South Korea's ex-leader Yoon lay on floor of cell and refused to be questioned, prosecutors say
Prosecutors investigating influence-peddling allegations connected to Yoon and his wife had tried to get him to comply with an arrest warrant and attend questioning voluntarily, a spokesperson for the special prosecution said.
'But the suspect stubbornly refused to do so, while lying on the ground, not dressed in a prison uniform,' Oh Jung-hee told a news briefing. She said investigators would try again to bring him in, even if they had to use force.
Yoon was dressed only in his undershirt and underwear when prosecutors came to his cell, the Yonhap News Agency reported, citing the special prosecution.
Yu Jeong-hwa, one of Yoon's lawyers, told Reuters that bringing up what he was wearing in a small space where the temperature was close to 40 degrees Celsius (104°F) was a public insult to his dignity and showed how the state was violating inmates' human rights.
The former president was put back in a solitary cell at the Seoul Detention Center in July, as prosecutors investigating his short-lived declaration of martial law in December sought additional charges against him.
Yoon is already on trial for insurrection, a charge which is punishable by death or life imprisonment.
He also faces a string of other investigations led by special prosecutors including one into scandals surrounding his wife, former First Lady Kim Keon Hee, where the couple allegedly exerted inappropriate influence over elections.
Yoon has denied any wrongdoing and his lawyers have accused prosecutors of conducting a politically-motivated witch hunt.
The former president has repeatedly rejected requests by prosecutors to appear for questioning, citing health issues.
His lawyers said on Thursday that he was unwell due to preexisting conditions, including a condition that meant there was a risk of him losing his eyesight.
In a reference to Yoon's position as a former top prosecutor, Oh, the spokesperson for the special prosecution, said the case was being closely scrutinised by the public.
'The suspect has consistently highlighted the importance of laws, principles, fairness and common sense and through this case people are watching if the law applies equally to everyone,' Oh said.
Separately, investigators requested that Yoon's wife Kim, who has also denied any wrongdoing, attend questioning on August 6. Kim's lawyers have said she would cooperate with the investigation.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
TimesLIVE
6 hours ago
- TimesLIVE
Rwanda reached deal with US to take in up to 250 migrants: government
The US and Rwanda have agreed for the African country to accept up to 250 migrants deported from the US, the spokesperson for the Rwandan government and an official told Reuters, as President Donald Trump's administration takes a hardline approach toward immigration. The agreement, first reported by Reuters, was signed by US and Rwandan officials in Kigali in June, said the Rwandan official, speaking on condition of anonymity, adding that Washington had already sent an initial list of 10 people to be vetted. "Rwanda has agreed with the United States to accept up to 250 migrants, in part because nearly every Rwandan family has experienced the hardships of displacement, and our societal values are founded on reintegration and rehabilitation," said the spokesperson for the Rwandan government, Yolande Makolo. "Under the agreement, Rwanda has the ability to approve each individual proposed for resettlement. Those approved will be provided with workforce training, health care and accommodation support to jumpstart their lives in Rwanda, giving them the opportunity to contribute to one of the fastest-growing economies in the world over the last decade." The White House and state department had no immediate comment. The department of homeland security referred questions to the state department. President Donald Trump aims to deport millions of immigrants in the US illegally and his administration has sought to ramp up removals to third countries, including sending convicted criminals to South Sudan and Eswatini.
IOL News
7 hours ago
- IOL News
ConCourt broadens interpretation of grazing rights under ESTA
The Constitutional Court ruled in favour of three brothers for their cattle to graze on the land belonging to a Trust. Image: Nicola Mawson THE Constitutional Court has afforded a broader interpretation to the Extension of Security of Tenure Act (ESTA) to include not only the right to reside on land, but also associated uses such as grazing and cultivation. This followed an appeal before the apex court by three brothers against a Supreme Court of Appeal judgment which denied them the right to graze cattle on the land they are staying on. The SCA judgment followed an earlier Land Claims Court (LCC) judgment, which ruled in favour of the Mereki brothers. They are occupiers in terms of ESTA and reside on a farm owned by a trust in the North West Province. The trust bought the farm in 2003 and the mother of the brothers previously occupied the farm and used it to graze cattle, but she had meanwhile died. According to the trust, the late Mrs Mereki derived consent to graze five heads of cattle due to her employment at the farm. According to the trust, the right was personal to Mrs Mereki and was not transferrable to her children upon her death. However, after her death, her sons continued to live on the farm and continued to use the land to graze their nine heads of cattle. They had never sought or obtained express consent to keep cattle on the farm. The Moladora Trust earlier turned to the LCC where they initially lost their legal bid for the brothers to remove their cattle. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading The LCC ruled that terminating grazing rights without engagement may constitute an eviction under ESTA. On appeal, the SCA held that the applicants never obtained explicit consent to graze livestock and that Mrs Mereki's right to do so did not automatically transfer to them upon her death. The brothers argued before the Constitutional Court that ESTA occupiers who had consent to reside on a farm acquired an automatic right to keep and graze cattle. Judge Owen Rodgers, who wrote the consenting ConCourt judgment, said this argument had far-reaching implications for the rights of both owners and ESTA occupiers, and the LCC, as a specialist forum, was best placed to determine it at first instance. The Court considered the historical background of dispossession and noted that the Constitution had been enacted with the intention of securing tenure and guaranteeing rights associated with the use of land for cultivation and grazing. It found that section 39(1) of the Constitution required that tenure under ESTA be given a broad and generous interpretation, rather than a narrow one. In interpreting ESTA, the court highlighted several provisions that referred not only to residence but also to the use of land. Particularly instructive were the definitions of 'evict' and 'terminate', along with other provisions envisaging that an occupier might have consent to cultivate crops or graze animals. The court held that the legislature had inconsistently included 'use of land' when referring to the right to 'reside on land'.
IOL News
7 hours ago
- IOL News
Court rules on former ConCourt Judge Yvonne Mokgoro's will
Late Justice Yvonne Mokgoro made an earlier will in 2014, but her children told the Kimberley High Court that the earlier will fell away as she made another will seven years later. Image: File The children of the former Constitutional Court Judge Yvonne Mokgoro, who passed away in May last year, turned to the court in a bid for the Master of the High Court to accept what they said is the last will and testament of their mother made in 2021. Judge Mokgoro made an earlier will in 2014, but her children told the Kimberley High Court that the earlier will fell away as she made another will seven years later. While both wills are basically the same, the only difference is in clause three of both wills. In the 2014 will in reference to this clause, the late judge left her share in a property to her life partner, Naledi Monyeki. In terms of her 2021 will, she left her share to her children and to a grandchild. Her son Ithatheng Mokgoro is the executor of her estate. None of the respondents, which included the Master, opposed the application, other than her life partner. After the passing of the deceased, Ithatheng contacted the fiduciary services company which handled the affairs of the late judge regarding her will. It was during this meeting that he learned that his mother had two wills. He examined the 2021 will more closely and noted that the place of signature had not been filled in at the appropriate place on the document. He also noted that the signatures on the 2021 will appear to be electronic signatures. This was confirmed by the witnesses. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ Monyeki, meanwhile, did not dispute that the late judge had instructed the 2021 will to be drawn up. He, however, forwarded several points in law as to why he disputed the 2021 will. This includes his argument that the Wills Act does not make provision for electronic signatures on the document. The court was told by counsel for the applicants that the 2021 will was drawn up by the financial company under the express direction of the deceased; and that it was clearly her intention that the 2021 will was to be her last will and testament. In declaring the 2021 document to be the last will and wish of the late judge, Judge Lawrence Lever said the email sent by her was clear. She asked two witnesses to electronically sign the new will, while she said she would also attach her electronic signature to the document. There was direct input from the deceased, and it could only have been on her direct instruction that the change in who was to benefit from her half share in the property could have been made, Judge Lever said. He also referred to the message by the late judge in which she said that she had done all she can to make her last will and testament as fair and uncomplicated as she can. He said Judge Mokgoro's wishes were clear and ordered the Master to accept her 2021 will. Cape Times
