South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol’s legal team has insisted that voter numbers must be verified to confirm the mismanagement of the election management system.
In a statement released Monday, Yoon’s legal representatives said, “The president cited the mismanagement of the election management system as one of the reasons for declaring martial law. “They added, “There have been several reports on election mismanagement, but the courts have never issued a search and seizure warrant, making proper verification impossible.”
They emphasized, “Therefore, verifying the mismanagement of elections is also essential in determining the legitimacy of the martial law declaration.”
The legal team stated that they had requested a verification process to compare the number of voters on election day, early voters within the district, and early voters outside the district with the actual voter list for the Yeonsu-eul constituency in the 20th general election, which was at the center of significant controversy. However, the Constitutional Court dismissed the request.
They explained that while the court did not provide specific reasons for the dismissal, the decision was presumed to have been influenced by the Supreme Court’s ruling on the election nullification lawsuit concerning the Yeonsu-eul constituency.
The legal team argued, “During the verification process conducted as part of the Supreme Court’s review, the National Election Commission (NEC) presented a voter list where both names and addresses were redacted, leaving only birth years. Because the authenticity of this voter list could not be confirmed, the verification process could not proceed.” They added, “The Supreme Court closed the case without raising any objections to the NEC’s presentation of an unreliable voter list.”
They further stated, “The Supreme Court conducted an inexplicable procedure, and as such incidents accumulated, suspicions regarding mismanagement only grew.”
Yoon’s legal representatives stressed, “A simple comparison of the number of voters announced by the NEC with the actual number of voters listed in the voter registry would be enough to resolve suspicions about election mismanagement.” They criticized the Constitutional Court’s decision, saying, “By refusing even this basic verification process, the Constitutional Court has effectively dismissed concerns over election mismanagement as conspiracy theories or preemptively decided not to review the case.”
They concluded, “A fair judge should first listen to our explanation of why we are requesting verification despite the Supreme Court’s ruling on the election nullification lawsuit and then decide on the admission of evidence. Preconceived notions must not sway the Constitutional Court, which should uphold the principle of a fair trial where the right to defense is guaranteed.”