South Korea court rejects arrest warrant for ex-President Yoon, Yonhap says
South Korea's special prosecutor had asked the court on Tuesday to issue an arrest warrant for Yoon as an investigation intensified over the ousted leader's botched bid to declare martial law.
A spokesperson for the Seoul Central District Court and the prosecution office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
A senior member of the special prosecutor's team of investigators said on Tuesday that the arrest warrant was on a charge of obstruction and accused Yoon of refusing to respond to a summons for questioning.
Subscribe to our Chief Editor's Week in Review
Our chief editor shares analysis and picks of the week's biggest news every Saturday.
This service is not intended for persons residing in the E.U. By clicking subscribe, I agree to receive news updates and promotional material from Mediacorp and Mediacorp's partners.
Loading
Loading
Lawyers representing Yoon criticised the special prosecutor for what they said were attempts to summon the former president "based on superficial and secondary matters that invited suspicion the probe was politically driven".
Nonetheless, his legal team said Yoon would comply with another summons and appear for questioning on Saturday.
The special prosecutor had said it would consider seeking another arrest warrant if Yoon failed to turn up for questioning on Saturday, the Yonhap News Agency reported.
Yoon, who is already facing a criminal trial on insurrection charges for issuing the martial law declaration, was arrested in January after resisting authorities trying to take him into custody, but was released after 52 days on technical grounds.
The former president is fighting the charges against him that include masterminding insurrection, which is punishable by death or life in prison. He maintains that he declared martial law on Dec 3 to sound the alarm over the threat to democracy posed by the then-opposition Democratic Party.
The special prosecutor was appointed just days after liberal President Lee Jae-myung took office on Jun 4 following his victory in a snap election called after Yoon's ouster in April. The prosecutor has launched a team of more than 200 prosecutors and investigators to take over ongoing investigations into Yoon.
Separately, the Seoul Central District Court issued a warrant on Wednesday for Yoon's former defence minister, Kim Yong-hyun, to extend his detention, citing concerns over potential destruction of evidence.
Kim played a leading role in recommending and planning martial law, and is in jail amid an ongoing trial on insurrection charges.
He has denied wrongdoing and said imposing martial law was intended to raise alarm over the opposition's dominance and gather information related to election fraud concerns.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
37 minutes ago
- CNA
India-Philippines relations: Marcos in New Delhi as 2 navies hold drills in South China Sea
President Ferdinand Marcos Jr is in New Delhi, the first visit to India by a Philippine leader in almost 20 years. His arrival, a day after the Indian navy began its joint patrol since 2021 in the South China Sea. The two-day exercise is taking place in waters close to the Scarborough Shoal, an area claimed by the Philippines, but effectively controlled by China. Neha Poonia reports.
Independent Singapore
2 hours ago
- Independent Singapore
‘Passenger is rude to the driver… So entitled!' — Netizens say after passenger scolded driver for driving off despite him waving ‘in front of the bus'
SINGAPORE: A heated video posted on Instagram by @thesgdaily, featuring a fiery encounter between a passenger and a Tower Transit bus driver, has left most netizens rallying behind the bus driver. The incident, which took place at night, was captured by the passenger himself: 'I was running towards you for such a long time, and I waved at you for super long,' the passenger insisted, claiming he was right in front of the bus when the bus driver drove off without stopping. The passenger continued pressing the issue, accusing the driver of ignoring him intentionally. The driver then lost his patience, and his voice went up: 'You listen first! If there is nobody at the bus stop, I won't stop; I will just go!' he retorted. View this post on Instagram A post shared by SG Daily 🇸🇬 (@thesgdaily) When the passenger refused to back down, the driver snapped, repeating his question three times before justifying his loss of composure: 'What did you scold me now? What did you scold me now? What did you scold me now? You scold my mother, you know. Who the hell are you, man? You want me to call the police?' The confrontation quickly escalated into a shouting match, and when the driver, noticing he was being recorded on video via the passenger's mobile phone, appeared to reach for the phone and asked, 'Why you take photo?' 'The passenger is rude to the driver… So entitled!' The video lit up social media, but instead of sympathy for the out-of-breath passenger, most viewers threw their support behind the driver. 'The passenger is rude to the driver… So entitled!' one commenter wrote. 'He could have missed seeing you. He's driving and must also see who is running in the nighttime?' Another commenter dropped a truth bomb with comedic flair: 'It's called BUS STOP for a reason, not BUS RUNNING. Come on, bro, everyone must wait for you running, eh?' Many were quick to remind that bus drivers have schedules to follow — and obligations to everyone onboard. 'If you [run] not at the bus stop, it's not my [business] problem,' one quoted the driver, praising his response. 'He thinks the driver is his personal chauffeur?' another quipped while one more schooled him with: 'Go get your own car or take a cab, lah!' 'Both are wrong!' A few commenters pointed out that while the commuter was out of line, the driver's reaction could've been more measured. 'Both are wrong!' one commented. 'The passenger is too self-entitled, and the driver's aggressive behaviour is unacceptable. Just a small problem becomes a big problem,' another commented. Still, others rebutted that the driver only lost his temper after being insulted. 'He wasn't aggressive at first,' someone clarified. 'He got angry because the guy scolded his mother. Anybody would have reacted that way,' another chimed in. Also, perhaps one of the most pointed comments of all: 'You missed the bus, you just wait la. You miss the flight, you can run after the plane, meh?' Chasing a moving bus from a distance is a gamble According to SBS Transit and Go-Ahead Singapore's FAQs, bus captains should stop for approaching passengers, but only if they are clearly within the bus stop bay. Once the bus starts to pull away, the driver's attention is on traffic. Chasing a moving bus from a distance is a gamble. In this case, it remains unclear whether the commuter reached the bus stop in time or was sprinting from afar. What's certain is that he managed to board eventually — and instead of taking the win, chose to confront the driver with a phone in hand and entitlement turned up to the max! Respect goes both ways… This viral episode isn't just about a missed bus. It's also about public civility, boundaries, and how not to act when things don't go your way. As one netizen put it for the passenger: 'The bus driver is NOT your personal chauffeur. This is public transport, not a private service.' And for the driver, another concluded with refreshing clarity: 'There is always a better way to resolve this. When both sides are on fire, look at it objectively.' If there's one thing this saga taught us, it's that being on time saves more than your seat — it might just save your dignity too. In other news, in Singapore's ever-evolving saga of ride-hailing dramas, another video surfaced — this time starring a Tada driver vs passenger whose simple request for cooler air ended with a chilling command: 'Get out!' You can read about their fiery encounter over here: 'Get out! Get out! This is my car, I'm asking you to get out!' — Tada driver ejects passenger for asking to 'increase air-con speed'
Independent Singapore
2 hours ago
- Independent Singapore
Legal vaping goes mainstream — Now illegal drug vapes are taking over, and no one knows how to stop them
SINGAPORE: In recent years, vaping has become popular. Bright ads, fruity flavours, and sleek, USB-like devices have turned nicotine use into something more private and socially acceptable. However, this trend raises a complex issue: Has legal vaping created a convenient cover for illegal drug use? A concerned Reddit user sparked a heated debate with a bold claim. He said that by legalising vaping, authorities have made it hard to tell the difference between nicotine vapes and those with illegal substances. 'Nicotine and drug vapes look nearly identical, small, discreet, and easy to hide,' the post stated. 'Without lab testing, it's almost impossible for police, teachers, or parents to know what someone is really vaping.' The post also pointed out that legalisation might unintentionally protect drug users. 'The widespread use of vapes reduces suspicion and makes illegal activity harder to spot unless there's a strong smell or obvious behaviour,' the netizen wrote. He believed the growing market for legal products is crushing enforcers and enforcement itself, giving illegitimate vendors the chance to go unobserved. Reusable vape pens, which are frequently sold lawfully, were emphasised as a major excuse—people can replenish them with prohibited drugs while avoiding attention. Not everyone was in agreement with this miserable viewpoint. The comments section became an animated discussion about strategy, implementation, and historical illustrations. 'Banning something without enforcement is as good as not banning,' one commenter said, stressing the limits of prohibition without a sturdy monitoring structure. Another commenter challenged the original argument, drawing parallels to other drug misuse: 'You could use that same logic for pills. Illegal drug makers can make their drugs look like harmless over-the-counter ones… Your logic is flawed.' The most thorough response came from a commenter who referenced lessons from Prohibition in the United States. 'Banning alcohol drove the market underground, where regulations didn't exist,' the commenter wrote. 'You will see many parallels with our current situation regarding vapes.' They argued that legalising the market isn't about ignoring problems—it's about using the size and value of the legal market to bring manufacturers under control. He maintained that regulation is a more efficient method than absolute prohibitions. 'There are ways to regulate products to minimise harm. Regulation is how the government manages supply.' This view exposes a bigger truth — legalising vaping isn't just about community health or personal autonomy; it's also about control and the competence to supervise a multifaceted and evolving industry. While the original post raised binding concerns about exposure and implementation issues, it also demonstrates the strain between conspicuousness and control. The more that something is hard-pressed underground, the tougher it becomes to manage. Eventually, the vaping argument isn't just about smoke vapours — it's about finding a sense of balance between self-determination and security, between innovation and oversight. Whether via harsher guidelines, shrewder enforcement, or public instruction, the discussion is far from over. One thing is clear — as vaping becomes more entrenched in everyday life, the mechanisms being employed to address its dangers must likewise advance fast.
