Witnesses claim martial law was legal but ill-advised at Yoon's 7th impeachment hearing

Was the martial law on December third last year legally proclaimed?

That was the key question at President Yoon's seventh impeachment trial hearing on Tuesday.

Our Oh Soo-young starts us off.

President Yoon Seok Yeol's martial law was ill-advised but lawfully proclaimed, according to his officials who were present at his office on the night of December third.

This came at Yoon's seventh impeachment trial hearing, as more witnesses were summoned on Tuesday, amid claims by some senior Cabinet ministers that Yoon had bypassed the Cabinet procedures required by the Constitution before declaring the decree.

Former interior minister Lee Sang-min said otherwise.

While admitting a Cabinet meeting hadn't been called in advance, he said the seven or so members who initially gathered at the President's Office waited for the 11-member quorum to be filled,.. after which Yoon spoke briefly before proclaiming Martial Law on live TV.

Lee said he believes "those present considered themselves at a Cabinet meeting."

National Security Advisor Shin Won-sik also said he was told by the President's Chief-of-Staff that a Cabinet meeting was ongoing when he later arrived at the scene.

Both Lee and Shin said while they, along with other ministers and secretaries, tried to dissuade the President from declaring Martial Law, they understood the political context of the decision.

On this, Yoon took the chance to speak, reiterating his claim that the opposition Democratic Party had sabotaged the administration with a series of impeachments, and, a major budget cut.

The hearing also addressed the election fraud allegations raised by Yoon as a pretext for declaring martial law.

Former intelligence official Baek Jong-wook said the National Election Commission's servers upon inspection seemed highly vulnerable to external attack and could potentially trigger a social crisis.

But he wouldn't comment on election fraud, saying the servers hadn't been examined for such irregularities.

Secretary-General of the Election Commission Kim Yong-bin said he hadn't been made aware of the false voting ballots mentioned by Yoon's legal team, and insisted regular inspections were conducted.

Given the conflicting narratives and discrepancies with previous statements, experts say it's likely the Court will have to summon more witnesses,.. inevitably extending the trial date.

While the Court has focused on delivering a speedy verdict, the President's side has continued raising objections to the trial proceedings.

Yoon himself opposed the Court's decision to accept investigation records as evidence, arguing it is crucial to hear out witness statements in person.

However, the opposition has called for a quick end to the trial,.. saying the evidence is out there.

"Our patience is wearing thin. How much longer must we put up with baseless conspiracy theories about election fraud? There's already been enough consideration given to the respondent through this week's witness examination. We hope for a swift conclusion to the proceedings."

The Court on Tuesday rejected Yoon's request to summon Prime Minister Han Duck-soo as a witness, deeming it unnecessary.

The next and final hearing for now is scheduled for Thursday with three witnesses to testify.

Oh Soo-young, Arirang News.