Much of Yoon Suk Yeol’s rise to presidency, despite his limited political experience, is owed to his image as a steadfast prosecutor who refused to compromise on his principles in the pursuit of justice.

In 2013, under the Park Geun-hye administration, then-prosecutor Yoon blew the whistle on external pressures from higher-ups attempting to prevent him from delving deeper into the National Intelligence Service’s alleged interference in local elections. “I am loyal to the law, not individuals,” he famously said. This, however, led to his demotion under the conservative Park administration.

Under the subsequent liberal administration of President Moon Jae-in, his image as a charismatic and unyielding prosecutor was further solidified, when he led investigations into then-Justice Minister Cho Kuk and clashed head on with Cho’s successor, Choo Mi-ae. These actions garnered him favor among the right, in a dramatic shift from his previous popularity among the left-wing faction. His image as a figure of uncompromising integrity stayed regardless, propelling him to the top of presidential polls.

As a prosecutor, Yoon’s firmness was an asset. A prosecutor’s role demands unwavering adherence to principles, impervious to external pressures.

But, politics is a different realm. The essence of political leadership lies not in rigidity but in flexibility. Winning public support requires the ability to explain policies, persuade citizens and engage in dialogue with opponents. Without these, even the most well-intentioned policies risk being misunderstood or facing setbacks.

This distinction became apparent early in Yoon’s presidency. Eleven days after winning the election, he announced the relocation of the presidential office to Yongsan, a move that surprised many and sparked criticism.

Previous presidents had made similar pledges, yet refrained from action after listening to advice about logistical and political challenges. Yoon, however, was so fixated on moving that he disregarded calls for broader consultation and even calls to not rush so that essential security work could be done.

While his stated motives to strengthen security and improve public communication may have been genuine, his refusal to spend even a single day in the previous presidential office and residence resulted in public backlash and a misunderstanding of his intentions.

Similarly, his diplomatic efforts were met with criticisms of unilateralism at home. In March last year, Yoon announced that South Korea would no longer seek compensation from Japan for forced labor during the colonization, marking a significant concession to Japan on an issue that had strained relations between the two countries. On Japan’s release of treated wastewater from Fukushima nuclear plants into the ocean, Yoon also bucked widespread public criticism at home and chose to support the Japanese government’s decision.

Though foreign policy experts acknowledged the necessity of mending the relationship, they argued that greater dialogue with the public, particularly with victims of forced labor regarding issues directly affecting them, could have mitigated misunderstandings and strengthened support for his initiatives.

Domestically, Yoon’s prosecutorial approach -- direct and uncompromising -- often clashed with the collaborative nature of governance. His handling of labor unions, nurses, doctors, journalists, farmers and other groups led to escalating tensions. These conflicts were frequently followed by declines in public support for Yoon.

Although Yoon said he was unconcerned with dwindling popularity, his consistently low approval ratings were a major factor behind the ruling party’s crushing defeat in the midterm elections this April, perhaps more decisive than the main opposition's success in drawing votes.

Facing a parliament dominated by opposition parties, Yoon’s uncompromising character remained unchanged. Although many of the government's key policy initiatives required legislative support, he was reluctant to engage in dialogue with the opposition, sticking instead to his adversarial approach.

An illustration of this: Yoon’s first meeting with main opposition leader Lee Jae-myung occurred 720 days into his term — the latest such meeting in South Korea’s presidential history. The meeting, held just nine days after the ruling party’s midterm election defeat to Lee's party, was largely symbolic, with no meaningful cooperation resulting from it.

Yoon consistently labeled the opposition party as an "anti-state force" and maintained a no-compromise, hardline stance in dealing with a National Assembly dominated by the opposition. This approach deepened political polarization and underscored the entrenched divisions that defined his administration.

Yoon’s presidency has not been without merit. Some of his policies hold potential. However, the lack of public persuasion and efforts toward bipartisan cooperation undermined their success. Officials within the presidential office told The Korea Herald there is a lack of advisors willing to offer candid feedback to Yoon – and he is not willing to listen.

It appears that Yoon did not even communicate with Han Dong-hoon, who was his loyal ally from the years at the prosecution. Both presidential office officials and Han’s aides confirmed to reporters that there had been no direct interaction between the two. Han, after becoming chair of the ruling party, ultimately turned his back on Yoon, and the defection of pro-Han factions became a decisive factor in the impeachment against Yoon being passed.

In the process of declaring martial law -- a decision that upended the nation and ultimately led to his removal from office -- Yoon admitted to having consulted only the minister of defense, bypassing broader consultation or input from other key advisors.

Yoon appeared to demonize the opposition party and attempt to suppress it with force, perceiving that all his desired government operations had been paralyzed by their dominance. However, Yoon should reflect on why the opposition party maintained such strength even midway through his term.

If Yoon ever survives the impeachment trial at the Constitutional Court, the chances of which appear slim, he must embrace a transformation -- from the prosecutor Yoon Suk Yeol to the politician Yoon Suk Yeol.

Leadership in a democracy is not about imposing decisions but about persuading, negotiating and compromising. These processes may seem slow and inefficient, but they are the lifeblood of democratic governance.