earticle

영어

This study examines the modes of positioning manifested in the 2025 Constitutional Court’s impeachment decision, employing the positioning theory of Davies & Harré (1990/1999) as a theoretical framework and adopting the analytical methodology proposed by Kayi-Aydar (2019). At a more granular level, the analysis follows the typology of positioning modes outlined by van Langenhove & Harré (1999), with the aim of identifying the specific features of each mode as employed in the Court's discourse. The analysis reveals that the Court dismissed the respondent’s argument that the declaration of martial law constitutes an act of high-level political discretion as a personal positioning mode lacking legal foundation. The Court further engaged in a deliberate other-positioning mode to morally censure both the respondent and, to an extent, the petitioner. Ultimately, the Court assigned legal responsibility for the constitutional violation through a performative positioning mode, culminating in the respondent’s removal from office. Additionally, the Court demonstrated a deliberate self-positioning mode, presenting itself as a unanimous collegial body that adjudicates ‘separately yet together,’ while also acknowledging the presence of concurring supplemental opinions.