FEW WILL have cherished their Christmas presents this year as much as Lee Myung-bak. On December 27th Mr Lee, South Korea’s conservative president from 2008 to 2013, was pardoned by Yoon Suk-yeol, the incumbent. He served just over two years of a 17-year sentence handed down in 2020 for bribery and corruption, and was let off from paying 8.2bn won ($6.4m) of 18.7bn won in fines and forfeits. He was the fourth South Korean president to be pardoned since democracy arrived in 1987. There are plenty of corrupt presidents around the world. What is less common is that they are tried, convicted and then pardoned by their successors. Why does that happen so often in South Korea?

Pardons play a peripheral role in most modern legal systems. In many countries, including France, Turkey and Switzerland, the power to pardon lies in large part with the legislature. In others, such as Indonesia, governments can only grant clemency if they are supported by the Supreme Court. American presidents, in particular Donald Trump, have sometimes been accused of abusing the power to pardon. But few democracies use pardons for political expediency in the way South Korea does.

The cycle began with Chun Doo-hwan, the last military dictator, and Roh Tae-woo, an ally of Mr Chun who became the first president after democratisation. Both were sentenced to prison in 1996 for taking bribes, staging a military coup in 1979 and playing a role in the massacre of pro-democracy protesters in 1980. They were freed the following year. Mr Lee’s successor and fellow conservative, Park Geun-hye, was sentenced to prison in 2018 for bribe-taking and abuse of power before being pardoned by her own successor, Moon Jae-in, of the liberal Minjoo party, in December 2021.

South Korea’s culture of backhanders outlived the corrupt dictatorship that created it. The country’s politics is a blood sport, which helps explain why miscreants are brought to justice: no president has been reluctant to use the police and prosecutor’s office to investigate political rivals. Why those who were convicted were then pardoned is harder to explain. In all four cases, the former presidents’ pardoners cited the need for national unity. In two, the poor health of the prisoner supposedly played a role.

Yet none of the pardons has been a matter of public consensus. The pardons of former presidents Chun and Roh led to clashes between protesters and riot police in 1997. Opinion was sharply divided about whether Ms Park and Mr Lee should be pardoned. A poll conducted in December 2022 before Mr Lee was freed found that 53% of South Koreans approved of the idea, but that 39% opposed it.

In some cases, pardons may be about self-preservation. As presidents can reasonably expect to be investigated by their successors when they leave office, why not show clemency, set a precedent and hope that you are treated leniently later, too. In other cases they may be a way to placate a segment of the electorate. Ms Park’s pardon came months before a presidential election. Mr Moon may have calculated that, were she to die in prison, that would hurt the chances of his party’s candidate (who lost to Mr Yoon regardless.)

Pardons are often motivated by power dynamics within the political elite, too. Convicted politicians often have powerful allies in parliament, who can encourage pardons. President Yoon is clearly a fan of Mr Lee, the former president he pardoned. He has stocked his team with staff from his predecessor’s administration and adopted similar policies. But the president also pardoned several politicians involved in the corruption scandal that brought down Ms Park—even though he had put them away when he was chief prosecutor under Mr Moon. He may be hoping that the pardons will unify his conservative party, People Power, which is riven by infighting. Mr Lee and Ms Park still have enormous influence in conservative political circles. The president, a political neophyte and outsider, may also be hoping to smooth his entry into this elite.

Though no longer a prosecutor, Mr Yoon still paints himself as a crusader for justice. But his decision to free a guilty man may open old wounds. The convictions of the ex-presidents and their co-conspirators were historic moments for South Korean democracy, says Erik Mobrand of the RAND Corporation, a think-tank. Far from unifying the country, upending more of these judgments could undermine faith in its institutions. ■