Talk:Impeachment of Han Duck-soo

Ex officio

@Motjustescribe: Please provide a source saying that the FM is ex officio the deputy PM. Deputy PM in any case is the more important role here (because that means they take over from Han), so I also object to having it second even if it's indeed ex officio. Jasper Deng (talk) 23:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

It's spelled out in Article 19 Clause 3 of the Government Organization Act: "The Minister of Economy and Finance and the Minister of Education shall concurrently hold office as Deputy Prime Ministers." Deputy prime ministers aren't appointed and approved by the president of the National Assembly; finance and education ministers automatically assume the role of deputy ministers ex officio.

I don't object to ordering the titles the other way. Motjustescribe (talk) 23:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Court decision: pending

Hi. Does it mean Mr. Han is still the acting president and prime minister of South Korea until the court finalizes its decision? Aminabzz (talk) 19:25, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

I think given the circumstances in which he was impeached, he is the suspended PM first and the acting presidency is merely secondary. Borgenland (talk) 01:37, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

But in the article Han Duck-soo, in the infobox he doesn't still have the successor of PM role mentioned (while we know the successor is Choi Sang-mok). Aminabzz (talk) 15:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Probably a failure to update. Borgenland (talk) 15:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I updated it and the term end Aminabzz (talk) 15:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

|not_voting perimeter

I don't like how the infobox uses the |not_voting parameter to represent the two Constitutional Court judges who voted for dismissal. It's not as if they weren't part of the ruling process. Is there a better way we can address this? -- 00101984hjw (talk) 05:05, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

"Rejection", not "dismissal". Sorry about that. -- 00101984hjw (talk) 05:10, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Indeed that is weird; I don't quite understand the distinction between "reject" and "dismiss", but I think "reject" is closer to "against", so I've counted them as such and added a note below the graph. charlotte ^👸♥ 05:11, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

"Rejection" differs from "dismissal" in the sense that it rules that the bill has been prematurely ratified by the assembly and orders to return the bill for a second motion, whereas "dismissal" rules the bill itself as unconstitutional. The ambiguity here has been caused over the debate on whether PM Han was to be impeached with a minimum of 200 favor votes in the assembly (as a president would be) or with only 150 votes (as a prime minister would be). The bill was passed with only 192 votes.

That being said, I suggest we merge the votes for rejection and dismissal together, in the sense that they pretty much lead to the same result where the bill is not accepted. -- 00101984hjw (talk) 05:21, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Wait nvm, you just made the changes. Thx. -- 00101984hjw (talk) 05:22, 24 March 2025 (UTC)