A Nation At A Crossroads: South Korea's Election After Yoon's Authoritarian Bid

South Korea’s 2025 presidential election marks a moment of extraordinary consequence. What was initially forecast as a routine contest has become a national reckoning after outgoing president Yoon Suk Yeol was accused of attempting to invoke martial law. The scandal has shaken confidence in the country’s conservative establishment and prompted soul-searching over the health of its democratic institutions. With leftwing candidate Lee Jae-myung now the frontrunner, the vote is not just about economic policy or foreign affairs—it has become a referendum on the very direction of South Korea’s democracy.

Yoon Suk Yeol’s Presidency and the Martial Law Allegation

Yoon Suk Yeol’s presidency began with strong support from conservative voters who viewed his tough stance on North Korea and prosecutorial background as assets in an era of geopolitical uncertainty. However, his time in office became increasingly polarising. Critics accused his administration of overreach, particularly in its confrontational approach to political opposition and its attempts to limit judicial scrutiny of the executive.

The situation reached a crisis point earlier this year when investigative journalists uncovered leaked documents and testimony suggesting that Yoon or key figures in his circle had explored the possibility of declaring martial law in response to mass protests. The proposal, reportedly discussed in internal meetings, aimed to suspend parts of the constitution under the guise of restoring order—despite no credible security threat existing at the time.

The backlash was swift and severe. Legal scholars, opposition leaders, and even members of Yoon’s own party condemned the move as a reckless abuse of power. The National Assembly convened emergency hearings. Civil society groups staged round-the-clock vigils outside the presidential office. Though Yoon denied the claims and no formal charges have been brought to date, the damage to his legitimacy was irreversible.

Political Fallout and Collapse of Conservative Cohesion

The conservative establishment, long a dominant force in South Korean politics, fractured in the wake of the revelations. Senior lawmakers distanced themselves from Yoon, with several prominent ministers resigning in protest. The ruling People Power Party was thrown into disarray, cancelling public events and retreating from policy campaigning amid plummeting approval ratings.

Internal disputes soon turned to public infighting, with younger conservatives calling for a wholesale generational leadership change. Some factions attempted to rebrand the party entirely, but polling data showed a collapse in public trust. Weeks before the election, previously loyal constituencies—including middle-class professionals and older voters—signaled their intention to back alternative candidates or abstain altogether.

What had begun as a campaign rooted in traditional policy debates had, by March, become a struggle for moral legitimacy. The conservatives were no longer competing on economic stewardship or defense strategy, but fighting to retain relevance in a system they were accused of trying to subvert.

Lee Jae-myung’s Rise and the Reframing of the Left

In this vacuum, Lee Jae-myung emerged as the beneficiary of the public’s anger. A longtime standard-bearer of the progressive camp and former Gyeonggi Province governor, Lee had previously run against Yoon in 2022 and lost narrowly. That defeat helped him reframe his public image—from a populist firebrand to a leader with unfinished business and a renewed commitment to constitutional integrity.

Lee’s platform has blended ambitious social welfare goals with a strong anti-corruption agenda. But it is his rhetorical emphasis on protecting democratic norms that has resonated most deeply in the current climate. He has repeatedly framed the election not in terms of left versus right, but democracy versus regression.

This message has landed particularly well with younger voters, many of whom are politically disillusioned yet viscerally opposed to authoritarianism. Campus movements, artists, and small business owners have coalesced around his campaign, creating a decentralised but potent force that mimics the energy of South Korea’s 2016-17 candlelight protests.

Institutional Resilience and Electoral Safeguards

Despite the turmoil, South Korea’s institutions have so far shown resilience. The National Assembly moved swiftly to convene investigative panels into the martial law allegations. Media outlets, including conservative-leaning publications, pursued the story aggressively. Civil society remained active, demanding full transparency.

The National Election Commission has also played a critical role. Amid fears of voter suppression or manipulation, the Commission introduced additional ballot monitoring, opened independent oversight channels, and increased public outreach to reassure citizens that their votes would be counted fairly. International observers from the EU and East Asian democracies have been invited to monitor the vote.

Although the judiciary has yet to weigh in decisively on the constitutional implications of the martial law plan, its past rulings have suggested an independent posture. In this context, the checks and balances of South Korea’s democracy appear strained, but intact.

Broader Implications for South Korean Democracy

The Yoon Suk Yeol episode has exposed both the vulnerabilities and strengths of South Korean governance. On one hand, it laid bare how quickly executive power can be redirected toward anti-democratic ends, especially in moments of political instability. On the other, the public’s reaction—combined with robust civil mechanisms—prevented the scenario from escalating further.

This election will not resolve all structural challenges, but it may realign the relationship between citizens and state. If Lee wins, his administration will inherit not just economic and foreign policy challenges, but a mandate to reform governance itself. That could include prosecutorial independence, constitutional amendments, and military-civilian oversight mechanisms.

More broadly, the events have sparked regional reflection. Other democracies in East Asia, some of which have faced similar institutional pressures, are watching closely. The durability of South Korea’s democratic response could set a precedent for how liberal systems confront internal threats without capitulating to them.

Conclusion

As South Koreans head to the polls, they are not just electing a president. They are expressing a collective judgment on how their nation handles crisis, accountability, and leadership. Lee Jae-myung’s surge is less a triumph of progressive policy than a vote of confidence in procedural legitimacy.

Whether the conservative bloc can recover from this moment or whether South Korea’s political culture resets entirely remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: this election is not business as usual. It is a turning point in the country’s democratic story—a moment that will define its trajectory for years to come.

Author: Ricardo Goulart