South Korea's extreme political polarization and acrimony put its democracy to the test when President Yoon Suk Yeol declared martial law late Tuesday, in an apparent preemptive move to prevent opposition parties from stymieing his presidency with budget cuts and the impeachment of key officials.

In such a crisis, democratic institutions demonstrated their resilience, a strength that has safeguarded the country’s young, but vibrant democracy, experts and observers said Wednesday.

Political commentator Park Chang-hwa said that, in the end, the swift resolution of the martial law standoff within just six hours was the result of both the parliamentary system’s checks and balances and the people’s right to resist.

“During the process of blocking the martial law declaration, the media closely scrutinized events, the National Assembly convened swiftly, and when lawmakers climbed fences and engaged in physical struggles, citizens stepped in to support them,” he told The Korea Herald. “Because all of this happened quickly, the situation could be contained at an early stage.”

At 10:28 p.m. on Tuesday, Yoon declared martial law in an urgent public address. The military immediately transitioned to a martial law command structure and issued orders which, among other things, prohibited “all political activities, including the activities of the National Assembly, local councils, political parties and political associations, as well as assemblies and demonstrations,” and placed all media and publications under the control of the martial law command.

The parliament moved swiftly.

The speaker of the National Assembly, Woo Won-shik, said, "The National Assembly will respond in accordance with constitutional procedures," and appealed to his fellow lawmakers: "All members of the National Assembly, please convene in the plenary chamber immediately."

The leaders of the ruling and opposition parties, who are usually at odds, joined forces, strongly criticizing Yoon's decree.

Han Dong-hoon, leader of the ruling People Power Party, stated, "The president's declaration of martial law is wrong." Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party, echoed, "The people did not authorize President Yoon's martial law."

By 1 a.m. Wednesday, the Assembly passed a resolution demanding the revocation of martial law with unanimous support from the 190 lawmakers present.

"I truly believe it was the people who stopped it,” Park said. “If the aides and the public hadn’t been able to block it, there could have been a situation where a few lawmakers were detained, resulting in a lack of a majority. If that had happened, it’s hard to imagine what could have unfolded."

The events highlighted both the strengths and weaknesses of South Korea’s democratic system. While the swift actions of media, lawmakers and citizens showcased the vitality of its institutions, experts argue the Constitution’s provisions on martial law remain vulnerable to misuse.

Experts stated that despite the current situation not being a wartime scenario as defined by the Constitution, the president's arbitrary interpretation could once again instill fear and anxiety among the public.

“This incident reveals the need for constitutional reform,” said Shin Yul, a political science professor at Myongji University. “The process for lifting martial law must be more immediate, and safeguards against arbitrary declarations should be strengthened.”

Also, the intensifying acrimony between Yoon and his liberal foes in the parliament, leading up to Tuesday’s martial law declaration, underscored a critical absence of political dialogue and compromise – a key element essential for any functioning democracy.

Ever since Yoon’s inauguration, South Korea has seen a recurring cycle of the opposition’s unilateral passage of contentious bills and Yoon’s persistent use of veto power.

Since taking office, Yoon has vetoed 25 bills — a record high for any president since the nation’s democratization. This figure is surpassed only by former President Syngman Rhee, who vetoed 45 bills during his 12-year tenure.