제인권법을 통해 본탈북난민 인권침해 현황과 해결방안

조소연 ( So Yeun Cho ) 한국윤리학회 2015 倫理硏究 Vol.105 No.1

The purpose of this study is to search the status of North Korean refugees, to examine the human rights violations of North Korean refugees in accordance with the provisions of refugee-related International Human Rights Law, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and to look for the political alternatives for solving the problem of human rights violations. According to the study results, North Korean refugees were experiencing a serious human rights abuses against all the provisions of international human rights law. If North Korean refugees were repatriated to the North, they should experience pain a degree of threatening the life and physical assault. When staying in a third country, North Korean refugees only got guarantees the right to survival, they still suffered human trafficking and labor exploitation. Freedom, equal rights, and safety rights to enjoy as human beings basically were not guaranteed. In addition, in the process of entry into the South their rights of physical freedom and safety were not protected. Especially a human rights violation for vulnerable women and children was serious. To settle these human rights issues, I suggest these four solutions, ``Efforts to obtain refugee status``, ``Introduction of first asylum,`` ``Raising the power of NGO’, ‘Expanding supports for North Korea``.

난민의 인권의식과 인권교육에 관한 연구

박미숙 ( Misuk Park ),손영화 ( Younghoa Son ) 아시아문화학술원 2019 인문사회 21 Vol.10 No.3

본 연구의 목적은 난민의 인권의식을 탐색하고 이를 통하여 인권교육의 방향을 제시하는 것이다. 이를 위해 한국의 체류경험이 있는 난민 6명을 대상으로 심층인터뷰하고 이를 인지적, 정서적, 행동적 측면으로 분석하였다. 그 결과, 첫째, 난민들은 한국에 체류하는 것이 급급하여 인권침해인지조차 인지하지 못하거나, 인권침해인줄 알면서도 참고 살아가고 있었다. 둘째, 부당한 대우를 받아도 저항하지 못하는 이주민과 난민들을 보며 서로 공감하고 있었다. 또한 한국인으로 통합되기 위해 한국국적을 취득하지만 여전히 이방인으로 살아가야 함에 정서적으로 힘들어 하였다. 셋째, 난민들은 같은 민족끼리 공동체를 형성하여 자신들의 인권을 보호받고자 노력하였다. 이러한 결과를 바탕으로 난민 인권교육의 방향을 제시하였다. 첫째, 난민들이 인권에 대한 지식과 이해를 돕기 위한 프로그램과 콘텐츠가 개발되어야 한다. 둘째, 난민들이 편안하고 자연스럽게 인권에 대한 상담이 이루어질 수 있는 창구가 마련되어 이들의 인권감수성이 발달될 수 있도록 해야 한다. 셋째, 난민들이 자발적으로 인권보호 활동을 할 수 있도록 난민공동체를 활성화시킬 수 있는 적극적인 지원방안이 마련되어야 한다. 이런 연구를 바탕으로, 한국에 체류하는 난민들의 인권 보호와 생활 보장이 이루어질 수 있기를 바라며, 그들이 한국 사회에서 원활하게 통합되길 기대한다. The purpose of this study explores the human rights consciousness of refugees and to suggest the direction of human rights education. To do this, six refugees with experience staying as refugees in Korea were interviewed in depth and analyzed in a cognitive, emotional and behavioral aspect. As a result, because the refugees are important to stay in Korea, not even recognize it as a violation of human rights, or live with it even though they knew it was a violation of human rights. Second, refugees were sympathizing with each other as they looked at migrants and refugees who could not resist even if they were treated unfairly. He also acquired Korean nationality to be integrated as a Korean, but emotionally struggled to live as a stranger. Third, the refugees tried to protect their human rights through immigrants, people and communities in the same situation. Based on these results, the direction of human rights education for refugees was presented. First, the program should be developed to help understanding and knowledge about human rights of refugees. Second, there should be a window where refugees can comfortably and naturally consult about human rights so that they can develop human rights sensitivity. Third, there should be an active support plan for the revitalization of the community for refugees so that they can voluntarily protect their human rights. Based on this study, we hope that the protection of human rights and the guarantee of living for refugees staying in Korea can be achieved, and expect them to integrate smoothly in Korean society.

탈북자(자발적 북한이탈자)의 인권보호와 국제인권법

장복희(Chang Bok-Hee) 한국토지공법학회 2008 土地公法硏究 Vol.40 No.-

  In summary of protection of North Korean refugees, the first asylum states grant "Convention refugee" according to the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees(the Refugee Convention), but this case will not be available in fact.<BR>  On emphasis, system of complementary protection is useful based on other international human rights treaties and standards. Complementary protection is to grant the status of de facto refugee and rights to asylum seekers similar to those convention refugees enjoys. Specially, the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumane or Degrading Treatment or Punishment are important complementary instruments to the Refugee Convention. As parties to general international human rights treaties, the first asylum states can give North Korean refugees "humanitarian status", "humanitarian residence" or "temporary protection".<BR>  In other hands, they can acquire the status "Mandate refugee" through the UN High Commissioner of Refugees(UNHCR). In this case, Korea government should do more positive diplomatic efforts. Besides, the third countries as well as Republic of Korea may admit them.<BR>  North Korean refugees are at least internationally "the subject of complementary protection". The states that accomodate them should abide the principle of non-refoulement, at least give temporary protection to the persons who do not want come back to North Korea.<BR>  Finally, solution of North Korean refugees has the aim to human rights protection in the lights of international human rights norms, protection itself has to be the core through the whole course towards the permanent settlements.<BR>  "Prevention, protection and solution" triple strategies have to be considered at once containing public information, dissemination education and discipline of international human rights norms, enhancement of related domestic law system, permanent solutions, opinions making, supports to NGO activities and enforcing of UNHCR role.<BR>  These actions have the base on respect of article 14(right to seek asylum) proclaimed in Universal Declaration of Human Rights and begin to ensure dignity of human beings, life and security of person, freedom and equality.

난민의 인권 및 두려움의 쟁점

허경미 원광대학교 경찰학연구소 2020 경찰학논총 Vol.15 No.2

This study analyzes the issues surrounding refugee human rights and fear of refugees in terms of threat theory and neo-discrimination. The subjects of analysis are Germany and Sweden, which lead refugee policy in the Schengen Agreement. The issues of refugee law and refugee fear in Korea were also analyzed. The refugee issues were divided into the perspectives of refugees under the Refugee Convention, that is, the human rights of refugees and the refugee policy of refugee host countries. The following conclusions were drawn from the research results. First, under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, the ideology of refugee human rights is not properly reflected in refugee-related laws and policies in Senggen Agreement or Korea. Second, the international community has no international norms to apply to countries that do not reflect the human rights ideology of the refugee convention. Third, it is the irony that the Schengen Agreements, which do not reflect the human rights ideology of the refugee conventions in refugee policy, as identified in the Syrian and Venezuelan refugee crisis, are actually the central states of international organizations, including the United Nations. More seriously, these developed countries are now leading the international refugee policy. Fourth, countries that build personal information DB systems, such as Schengen Information System(SIS), which collect and share personal information, especially biometric information, for refugees and general travelers, are increasing. As a result, not only human rights violations of the general public, but also refugee screening itself is blocked at the source. Fifth, official statistics proved that refugee crime rates including migrants were not higher than indigenous people. However, it is causing refugee xenophobia with the image of refugee= criminal = social anxiety factor. This, in turn, leads to a vicious cycle that reduces the multicultural acceptance of the international community. Sixth, the expansion of the negative image of refugees from certain religions is a form of extreme xenophobia, which is used as a tool for quarrels over vested interests or political economy, and mass media is also used as a tool. Seventh, it is urgent for Korea to revise its regulations regarding refugee rights and to improve realistic policies on refugee policy. Eighth, the multicultural acceptability index of Koreans is generally at a low level. In particular, foreigners' rejection and avoidance scores are relatively high. This shows that multicultural education in community society needs to be conducted in various ways. 이 연구는 다양한 학문적 영역에서 제기되고 있는 난민인권과 난민두려움을 둘러싼 쟁점들을 위협이론과 신차별주의적 관점에서 분석하였다. 분석대상은 셍겐협정국의 난민정책을 주도하는 독일과 스웨덴과 한국이다. 난민이슈는 난민협약 상 난민인권적 측면과 난민수용국가의 난민정책적 측면으로 분리하여 살펴보았으며, 다음과 같은 결론을 도출할 수 있었다. 첫째, 난민협약 상 보장되어야 하는 난민인권이 셍겐협정국이나 한국에서 현실적으로 난민관련 법 및 정책에 제대로 반영되지 못하고 있다. 둘째, 난민협약 상 인권이념을 반영하지 않는 경우에도 국제사회가 관련국에 취할 수있는 제재규정이 마땅치 않다. 셋째, 시리아나 베네수엘라 난민사태에서 확인되는 것처럼 난민협약의 인권이념을난민정책에 반영하지 않은 셍겐협정국이 실제로는 유엔을 포함한 국제기구의 중심국가들이라는 아이러니이다. 더 심각한 문제는 이들 선진국이 현재 국제사회의 난민정책을 주도하고 있다는 점이다. 넷째, 난민과 일반 여행객의 개인정보, 특히 생체정보를 수집, 공유하는 셍겐정보시스템과 같은 개인정보데이터베이스시스템을 구축하는국가들이 증가하고 있다. 이로 인한 일반시민의 인권침해는 물론이며, 난민심사 자체가 원천적으로 차단되는 문제가 있다. 다섯째, 공식통계를 통해 이주민을 포함한 난민범죄율이 원주민 보다 높지 않다는 것이 증명되었다. 그러나 난민=범죄자=사회불안요인이라는 이미지를 씌워 난민 제노포비아를 야기시키고 있다. 이는 결국 국제사회의 다문화수용성을 떨어뜨리는 악순환으로 이어진다. 여섯째, 특정종교 출신의 난민에 대한 부정적 이미지의 확대는 극우주의적인 제노포비아의 한 형태이며, 이는 기득권 혹은 정치경제의 주도권 다툼의 도구로 악용되며, 미디어 역시 그 역할의 일부를 수행한다. 일곱째, 한국의 난민법은 난민협약 상 난민인권 보호규정을 갖추지 못했고, 난민신청자 생계비 지원 미비 등의 문제가 있어 그 개선이 시급하다. 여덟째, 한국인의 다문화수용성지수가 전반적으로 낮은 수준이고, 특히 외국인의 거부·회피정서점수가 상대적으로 매우 높다는 점은 공동체사회의 다문화교육이 다양한 방식으로 진행될 필요가 있음을 보여준다.

Transformations and Challenges: A PRC Perspective on Human Rights and Koreans’ Human Rights in Yanbian Korean Autonomous Prefecture

박선영 한국중국학회 2009 國際中國學硏究 Vol.0 No.12

This paper examines human rights as a theory that PRC claims to support and addresses how the PRC (People’s Republic of China) applies the theory to ethnic minority groups in reality. First, analyze what the PRC perspective on human rights is in theoretical terms and how the PRC defines the protection of the rights of minority ethnic populations. Second, examine how the PRC applies the theory to the Yanbian Korean Autonomous Prefecture (YKAP). Although there are many ethnic groups living in the YKAP, this paper focuses on the human rights issues of Yanbian Koreans and North Korean refugees in that region. This paper will present a case that reviews the reality of the protection of minority ethnic groups’ human rights that the PRC stresses. I will also review the issue of ethnic self‐government that institutionally guarantees the human rights of minority ethnicities. By pointing out the issue of Koreans living in the YKAP (Yanbian Koreans and North Korean refugees) who are in socially and politically poor surroundings, I will describe myths and realities of the PRC perspective on human rights. The autonomous prefecture of an ethnic region sets up an agency for autonomy and allows each ethnic group in the respective region to supervise internal affairs of the region. Thus, in PRC, there are 159 ethnic autonomous areas that consist of 5 self‐governing regions, 30 autonomous prefectures, and 124 autonomous counties. In reality, however, the population of Koreans in the YKAP, for example, has decreased remarkably due to the artificial administrative modification and accelerating segregation against Yanbian Koreans. Moreover, ethnic autonomy policies and systems that should protect the rights of minor ethnicities socially and systematically have faded because of the reduced number of officials from the Korean group. The North Korean refugees are in the dead zone of human rights within the YKAP. Economically poor escapees must endure miserable livings in the northeast region of the PRC, and their survival, which was their main motivation for escape, is threatened once more. Men and women have to endure extremely low wages, labor exploitation, and unjust treatment. Women are especially under a condition of sexual exploitation and sex slave‐like treatment, and even under the threat of human trafficking. The PRC’s perspective and practices of human rights face challenges and need transformations. The PRC perspective on human rights is not confined only to human rights for Chinese but also includes human rights for ethnic minority groups in the PRC, including Yanbian Koreans and North Korean refugees.

외국에서의 인권침해와 강제송환금지원칙

손영화,박미숙 한국법정책학회 2019 법과 정책연구 Vol.19 No.2

Although the principle of banning expulsion or return ("refoulement") is known internationally as the Non-refoulement principle, Refoulement is originally a term used in European immigration procedures. The Non-refoulement principle is to impose restrictions on the authority of immigration which clearly shows the sovereignty of the state. This principle is an important criterion for international protection if there is a difference between sovereignty and international obligations. The government has no obligation to secure implementation of the Refugee Agreement, including legislative measures and recognition procedures. Article 33 of the Refugee Agreement provides that the Non-refoulement principle is inseparable. Paragraph 2 of the same Article provides for the exclusion of the provisions of paragraph 1 of the same Article by national security and the sophistication of serious crimes. The human scope of Article 33 paragraph 1 of the agreement is a refugee. Regardless of whether they were officially recognized as refugees, asylum-seekers are included. The expansion of the scope of application is due to changes in the international situation after the establishment of the agreement and the development of human rights agreements. The purpose of Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment(Convention against Torture) is to prevent torture. And Article 3, paragraph (1) states that "No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture." It explicitly stipulates the Non-refoulement principle. The scope of human resources is all persons and does not consider whether they have committed crimes referred to in Article 1 paragraph (F) of the Refugee Agreement. The scope and interpretation standards of Article 3 of the Convention against Torture are developed through the view and general opinions of the commission that are not legally binding. Unlike the Convention against Torture, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights does not explicitly stipulate the Non-refoulement principle. Through the development of non-legally binding norms such as objective interpretation by the Human Rights Commission and general opinions and opinions, the interpretation of the principles is drawn up. This recognition has been spread on a universal level by the Commission on Human Rights, which provides an implicit mandate to prohibit deportation derived from general prohibition of torture, inhuman and degrading treatment. Refugee law and human rights law have evolved to interact, to divert the scope of application through a purposeful interpretation, and to ensure effective protection for those who have avoided human rights violations in foreign countries. The universalization of human rights against the backdrop of market economy, democracy, and globalization of human rights has been emphasized, and regional asylum has been joined, a comprehensive approach to the basis of human rights has been sought, and complementary protection has been developed. In order to ensure the effectiveness of the Non-refoulement principle to issues such as today's influx of large quantities, it is considered necessary to take a multilateral approach. 강제송환금지원칙은 국제적으로는 농르풀망(Non-refoulement)원칙으로 알려져 있는데, 르플망이라는 것은 원래 유럽의 출입국 관리절차에서 나온 용어이다. 강제송환금지원칙은 국가주권이 뚜렷이 나타나는 출입국관리권한에 대하여 제한을 과하는 특징이 있다. 동 원칙은 국제적 보호와 관련하여 주권과 국제적 책무 간에 차이가 발생하는 경우에 보호의 중요한 기준이 된다. 난민협약은 입법조치 및 인정절차 등 이행확보를 위한 국가의 의무규정이 없다. 난민협약 제33조의 강제송환금지원칙은 국제법상 강행규범으로 되어 있다. 동조 제2항에서 국가의 안전 및 중대범죄의 고려에 의해 동조 제1항의 적용제외가 규정되어 있다. 동 협약 제33조 제1항의 인적 범위는 「난민」 이다. 난민으로 정식으로 인정되었는지 여부와 관계없이 비호신청자도 인적 범위에 포함된다. 적용범위의 확대는 협약 제정 이후의 국제정세 변화에 대한 대응 및 인권협약의 발전에 따른 것이다. 고문방지협약의 목적은 고문의 방지이며, 제3조 제1항은 「어떠한 체약국도 고문받을 위험이 있다고 믿을 만한 상당한 근거가 있는 다른 나라로 개인을 추방․송환 또는 인도하여서는 아니된다.」 고 하여 명시적으로 강제송환금지원칙을 규정하고 있다. 인적 범위는 모든 사람이며, 법적 지위나 난민협약 제1조 F항에 언급되는 죄를 범했는지 여부를 고려하지 않는다. 고문방지협약 제3조의 적용범위, 해석기준은 법적 구속력이 없는 위원회의 견해나 일반논평에 의해 발전을 하고 있다. 자유권규약은 고문방지협약과는 달리 강제송환금지원칙을 명시적으로 규정하는 조항은 없다. 규약인권위원회에 의한 목적론적 해석, 일반논평·견해 등 법적 구속력이 없는 규범의 발전에 의해 해당 원칙의 해석을 이끌어내고 있다. 규약인권위원회에 의해서 고문, 비인도적 및 품위를 손상시키는 취급의 일반적 금지로부터 파생한 강제송환금지원칙의 묵시적 책무가 제시됨으로써 보편적 차원에서 이 인식이 퍼지게 되었다. 난민법과 인권법은 상호작용하고, 목적론적 해석에 의해 적용범위를 변용시켜, 외국에서의 인권침해를 피해서 온 사람에 대한 실효적 보호를 확보하기 위해 발전해 왔다. 시장경제, 민주주의, 인권의 글로벌리제이션을 배경으로 인권의 보편화가 강조되어 영역적 비호에 추가하여 인권 기저의 포괄적 접근이 모색되어 인권협약에 근거한 보완적 보호의 진전을 볼 수 있다. 오늘날 대량유입 등 과제에 대한 강제송환금지원칙의 실효성 확보에 관하여 앞으로도 다각적인 대응이 필요하다고 생각된다.

북한인권의 국제인권법적 고찰 -인권관련 법률의 적용과 분석, 그리고 인권개선을 위한 법률가의 역할-

원재천 대한변호사협회 2010 人權과 正義 : 大韓辯護士協會誌 Vol.- No.401

In December 2009, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea(hereinafter North Korea) received Universal Periodic Review by UN Human Rights Council. This journal article paper has applied various treaty standards as well as North Korean national laws to examine current human rights practices of North Korea. As it turned out, North Korea is a party to four key human rights treaties and Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and Additional Protocols - the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and Convention on the Rights of the Child. As a treaty party, North Korea has a duty to comply with the international human rights standards and this paper discusses North Korea’s treaty obligation discrepancies by examine some of the known state practices and transgressions. It has been observed that North Korea has a very rigid sociological and political caste system based on Juche and Kimilsungism. These state ruling ideologies were translated into extreme discriminatory policies and those policies were implemented by means of fear and caused brutal suppression of political prisoners and their families. Many political prisoners and their families have ended up in North Korean Gulag(Political Concentration Camp). This article presented a convincing case that certain practices of North Korean government have met each and every element of particular crimes of Genocide and Crime Against Humanity. Moreover, the article examined status of religious freedom, challenges of protecting North Korean refugees in neighboring countries and the issue of reunion of separated families between North and South Korea. The paper further discussed role of human rights advocates and lawyers in improving human rights situation in North Korea by utilizing already available UN protection mechanism. 1990년대 북한의 식량난 이후 생겨난 많은 수의 탈북자들의 증언으로 우리는 북한인권상황을 접하게 되었다. 증언들은 자연 재난의 피해로 발생한 식량부족으로 야기된 북한주민들의 참혹한 삶의 현실을 그대로 전해 주었을 뿐 아니라, 정치, 사회적 가족내력을 기반으로 인도의 카스트제도보다 철저한 신분 차별국가로서의 사회적 폐쇄성과 국가적 이념에서 조금의 일탈도 용납하지 않는 봉건사회 같은 개인 독재 국가의 폐해를 확인해 주었다. 정치범들 가족에 대한 연좌제와 구소련에서 볼 수 있었던 정치범 수용소는 이미 반인륜적 범죄의 수위를 넘고 있지만, 북한은 아직도 국가안보와 체제유지라는 거대 담론으로 이를 정당화하고 있는 듯하다. 그러나 북한의 인권문제는 더 이상 북한만의 문제가 아니다. 현 국제사회의 추세에 비추어 볼 때, 한 국가의 인권 유린사례를 더 이상 그 나라의 내부 문제로만 보지 않는다. 21세기를 맞이하여, 과거 체제 경쟁을 통한 한판의 승부수에 연연했던 남북관계도 어느덧 동반 생존 및 발전 그리고 점진적인 협력이라는 성숙한 관계로 발전해 가고 있다. 결국 남한도 북한도 국제사회의 일원으로서 국제사회의 일정한 룰을 적용 받는다. 이는 정의로운 법치 (Rule of Law)를 의미하며, 북한도 시대에 맞게 선진 제도의 도입과 법령제정 및 이행으로 국가의 공권력을 행사하는 방법을 찾도록 노력해야 한다. 본 논문에서는 2009년 12월 북한인권상황에 대한 유엔의 정례검토를 계기로 북한의 인권문제를 국제적․보편적인 기준으로 분석하고, 이에 따른 문제점을 파악하여 이를 제도권 안에서 해결하려는 과제와 부담을 법률가들과 함께 나누고자 한다.

유럽인권법원의 난민보호와 우리의 방향 -인권에 내재된 국가의 적극적 작위의무-

홍선기 ( Hong Sun-ki ) 경상대학교 법학연구소 2017 法學硏究 Vol.25 No.2

우리나라는 1992년 난민협약과 난민의정서에 가입한 이후 1993년 출입국관리법과 1994년 동 시행령에 난민인정조항 신설을 통해 난민인정제도를 도입한 이후 7월부터 난 민지위인정신청을 받기 시작했다. 하지만 그 기준이 너무 엄격해서 난민협약에는 크게 미치지 못한다는 지적이 있어왔다. 이후 우리는 아시아 최초로 난민법을 통과시킨 나라가 되었다. 그럼에도 불구하고 우리 헌법과 국내 판결 그리고 난민관련 사무에서 우리나라는 매우 소극적인 자세에 그치고 있다. 난민의 인권문제는 어제 오늘의 일이 아니다. 그리고 난민의 역사는 우리 인류의 역사이기도 하다. 인권이 실질적으로 보장되기 위해서는 단순 히 국가에 의한 인권침해 방지만으로는 부족하며 오히려 인권 보호를 위한 적극적인 행 위가 요구된다. 즉 인권에 내재(inherent)하는 국가의 적극적인 의무(positive obligation)가 존재한다. 이는 유럽인권협약과 유럽인권법원에서 인정되고 있다. 특히 생명권을 규정 한 제2조와 비인도적 처우를 금지하는 제3조가 난민에게 적용되고 있으며, 그중에서 특히 제3조의 경우 본 조항이 가진 “절대성(absolute nature)”이 인정되고 있기 때문에 국가의 “함축된 적극적 의무(implied positive obligation)”라는 해석으로 난민이 보호되고 있다. 이에 우리 헌법상 난민과 관련된 근거와 인권에 내재(inherent)하는 절대성과 이에 수반한 국가의 적극적인 의무(positive obligation)가 우리의 난민의 인권문제 해결에 있어서 나름대로 좋은 대안이 될 수 있을 것으로 판단된다. Alan Kurdi, a Kurd child of Syria, was found dead in beach. This accident spread to the whole world, stirred up internationally, and amplified the interest about refugee issues country-by-country. Europe is under an acute crisis situation due to the explosive increase in the refugee inflow since 2015. The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom has established one of the most effective regional system of protecting human rights. The European Court of Human Rights held in cases about refugee that there had been: a violation of Article 2(right to life) and 3 (Prohibition of torture) of the European Convention on Human Rights. Because Article 2 and 3 are normative ones which has "absolute nature" and "positive obligations" on memberstate of EU. Korea joined refugee-related international agreement in Dec. 3, 1992 and has received refugee recognition since 1994. As a signatory to the UN Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, South Korea had regulated the approval procedure for refugees through the Immigration Control Act. The discussion about the enactment of refugee law corresponding to the purpose of refugee agreement has started since 2006. The first independent refugee law in East Asia was signed into law in 2013 and enforced. The enactment and enforcement of Refugee Law are in fact a big progress in Korea`s refugee policy; however, further progress would be required in order to extend the application ranges for the refugee status, and to provide more effective protection to people seeking refugee status and their families. Considering this special nature of human rights treaties, we should take more approach concerning "absolute nature" and "positive obligations" made by the European Court of Human Rights.

아시아 난민의 인권과 ‘권리를 가질 권리’

김민수 부산대학교 인문학연구소 2023 코기토 Vol.- No.100

The purpose of this paper is to present to the necessity of fundamental reflection on the meaning of human rights in order to solve the refugee problem in Asia, which is rapidly increasing in the 21st century, and the politics of human rights and democratization of borders. Despite the long history of refugee problems in Asia, the region is experiencing Asian rejection due to the Eurocentric nature of the international refugee regime, which makes it difficult to solve the refugee problem through the current international refugee regime. Therefore, in order to solve the refugee problem in Asia, it is necessary to consider establishing a new refugee regime. The new international refugee regime should be able to recognize the right to belong to a political community as a fundamental right of refugees through radical reflection on the concept of human rights as well as escaping from Eurocentrism. The ‘right to have rights’ presented by Hannah Arendt provides a good reference point for reasoning why the right to belong to a community must be a fundamental right. However, apart from the need for a new international refugee regime based on the ‘right to have rights’, the issue of feasibility still remains. Therefore, solving the refugee problem in Asia requires “democratization of borders” to make borders flexible and transparent as well as efforts to establish a new international refugee regime, and “politics of human rights” to make the contradiction between rights and institutions a political place. 본 논문의 목표는 21세기 들어 급증하고 있는 아시아 지역의 난민 문제를 해결하기 위해 인권의 의미에 대한 근본적 성찰과 이를 통한 ‘인권의 정치’와 국경의 민주화의 필요성을 제시하는 것이다. 아시아 지역은 짧지 않은 난민문제의 역사에도 불구하고 국제난민레짐의 유럽중심주의적 특성으로 인해 아시아적 거부 현상을 보이고 있다. 이로 인해 현재의 국제난민레짐을 통해 아시아 지역의 난민 문제를 해결하는 것이 쉽지 않은 상황이다. 따라서 아시아 지역의 난민 문제를 해결하기 위해서는 새로운 국제난민레짐의 확립을 고려할 필요가 있다. 새로운 국제난민레짐은 유럽중심주의를 벗어나는 것은 물론이고 인권개념에 대한 발본적 성찰을 통해 공동체에 소속될 수 있는 권리를 난민의 근본적 권리로 인정할 수 있어야 한다. 한나 아렌트가 제시한 바 있는 ‘권리를 가질 권리’는 공동체에 소속될 권리가 근본적 권리일 수밖에 없는 이유를 사유할 수 있는 좋은 참조점을 제공한다. 그러나 ‘권리를 가질 권리’에 기반한 새로운 국제난민레짐의 필요성과 별개로 실현가능성의 문제가 여전히 남는다. 따라서 아시아 지역의 난민문제를 해결하기 위해서는 새로운 국제난민레짐을 확립하려는 노력 못지않게 국경을 유연하고 투과성 높게 만들려는 ‘국경의 민주화’와 권리와 제도 사이의 이율배반을 정치의 장소로 삼는 ‘인권의 정치’가 필요하다.

Factors Affecting Domestic Refugee Policy Development: An Analysis of South Korea’s Case

( Yun Ju Kang ) 홍익대학교 법학연구소 2017 동북아법 Vol.11 No.-

Asia is no exception to the global refugee crisis. The number of asylum-seekers in Asian countries has escalated very quickly in recent years, and South Korea has been experiencing a constant stream of refugee applicants along with urging by the international community to adopt international refugee laws and give protection to refugees. To share the burden of the refugee crisis, the South Korean government has joined the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol and established its own 2013 Refugee Act at the national level, which guarantees procedural rights and available assistance for refugees and refugee applicants. The development of South Korea’s refugee policy is significant, especially because it is the first country in Asia to adopt a separate Refugee Act at the national level. However, there has also been criticism of the scope and nature of South Korea’s refugee accommodation. South Korea’s refugee policy is based on an immigration control stance, and its refugee acceptance rate remains relatively low. While South Korea remains in this stage of refugee protection, there is ongoing debate on the further development of refugee policy and opposition to its expansion. What factors have been driving South Korea’s refugee policy development, and what factors are deterring Korea from moving beyond its present phase? How can Korea move forward toward better guarantees of human rights for refugees? Addressing these questions is important to encourage South Korea to keep improving its protections of refugees. Analyzing South Korea’s case is meaningful to other countries as well to identify the motives of refugee policy development. Accordingly, this paper examines the two main societal factors, domestic (internal) and international (external), that influence national refugee policies. The paper introduces these two factors and discuss how they affect improvements in domestic human rights. By examining the development of South Korea’s refugee policy in terms of this spiral model, this paper explains the role of advocacy for international society and domestic human rights in shaping 2013 Refugee Act. This paper further analyzes factors that currently deter further development of refugee policy in South Korea and what actions will be necessary to move forward in terms of the two factors. This paper demonstrates that continuing global attention to the refugee problem and cooperation with domestic social movements to solve it are crucial for enhancing refugee protection.