Seoul, Jan 16 The South Korean Constitutional Court said on Thursday that it has rejected President Yoon Suk Yeol's request to postpone a hearing on his impeachment scheduled for later in the day.
The second formal hearing of the impeachment trial is scheduled later in the day, but Yoon's lawyers requested a postponement.
Yoon skipped the first hearing on Tuesday, leading it to end after 4 minutes, Yonhap news agency reported.
Earlier on January 15, impeached South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol was taken to a detention centre where he spent the night before undergoing further questioning over his imposition of martial law.
Yoon was escorted to the Seoul Detention Centre in Uiwang, 22 km south of Seoul, after being questioned for over 10 hours at the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) in nearby Gwacheon.
"The questioning of President Yoon ended at 9:40 p.m.," the CIO said in a notice to the press.
Yoon refused to answer questions regarding his declaration of martial law on December 3, according to the CIO. He was scheduled for further questioning on Thursday before investigators filed for a warrant to formally arrest him within 48 hours of his detention at 10:33 a.m. on Wednesday.
Yoon, the first sitting president to be arrested, had been detained by investigators at his official residence in central Seoul after their initial attempt to detain him in early January failed due to a standoff with presidential security personnel, Yonhap news agency reported.
The questioning sessions were held inside an interrogation room at the CIO headquarters and led by deputy CIO chief Lee Jae-seung, among others, with one of Yoon's lawyers present. The questioning was not recorded on video due to Yoon's objections, according to the CIO.
Yoon, who had been suspended from duty following his impeachment by the National Assembly on December 14, faced charges of insurrection and abuse of power.
He was accused of sending troops to the National Assembly after declaring martial law on the night of December 3 to prevent lawmakers from voting down the decree.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor