon would have agreed to stay out of state affairs until he stepped down in February or March ahead of a presidential election.
The proposal drew condemnation from opposition politicians and citizens, not least because ruling party figures, including the prime minister, are among those being investigated along with Yoon.
The main opposition Democratic Party dubbed the plan a “second coup by aiders and abettors of insurrection”.
“You can’t just pass down your powers like that,” Lee Sang-jun, an insurance broker in Seoul, told Al Jazeera before Yoon’s latest address.
“This is illegal and another case of just making a fool out of citizens.”
“They’re just trying to hold onto power until they can try at another government takeover,” Lee added.
Kim Seo-young, an assistant professor of political science at Seoul National University, said any power-sharing deal would be “hugely problematic” from a legal perspective.
“Article 71 of the constitution states that the prime minister or members of the state council can act for the president only if the office of the presidency is vacant or if the president is unable to perform his or her duties for any reason,” Kim, who has joined hundreds of academics publicly calling for Yoon’s impeachment, told Al Jazeera.
“But Yoon still resides in the president’s office, and he has not resigned nor faced impeachment.”
Kim said that “everything is in the dark” when it comes to how such an agreement would work in practice.
“We have no idea of who will specifically be in charge of what, while there is actually no evidence that Yoon has stepped aside as he recently accepted the resignation of officials,” she said.
“People are very concerned as there is no assurance of stability.”
Min Hyeon-jong, 32, who works at a financial firm, compared the country’s situation with its communist-governed neighbours.
“It’s comical to think that the president declared martial law to prevent communist influence from entering his government when his party is mirroring what the governments in China and North Korea have in place,” Min told Al Jazeera.
“Both states have leaders who handpick the officials to run their countries.”
Min said he also questions whether Yoon can be trusted to respect the results of elections that do not go his way.
Surveillance footage that circulated after Yoon declared martial law showed soldiers under the command of the Defence Ministry entering the National Election Commission and taking photos.
In legislative elections in April, the Democratic Party won a commanding majority in the National Assembly, empowering the opposition to frustrate Yoon’s legislative agenda.
In his address on Thursday, Yoon said he had directed his former defence chief Kim Yong-hyun to check the voting system out of concern it may have been compromised by North Korean hackers.
“I think Yoon is contradicting himself as he himself was elected by the people. It doesn’t make sense that one election was legitimate while another wasn’t,” Hyeon said.
For Kim, Yoon’s actions represent an “assault on South Korea and its people on all fronts”.
“First and foremost, this is an attack on democracy and the basic rules that our government and people uphold,” she said.
“Stock prices have plummeted as the political situation is imposing a lot of economic burdens, and foreign policy risks coming to a standstill.”
Like many people in the country, Kim initially thought that last Tuesday’s announcement of martial law was the result of a split-second erratic decision by Yoon.
However, recent speculation has made Kim think twice about Yoon’s motives.
“There have been numerous accusations of documents proving that this was meticulously planned for several months. While we don’t know if this is true, I think the frustration directed across the aisle and a conviction of doing the right thing led to this extreme action,” she said.
“It’s still hard to believe as a political scientist and, also, as a citizen of this country.”
