The floor leaders of the ruling and opposition parties Monday agreed to accept whatever the Constitutional Court rules on the parliamentary impeachment of President Park Geun-hye.

It should be no wonder that the political parties of a democracy would obey judicial decisions. Disobedience to rulings by the top court is an act of repudiation to the constitutional order.

Yet the news of their agreement, though verbal, is a relief amid escalating confrontation between protestors for and against the impeachment motion. Some leading politicians on both sides openly uttered incendiary remarks, instigating disobedience and protest if the court decision were to go against their demands.

Former Gyeonggi Province Gov. Kim Moon-soo, a would-be president from the ruling Liberty Party of Korea, formerly the Saenuri Party, participated in a protest against the impeachment of Park on Saturday where he made an inflaming speech. “We should drive out the cruelest mob,” he said, referring to pro-impeachment protestors. “We should crush their revolution.”

Rep. Yoon Sang-hyun of the same party hosted a forum on the presidential impeachment in the National Assembly. Participants excoriated such institutions as the special counsel team investigating the corruption scandal involving Park and her friend, as well as the news media digging up the scandal.

Moon Jae-in, the front-runner in the presidential race and former leader of the opposition Democratic Party of Korea, said he would accept the ruling, but added the populace would not condone it if the court rejects the impeachment motion. The remark implies people should protest against the court if it decides to reinstate Park to office. In December, he came under fire for saying if the court turns down the impeachment motion, a revolution would be the final resort.

Lee Jae-myung, Seongnam mayor and a Democratic Party presidential candidate, engaged in demagoguery, saying “If the Constitutional Court ignores popular expectations and throws out the impeachment, the people should fight the court.”

It’s sophistry. There’s no higher court to appeal to than the Constitutional Court. Nevertheless, Lee was outspoken in saying he would disobey the decision to reject the impeachment.

If the situation continues, confrontation may escalate into chaos and violent clashes after the court decision either to uphold or reject the motion. To prevent the nation from falling into disorder, presidential candidates need to agree indisputably to respect the court ruling and not to foster protests after the decision, or to proclaim individually to do so if they find it hard to get together to sign such a deal.

As potential leaders of the nation seeking its unity, they should also try to persuade protestors to respect whatever the court decides.

The thing is, protestors are becoming recalcitrant. Protests are showing signs of going too far and becoming provocative.

The principal of a high school in Seoul criticized the parliamentary impeachment of Park in his speech to students last week, and members of a conservative parents’ group rallied for him in front of the school Tuesday. Whether a head teacher’s address to high school students denouncing the impeachment of Park is educational is certainly questionable.

Seo Seok-gu, one of the lawyers representing Park in her impeachment trial, entered the Constitutional Court with a Korean national flag draped over his shoulders. He showed the flag to spectators shortly before the start of a hearing. Outside the court, Seo has participated in anti-impeachment protests in which participants wave Korean and US national flags. His flag performance was restrained by a guard immediately, but his protest briefly encroached upon the sanctity of the Constitutional Court.

A television show host said he would participate in a pro-impeachment cultural event, and anti-impeachment protest organizers offered an open debate with him at their rally site.

Both sides have scheduled large rallies for Feb. 18, 25 and March 1. Feb. 25 is the fourth anniversary of President Park’s inauguration, and a pro-impeachment civic group plans to hold a coast-to-coast protest on that day.

More and more people are worried about a likely post-ruling collision between the two sides as the day of reckoning approaches. Not much time is left before the court rules on the impeachment motion. The pro-impeachment side demands it make a decision before March 13, when its acting Chief Justice Lee Jung-mi is to retire, while the anti-impeachment camp emphasizes prudent deliberations, preferably extending past March 13.

To ease growing public concern about possible disorder after the court ruling, protest organizers on both sides need to agree to respect it and refrain from protesting against the court.