A South Korean court dismissed a request to detain former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo in connection with a martial law case. Judges reviewed arguments from both the special counsel team and Han’s legal representatives. Moreover, they concluded that detention was not necessary due to insufficient grounds.
The special counsel had asked for a warrant to detain Han on six charges. These charges included abetting martial law, fabricating public documents, perjury, and violating presidential archive rules. However, Han denied all allegations except perjury during his hearing. He insisted that the accusations against him lacked legal foundation.
Additionally, the court examined a lengthy report submitted by prosecutors. Despite the report’s 362 pages, judges decided the evidence did not prove a risk of evidence destruction. They explained that exercising a right to defense differs from destroying records. Therefore, they could not support the detention request.
The court also considered Han’s personal and professional background. Judges highlighted his age, career, and family connections. Furthermore, they noted his cooperation during questioning and consistent attendance at legal procedures. Consequently, they concluded that Han posed no flight risk.
In their ruling, the judges emphasized that some of the legal claims require further debate. They said the actions attributed to Han remain open to interpretation under law. As a result, the court viewed the request as premature.
Han had attended the court hearing earlier in the day. The session lasted several hours before the final decision came in the evening. Following the rejection of the warrant, he avoided immediate detention. Meanwhile, prosecutors indicated they may pursue other legal steps as the investigation continues.
The case has drawn wide attention because of its ties to alleged insurrection charges against former President Yoon Suk Yeol. Several other officials remain in custody, including a former defense minister and a former interior minister. Yet, Han became the first Cabinet-level figure from Yoon’s government to avoid detention.
Observers noted that this outcome could affect future proceedings. It might influence how prosecutors pursue charges against other officials. Moreover, the court’s reasoning showed an emphasis on legal caution. Analysts believe this decision highlights the complexity of high-profile political cases in South Korea.
The dismissal of the detention warrant reflects the cautious approach courts often take in sensitive political matters. Therefore, the ruling underlines the challenges investigators face when handling allegations involving top officials.
