South Korean prosecutors seek death penalty for former President Yoon on insurrection charge
Former Prosecutor General Yoon Suk-yeol speaks to declare his bid for presidency at a memorial dedicated to the noble sacrifice of independence fighter Yun Bong-gil on June 29, 2021 in Seoul, South Korea. (Photo by Kim Min-Hee – Pool/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — South Korean prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for former President Yoon Suk Yeol, who is standing trial on charges of leading an insurrection.
During a 17-hour closing hearing on Tuesday, prosecutors argued that Yoon’s alleged actions posed a grave threat to the constitutional order and warranted the maximum punishment allowed under South Korean law. The former president has been on trial since he was impeached last April on charges that he led an insurrection by attempting to impose martial law in December 2024. Insurrection is one of the few crimes still punishable by death in the country.
“The fact that prosecutors sought the death penalty may be because former President Yoon continues to maintain that his actions were justified and has shown no remorse or acknowledgment of wrongdoing,” Jungkun Seo, a professor at Seoul’s Kyung Hee University, told ABC News Wednesday.
“It was widely expected that the outcome would be either the death penalty or life imprisonment,” Seo said.
South Korea has not carried out an execution in nearly 30 years, and legal observers said the prosecution’s request was consistent with past practice in cases involving former leaders accused of insurrection, even if the likelihood of an execution remains low.
Many lawmakers from the Democratic Party welcomed the call for the death penalty following the hearing.
“Calling for the death penalty for Yoon is not a matter of choice but a necessity and cannot be considered excessive,” Moon Geum-ju, a Democratic Party floor spokesperson, said in a statement Wednesday.
Moon said suggesting a lesser sentence for someone accused of undermining the Constitution and plunging the country into crisis would be an affront to justice and common sense.
Meanwhile, lawmakers from the conservative People Power Party appeared to distance themselves from the former president, declining to issue an official statement on the case.
Party leader Jang Dong-hyuk told reporters Wednesday that the special prosecutor’s sentencing request was not an issue he should comment on, adding that he expects the court to conduct a fair trial.
The presidential office said it expects the judiciary to rule in accordance with the law and public expectations.
Two former South Korean presidents were convicted of insurrection in the 1990s for their roles in a 1979 military coup. Prosecutors at the time sought the death penalty for former President Chun Doo-hwan and a life sentence for his successor, Roh Tae-woo.
Chun was initially sentenced to death, though the sentence was later commuted to life imprisonment. Roh was sentenced to 17 years in prison. Both men were released after serving about two years following a presidential pardon, which the government at the time described as necessary for national reconciliation.
The court is scheduled to deliver a final verdict on Feb. 19 at the Seoul Central District Court.
The logo of the United Nations at the General Debate of the UN General Assembly in New York. Over 140 heads of state and government are expected to attend the world’s largest diplomatic event over several days. Photo: Kay Nietfeld/dpa (Photo by Kay Nietfeld/picture alliance via Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — The United Nations said Friday that U.S. airstrikes on alleged drug trafficking boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific Ocean violate international human rights law and must stop.
In a statement to ABC News, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk said that the attacks breach international law and called for an investigation into the strikes.
“These attacks – and their mounting human cost – are unacceptable. The U.S. must halt such attacks and take all measures necessary to prevent the extrajudicial killing of people aboard these boats, whatever the criminal conduct alleged against them,” Türk said.
“Under international human rights law, the intentional use of lethal force is only permissible as a last resort against individuals who pose an imminent threat to life,” he added. “Based on the very sparse information provided publicly by the U.S. authorities, none of the individuals on the targeted boats appeared to pose an imminent threat to the lives of others or otherwise justified the use of lethal armed force against them under international law.”
White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly told ABC News that President Donald Trump is working to eliminate threats to U.S. security.
“The UN has failed at everything from operating an escalator to ending wars — it’s ridiculous that they are now lecturing President Trump and running cover for evil narcoterrorists trying to murder Americans. The President acted in line with the laws of armed conflict to protect our country from those trying to bring poison to our shores, and he is delivering on his promise to take on the cartels and eliminate these national security threats from destroying lives,” Kelly said.
Since September, President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have executed over a dozen military strikes against boats in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific, arguing they are anti-drug and counter-terrorism measures.
Over 60 people have allegedly been killed in the strikes, according to U.S. officials.
In announcing the latest and most deadly strike Wednesday, Hegseth said the U.S. “carried out a lethal kinetic strike on yet another narco-trafficking vessel operated by a Designated Terrorist Organization in the Eastern Pacific.”
“This vessel, like all the others, was known by our intelligence to be involved in illicit narcotics smuggling, was transiting along a known narco-trafficking route, and carrying narcotics,” he added.
This is the first time the U.N. has condemned the strikes.
“The United States should investigate and, if necessary, prosecute and punish individuals accused of serious crimes in accordance with the fundamental rule of law principles of due process and fair trial, for which the U.S. has long stood,” a statement from his office reads.
Ravina Shamdasani, a spokeswoman for Türk, mirrored this sentiment at a Friday U.N. briefing.
“These attacks and their mounting human cost are unacceptable. The U.S. must halt such attacks and take all measures necessary to prevent the extrajudicial killing of people aboard these boats,” she said.
French police officers stand in front of the Louvre Museum after a robbery in Paris, France, on October 19, 2025. (Photo by Jerome Gilles/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
(LONDON) — Investigators have collected more than 150 trace samples, including fingerprints, bits of DNA and other silent evidence, from the scene of the Louvre heist, a source close to the Minister of the Interior in France has told ABC News.
The samples are now being analyzed in Paris as authorities work to identify the suspects and the manhunt for the four main suspects in the brazen heist enters its sixth day on Friday.
Investigators have said they are in a race against time to catch the culprits, fearing they will dismantle the eight pieces they got away with and attempt to fence the many diamonds, precious stones and gold piecemeal.
On Thursday, a dramatic video surfaced capturing two of the thieves wanted in the brazen $102 million jewel heist at the Louvre as they exited the crime scene on a mobile cherry picker and fled on motorbikes with the loot.
Two French law enforcement sources confirmed to ABC News on Thursday that investigators are aware of the video and are reviewing it for clues as part of the investigation. The sources said the video was taken from inside the Louvre by members of the museum security staff.
The video, circulating online and verified by ABC News, shows the two thieves coming down from the targeted Apollo Gallery at the world-famous museum in a truck-mounted mechanical cherry picker.
In the footage, alarms can be heard going off in the background. The alleged perpetrators — one wearing a motorcycle helmet and the other covering their face with a balaclava and wearing a yellow construction worker vest – are seen making their way to the street.
Across the street from the escaping thieves, people can be seen walking and jogging along the Seine River as traffic goes by. The thieves are then seen jumping on a motorcycle and speeding off with the jewels.
French investigators said the entire robbery from start to getaway took seven minutes.
Among the eight pieces of jewelry taken was a pearl and diamond tiara from the collection of Queen Marie-Amelie and Queen Hortense, according to the Louvre. The tiara, according to the Louvre, is composed of 212 pearls of various sizes and nearly 2,000 diamonds. The piece was commissioned by Emperor Napoleon III for his marriage to Eugenie de Montijo in 1853.
Also stolen was another tiara from the collection of Queen Marie-Amelie and Queen Hortense composed of sapphires and 1,083 diamonds, according to the Louvre.
Officials said earlier this week that evidence collected so far points to “organized crime,” but added that investigators have not ruled out that the heist could have been an inside job.
The flag of Greenland, known locally as “Erfalasorput” flies next to the Church of Our Saviour on March 30, 2025 in Nuuk, Greenland. (Leon Neal/Getty Images)
(LONDON) — U.S. officials are expected to meet with Danish and Greenlandic counterparts in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday, amid President Donald Trump’s continued expressions of intent to acquire the semi-autonomous Arctic territory despite collective opposition in both Copenhagen and Nuuk.
Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen and Greenlandic Foreign Minister Vivian Motzfeldt are set to lead the delegation to meet with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance. Greenland is a self-governing territory within the Kingdom of Denmark.
In Denmark, “this is the big national news,” Jonas Parello-Plesner, a Danish political analyst and former diplomat, told ABC News. “If in the first Trump period the saying was, ‘You should take him seriously, but not literally,’ I think the saying this time around is, ‘You should both take him seriously and literally.'”
Trump first raised the prospect of acquiring the territory during his first term, when Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen dismissed the idea as “absurd.” Trump’s second term has seen the president speak more aggressively about the proposal.
“Even from a year ago, I see a quite stark difference in both Greenlandic and Danish attitudes that this is actually potentially really serious and life changing for the Kingdom of Denmark,” said Parello-Plesner, who is now the executive director at the Copenhagen-based nonprofit Alliance of Democracies Foundation.
Mikkel Runge Olesen, a senior researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies, told ABC News that the furor is prompting deeper questions among Danes and Greenlanders about their long-standing ties to the U.S.
“Is this who the U.S. is now? A superpower going around, invading its small democratic allies?” he asked. “That’s scary to think of.”
“Just think of what it will do for the American alliance system worldwide,” he added. “What kind of signal it sends — if you’re allied with the U.S., you may be invaded whenever it suits the U.S.”
‘You need ownership’ Trump has repeatedly suggested that U.S. sovereignty over the world’s largest island is necessary to ensure American security and blunt Chinese and Russian influence in the Arctic region.
As a part of the Kingdom of Denmark, Greenland is covered by NATO’s collective defense clause. Greenland hosts the U.S. Pituffik Space Base and around 150 American troops, the U.S. having significantly downgraded its footprint from its high point during the Cold War.
A 1951 defense agreement grants the U.S. military access to Greenland, and Danish politicians have repeatedly expressed willingness to work with Washington to expand the American and NATO presence there.
Danish officials have also sought to head off concerns about the supposed vulnerability of the Arctic. Last year, Copenhagen announced a $6.5 billion Arctic defense package in response to U.S. criticism that it had failed to adequately protect Greenland.
But Trump and his administration appear undeterred. “One way or the other, we’re going to have Greenland,” the president told reporters aboard Air Force One this weekend.
“If we don’t take Greenland, Russia or China will and I’m not letting that happen,” Trump said, before deriding Denmark’s military strength on the island.
“Basically, their defense is two dog sleds,” Trump said. “In the meantime, you have Russian destroyers and submarines and China destroyers and submarines all over the place.”
Asked if there was a deal to be done to avoid further tensions, Trump said he would “love to” because “it would be easier.”
But when pressed, the president said, “I could put a lot of soldiers there right now if I want. But you need more than that. You need ownership.”
Ahead of this week’s meeting, Danish and Greenlandic politicians issued statements again rebuffing any suggestion of a U.S. acquisition of the island, statements which were backed by other European leaders.
“If the United States decides to attack another NATO country, then everything would stop — that includes NATO and therefore post-World War II security,” Frederiksen said in a statement.
“Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Greenland is a member of NATO through the Commonwealth and therefore the defense of Greenland is through NATO,” the government in Nuuk said in a statement.
On Wednesday, Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen posted a photo to social media showing a message sent to him by Frederiksen.
“Greenland will not be owned by the United States,” the message — written in Greenlandic — said. “Greenland does not want to be ruled by the United States. Greenland does not want to be a part of the United States. We want Greenland to continue to function as part of the Kingdom.”
The leaders of all five political parties holding seats in Greenland’s parliament also released a joint statement. “We do not want to be Americans, we do not want to be Danes, we want to be Greenlanders,” they said.
Before heading to the U.S. on Tuesday, Rasmussen — the Danish foreign minister — told reporters in Copenhagen, “Our reason for seeking the meeting we have now been given was to move this whole discussion, which has not become less tense since we last met, into a meeting room where we can look each other in the eye and talk about these things.”
Appealing to ‘the deal-maker’ Olesen, of the Danish Institute for International Studies, said Trump’s most recent comments “should worry Danish politicians.” His apparent dismissal of Copenhagen’s efforts to bolster its Arctic readiness “means that either he hasn’t noticed” or “he doesn’t care. And either way, it’s pretty bad.”
Trump told The New York Times he believed U.S. ownership of Greenland “is what I feel is psychologically necessary for success.” That, too, is “problematic” for Copenhagen, Olesen said. “How do you deal with that?” he asked.
“That’s the conundrum for the Danish and the Greenlandic politicians,” Olesen said, “trying not to provoke Trump too much and trying to give him something.”
“It will be difficult to offer a compromise if all he wants is ownership,” he added.
Parello-Plesner, the former Danish diplomat, said the experiences of other nations during Trump’s second term may offer models.
Trump’s focus on Panama and perceived Chinese overreach produced a proposed deal for a U.S. firm to take control of two ports there owned by a Hong Kong conglomerate. The president described the deal as “reclaiming the Panama Canal.”
José Raúl Mulino, the president of Panama, addressed Trump’s comments about the Panama Canal in a post on X last March, saying in part: “President Trump is lying again. The Panama Canal is not in the process of being recovered, and this was certainly not a topic of discussion in our conversations with Secretary Rubio or anyone else. On behalf of Panama and all Panamanians, I reject this new affront to the truth and to our dignity as a nation.”
In Ukraine, Kyiv alleviated U.S. pressure by agreeing to a rare earth minerals sharing deal as part of the U.S.-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund.
“There’s also a very pragmatic side to Trump — the deal maker,” Parello-Plesner said. “I think our side needs to give him something to work with,” he added.
That could mean fresh commitments on American military deployments in Greenland, a deal related to the territory’s untapped mineral wealth or a pledge to do more to block autocratic states from asserting their Arctic ambitions, Parello-Plesner said.
It is unclear what might appeal to the U.S. side, he continued. “We’ve seen for 30 years that the U.S. has just wanted to cut down on the presence up there and only uses it for limited missile defense purposes,” he said.
Regarding Greenland’s believed mineral wealth, Parello-Plesner said the U.S. government and private companies have been largely uninterested given the territory’s inhospitable weather and terrain, extraction challenges and global market forces.
A symbolic win might be enough to take the heat out of Trump’s push, Olesen said.
“It’s going to be interesting to see how far Danish and Greenlandic politicians feel they can go in order to avoid being humiliated, in order to avoid handing over the Greenlandic underground to a bully,” Olesen continued.
“But then again, the stakes are so high, so I wouldn’t rule it out, and I wouldn’t rule out that if this is something that could solve the crisis.”
In the meantime, both analysts said Copenhagen and Nuuk are likely to focus on bolstering the image of domestic unity, European solidarity, backing from the U.S. Congress and NATO-led Arctic security.
“The Trump policy line is not invulnerable,” Olesen said, noting pushback from U.S. voters and members of Congress — including prominent Republicans.
“At some point, Trump may decide that it’s not worth the bother anymore, and in that case, it would probably be wise to offer him some way to save face and get out of it,” he said.
But months of back and forth over Greenland have already done significant damage to transatlantic sentiment in Denmark, Parello-Plesner said, in a country he said has long prided itself on broad support for NATO and for close relations with the U.S. Danish forces, for example, sustained a comparable per capita casualty rate as the U.S. in the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan.
That strength of feeling, he said, “has dropped tremendously.”
