How S Korea can avoid date with chaos 

A ruling confirming the impeachment would remove Park from office, strip her of immunity from criminal charges, and leave her open to indictment for corruption. 
It would also make Park the first south Korean president ever to be impeached. 
An impeachment verdict would require the election of a new president within 60 days, which would also pose a formidable challenge to the nation. 
If the top court makes the opposite decision, Park, who has been suspended from office since December 9 after the parliament’s vote to impeach, would see out her five–year term that ends next February. Park’s successor would be chosen on December 20. 
Whichever verdict the court issues, it will end the impeachment process, which with the just-ended investigation into the presidential scandal, has put the whole country on edge. The problem is that the end of the impeachment trial is unlikely to end the division that has plagued the nation these past three months. Rather, many are worried about the aftermath of the court’s decision. 
Most worrisome is the presence of hardliners in both pro- and anti-impeachment factions who will refuse to accept the top court’s decision if it goes against them. 
Recent opinion polls show that about half of South Koreans say they will not accept the Constitutional Court’s decision if it goes against their position. Those findings are alarming indeed. 
Joining the fanatics are certain politicians, who have tried to take advantage of the impeachment trial by fanning hatred against the other side. Some have even threatened “revolution” while others declared they stood ready to shed “blood on the streets”. 
These demagogues are threatening the rule of law and democracy. They also menace the proud tradition of non-violence, which both sides have upheld so far in staging peaceful street demonstrations. 
Candlelight vigils held by pro-impeachment groups have drawn praise from around the world for their exemplary conduct. In the initial stage of the scandal, the anti-Park sentiment was so overwhelming that few pro-Park groups dared to hold public rallies. 
Day by day, the pro-Park groups gained strength to the degree that in recent demonstrations they have equalled or even outnumbered anti-Park protesters. 
It was encouraging to see that the two groups, holding rallies only tens of metres apart, did not resort to violence. This wonderful tradition should be upheld on Friday, when two groups are set to hold mass rallies outside the Constitutional Court. 
Any eruption of violence would likely add fuel to the simmering tension between the two groups, which could plunge the nation into deeper turmoil. 
We now stand at a critical juncture, and only obedience to the rule of law and preservation of our proud tradition of non-violence can save us from this crisis. 
For this, everyone – from President Park, politicians, presidential hopefuls and those who have held candles or national flags – should think twice before they speak or act. At stake is not merely the fate of an already unpopular president, but the future of the nation.