Forty-three days after President Yoon Suk Yeol declared martial law, investigators arrived at his official residence in Hannam-dong with a second warrant to detain him for questioning.

This time, they brought additional officers to help carry out the order. Yoon and his lawyers confronted the investigators for several hours, arguing over the criminal investigation into allegations of insurrection. The president delayed the process by requesting to voluntarily walk in for questioning, a request that was promptly denied. One fortunate aspect of executing the detention warrant was that there was no violent or bloody confrontation between the police, the Corruption Investigation Office for High-Ranking Officials (CIO), and the Presidential Security Service (PSS).

Around 1,000 investigators gathered in the early morning hours as supporters and opponents of the president took their positions. However, the entry into the official presidential residence was carried out relatively peacefully. Unlike the first attempt, about 500 PSS officials did not resist or engage in chaotic confrontations. Many viewers who had been watching the live broadcast since the early morning experienced a mixture of emotions, witnessing the regrettable event of Korea's first sitting president being detained. Yet, there was a certain sense of relief, as no violent confrontations or casualties occurred.

This time, the investigators were well-prepared, and the Korean public, uncertain and wary for over a month, waited for the president to step forward.

And he did.

Before leaving the presidential residence, Yoon stated that the "law has completely collapsed" in the nation and that he was heading to the CIO to "prevent bloody clashes." These comments seemed aimed at improving his chances of refuting the CIO's warrants and the joint investigation. While not acknowledging it publicly, one can hope that the president recognizes he could have avoided detention had he cooperated from the beginning and voluntarily appeared for questioning in the ongoing criminal investigation into insurrection, which runs parallel to the Constitutional Court's review. Going further back, the president could have taken greater steps to persuade the large opposition bloc in the National Assembly toward cooperative politics. Senior government and military officials who followed his orders on Dec. 3 are now either arrested or indicted on charges of insurrection and abuse of power. Main opposition Democratic Party of Korea leader Lee Jae-myung called the situation regrettable, but emphasized that "now is the time to recover constitutional order and focus on livelihood issues." Meanwhile, Kweon Seong-dong of the ruling People Power Party lamented the damage to the nation's status.

The world also watched closely.

A spokesperson for the White House National Security Council expressed appreciation for the efforts of all citizens "to act in accordance with the Constitution."

Rather than invoking his right to remain silent, the president should choose to cooperate fully with the investigations, offering a transparent and straightforward account of how and why martial law was declared in early December — especially in a nation as advanced as Korea. The democratic progress Korea has achieved stands on the sacrifices of its citizens and it is to them that we owe the enduring strength of our democracy. The president should take the lead in reaffirming that this resilience continues to guide the nation. In the same spirit, both the ruling and opposition parties, along with all those in government service, should unite in their efforts to further strengthen and stabilize Korea's democracy for the benefit of all of its people.

The president's cooperation with the legal processes surrounding the investigation and his compliance will send a powerful national message: that in Korea's democracy, the law applies fairly and justly to everyone. However, should he attempt to bend the law in order to justify preferential interpretations under the pretext of his position as sitting president, he will send a dangerous message to the nation. This could deepen the public's uncertainty, sow fear, and ultimately fuel anger, undermining the very foundations of trust in the rule of law.

Separately, the Constitutional Court has begun deliberating whether to remove him over the imposition of the Dec. 3 martial law. Yoon has argued that the decree was a legitimate act of governance, aimed at countering what he referred to as "anti-state" opposition that he claimed sought to undermine his agenda. As he has stated that he will not shy away from legal and political accountability for his actions, he must prove that he is a man of his word by fully cooperating with both the court's review and the joint criminal investigation led by the CIO.