 ▲ 20일 윤석열 대통령 탄핵심판 10차 변론기일이 열린 서울 종로구 헌법재판소 대심판정. ©공동취재 |
윤석열 대통령 측이 25일 헌법재판소 탄핵심판 11차 마지막 변론에서 '12·3 비상계엄은 대통령의 정당한 통치행위'라고 강변했다.
윤 대통령 측 법룰대리인단 이동찬 변호사는 이날 오후 서울 종로구 헌재 대심판정에서 열린 11차 최종변론에서 "야당이 다수 의석을 악용해 일방적 예산 삭감을 결정하는 건 정부 예산편성권을 약탈하는 것과 마찬가지'라며 이같이 강조했다.
그러면서 "야당은 이재명을 지키기 위해 셀프 방탄법을 통과시키고 이재명 수사를 방해하는 특검법 등을 추진했다. 야당이 22대 국회에서 발의한 각종 특검법 등이 정말로 국민을 위한 법이라 말할 수 있을지 모르겠다"며 "대통령은 국가 독립·영토 보전·국가 계속성·헌법을 수호할 책무를 진다(헌법 66조 2항), 이것이 바로 대통령이 비상계엄을 결심한 이유"라고 강조했다.
또 차기환 변호사는 "현재 국정은 구멍이 나 침몰 직전 상황을 모르는 배"라며 "비상계엄은 화재경보를 울려서라도 배를 구하고자했던 선장의 충정"이라고 했다. 또 "중국이 한국서 어떤 일을 벌이고 있으리란 것을 예상할 수 있다"며 부정선거 음모론·중국 연루설 등을 토대로 선관위 압수수색 필요성이 있었다는 논리를 재차 펼쳤다.
이어 김계리 변호사는 "비상계엄 후 담화문을 찬찬히 읽어보고 임신·출산·육아를 하느라 몰랐던 민주당 패악·일당독재·파쇼 행위를 확인하고 이 사건 변호에 참여케 됐다"며 "저는 계몽됐다"고 했다.
더불어 "(윤 대통령의 비상계엄 선포는) 반국가세력 사회장악·민주당 언론장악 시도·입법폭거 등 일당독재 파쇼행위에 대한 상황을 알리기 위한 대국민 호소용 계엄 선포였다"며 "그럼에도 민주당은 멈추지 않고 검사 3인·최재해 감사원장 탄핵소추안을 발의했다"고 지적했다.
송진호 변호사는 "윤 대통령은 위치 파악 확인만 요청했을 뿐"이라며 "지시가 하달되면서 뒤틀려진 바는 없지 않지만 실행에 옮긴 이들은 체포 지시를 받은 바 전혀 없다"고 했다. 곽종근 전 특수전사령관의 증언(국회의사당 안 사람들을 빨리 데리고 나오라는 지시를 직접 받았다)은 "오염된 진술"이고, 홍장원 전 국정원 1차장의 '체포조 메모'에 대해선 "(홍 전 차장) 진술이 번복되고 위증을 했으며 야당과 함께 내란몰이를 한 것"이라고 했다.
도태우 변호사는 "사법·입법·행정부 어느 쪽도 중앙선거관리위원회를 제대로 견제·감독하지 못해 자체적 정화 능력이 의심받고 있는 상황"이라며 "국가원수 지위인 대통령이 유일하게 선관위를 견제할 수 있었다"고 부정선거 문제를 근거로 들었다.
또 "(부정선거 관련 의혹을 모두 받아들이지 않은 대법원판결이) 추가 논의를 차단하는 근거로 악용돼선 안 된다"며 '해커는 사전투표용지 무단 인쇄가 가능했다'는 백종욱 전 국정원 제3차장 증언을 인용했다.
아래는 위 기사를 '구글 번역'으로 번역한 영문 기사의 [전문]입니다. '구글번역'은 이해도 높이기를 위해 노력하고 있습니다. 영문 번역에 오류가 있을 수 있음을 전제로 합니다.<*The following is [the full text] of the English article translated by 'Google Translate'. 'Google Translate' is working hard to improve understanding. It is assumed that there may be errors in the English translation.
President Yoon Seok-yeol's side: "An appeal to the public to inform about martial law and anti-state forces taking control of society"
Yoon's defense team's 11th final argument at the Constitutional Court: "I don't know if we can really say that various special prosecutor laws are laws for the people... It's to make known the situation of the Democratic Party's legislative tyranny and other one-party dictatorship and fascist acts."
-kihong Kim reporter
President Yoon Seok-yeol's side insisted in the 11th and final argument of the impeachment trial at the Constitutional Court on the 25th that "the 12/3 martial law was a legitimate act of government by the president."
Attorney Lee Dong-chan, a member of President Yoon's legal team, emphasized this during the 11th final argument held at the Constitutional Court in Jongno-gu, Seoul that "the opposition party's decision to unilaterally cut the budget by abusing its majority of seats is the same as plundering the government's budget formation authority."
In doing so, he said, "The opposition party passed the self-bulletproof law to protect Lee Jae-myung and pushed for special prosecutor laws to obstruct the investigation of Lee Jae-myung. I don't know if the various special prosecutor laws proposed by the opposition party in the 22nd National Assembly can truly be said to be laws for the people," and emphasized, "The president has the responsibility to protect national independence, territorial integrity, national continuity, and the Constitution (Article 66, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution). This is the reason the president decided to declare martial law."
Attorney Cha Ki-hwan also said, "The current state of affairs is a ship that has holes and is on the verge of sinking," and "Martial law is the loyalty of the captain who tried to save the ship even by sounding the fire alarm." He also once again argued that there was a need to search and seize the National Election Commission based on conspiracy theories about election fraud and China's involvement, saying, "We can expect that China is doing something in Korea."
Attorney Kim Gye-ri continued, "After carefully reading the statement made after martial law was declared, I realized the Democratic Party's evil, one-party dictatorship, and fascist acts that I had not known about while getting pregnant, giving birth, and raising a child. This led me to participate in the defense of this case. I was enlightened."
In addition, he pointed out that "(President Yoon's declaration of martial law) was a declaration of martial law to appeal to the public to inform them of the situation regarding the one-party dictatorship fascist acts such as the social control of anti-state forces, the Democratic Party's attempt to control the media, and the legislative tyranny," and "Despite this, the Democratic Party did not stop and proposed an impeachment motion against three prosecutors and Choi Jae-hae, the head of the Board of Audit and Inspection."
Attorney Song Jin-ho said, "President Yoon only requested confirmation of location," and "There may have been some distortion as the order was given, but those who carried it out were never given arrest orders." He said that the testimony of former Special Warfare Command commander Kwak Jong-geun (that he directly received orders to quickly bring people inside the National Assembly building out) was a "contaminated statement," and regarding the "arrest team memo" of former National Intelligence Service 1st Vice Director Hong Jang-won, "(Former Vice Director Hong) changed his statement, committed perjury, and joined the opposition party in inciting rebellion."
Attorney Do Tae-woo said, "Neither the judiciary, the legislature, nor the executive branch are properly checking and supervising the National Election Commission, so its self-purification ability is being questioned," and "The president, as the head of state, was the only one who could check and restrain the National Election Commission," citing the issue of election fraud as evidence.
He also said, "(The Supreme Court ruling that did not accept all suspicions related to election fraud) should not be used as a basis for blocking further discussions," and quoted the testimony of former 3rd Deputy Director of the National Intelligence Service Baek Jong-wook, who said, "Hackers were able to print early voting ballots without permission."
