
Learning history’s lessons: how martial law was resisted in South Korea
Hanseul Lee describes the dramatic role of young people in defending the nation’s democratic institutions.
On the night of Tuesday, 3 December, President Yoon Suk-Yeol declared martial law across South Korea. Calling for the elimination of ‘anti-social’ forces, the decree involved the contentious ban of political activity by parties and the National Assembly – an institution that serves a parliamentary role in South Korea –, as well as the censorship of media outlets.
This very much resembled the last martial law declared by the authoritarian leader Chun Doo-Hwan in 1979, who was a military dictator. For those generations who had gone through the previous martial law, which went from 1979 to 1980, Yoon’s abrupt action brought back traumatic memories of living under an authoritarian regime without democracy.
As soon as martial law was declared, Assembly members raced to the building, some even climbing over its fence to get in. While armed helicopters and the military rushed to guard the main entrance, citizens attempted to block further military personnel carriers from entering the National Assembly.
The dramatic overnight events were livestreamed by citizens as well. Given that the Assembly passed a motion to illegalise the martial law about two hours after Yoon’s declaration, the president lifted the martial law at 4am the next day. While many refer to this martial law as a failed coup which only lasted for six hours, it was simultaneously a trigger for a big wave of political, economic, and social changes across Seoul.
The opposition party took the initiative to impeach Yoon. In South Korea, a president can be impeached through the National Assembly but the Constitutional Court must confirm it. If the Constitutional judges had rejected the impeachment, Yoon could have returned to office.
Yet, even the very first step toward impeaching Yoon faced challenges. The ruling People’s Power Party (PPP) politicians boycotted the vote on 7 December, ultimately discarding the impeachment bill. While this was another test for South Korea’s democracy in the wake of the martial law declaration, it also promoted social cohesion.
Korean citizens – particularly women in their 20’s and 30’s – heralded democracy through creative demonstration methods. The so-called traditional popular songs that used to be sung during demonstrations were now remixed with the Gen-Z’s list of K-pop songs.
The light sticks used to illuminate stadiums to cheer K-pop artists became a tool to voice public support for the impeachment of the president, no matter which ‘fandom’ people belonged to.
The use of light sticks goes back to a politician’s claim in 2017 that ‘candlelights would die when strong wind blows’, when the majority of Koreans participated in candlelight demonstrations to impeach the former president Park Geun-Hye.

Citizens also brought flags bearing unique messages like ‘Union of 18-year-olds who just finished Korean SAT’ or ‘National Procrastination Union’. This was to defend against the claim that anti-social forces were manipulating citizens to impeach the president; the citizens themselves were proving that they were active agents.
Finally, there was the practice of ‘paying-in-advance’. With the street demonstrations taking place every day amidst the cold weather in Seoul, both citizens and celebrities privately paid in advance at restaurants or cafés near the National Assembly building.
All citizens who participated in the pro-impeachment demonstration could get whatever menu they pre-ordered for free. Some cafés even distributed coffee free of charge, even if this meant a significant financial loss for them. As they could not leave their cafés unmanned, they believed that giving out free drinks would be their own way to support democracy.
These innovative forms of demonstration culture had a butterfly effect, in that similar patterns could be observed in other social protests. For instance, when a group of farmers demonstrated by driving tractors toward Seoul (having notified the police in advance), many of the earlier mentioned women in their 20’s and 30’s supported them by guarding the tractors all day from any potential attack from the police, and by calling on policemen to let the tractors through.
The wave of demonstrations spread beyond the Korean borders. South Korean young people studying abroad also stood up to make their voices heard in international communities. On 11 December, 201 South Korean students and alumni from 14 London Universities signed for Yoon’s impeachment and punishment.
The students claimed that the martial law was a traumatic experience for them, as they were powerless to physically support the protests back at home and their national pride was ‘utterly shattered’.
On the one hand, martial law recalled the darkest years in Korean democracy. On the other, Koreans saw hope in the apparent darkness before them.
Due to the radical backlash, PPP had no other choice but to join the voting held on 14 December. With 204 votes for the bill, Yoon was impeached by the Parliament.

The democratic system in South Korea worked again, yet its repercussions are likely to last in the country’s economy and politics. With the constant depreciation of the Korean Won against the US Dollar ever since 3 December, the economic growth forecast for 2025 is gloomy for Seoul (as an export-oriented economy).
And the situation continues open-ended given that Yoon is resisting arrest, holed up in his residence with supporters around it as a human wall to protect him. The impeachment trial is due to start on January 14 and could take six months but there is hope that the Constitutional Court will make the decision much earlier than this.
It is clear that Yoon’s martial law came as a shock to the international community, testing the resilience of the country’s democracy. But the way South Koreans resisted the dangerous pretensions of the now impeached president offers a vision as to how South Korean society should go forward in the near future.
South Korea’s youth have shown real interest in politics and a commitment to the nation’s democracy. Its women have had a significant role in the making and defence of the country’s laws and they must henceforth always have a role in these processes.
Furthermore, national social issues must no longer be the lonely fight of vulnerable people but something that should be discussed throughout the whole society for ongoing improvement.
Last but not least, martial law showed that education in history matters. By remembering what had gone before, the people learnt not to make the same mistake again. Martial law was not just an ever weaker distant memory, but something that could still affect our daily life in any period, now or in the future.
Like what you’ve read? Consider supporting the work of Adamah by making a donation and help us keep exploring life’s big (and not so big) issues!

Hanseul Lee
Hanseul Lee is a final-year undergraduate student at the London School of Economics, reading International Relations and History. As an aspiring diplomat, she is passionate about exploring and seeking solutions to the pressing global challenges we face today. She wishes to contribute to the world in a positive way through her work.

