국제사법재판소 잠정조치 명령의 이행강제

국문 초록 (Abstract)

국제사법재판소의 잠정조치 명령의 법적 구속력은 상설국제사법재판소 설립 시부터 논란의 대상이었으나 국제사법재판소는 「라그랑 사건」 본안 판결을 통하여 그 법적 구속력을 인정하여 주었다. 법적 구속력 인정은 잠정조치 명령 이행에도 영향을 끼쳤으며 국가들은 법적 구속력 불비를 이유로 잠정조치명령 이행을 거절할 수 없게 되었다. 하지만 그럼에도 불구하고 잠정조치 명령의 이행을 강제할 수 있는 수단이 부족한 것이 현재의 국제법 체제의 현실이다. 판결의 강제집행에 관한 유엔헌장 제94조 제2항은 잠정조치와 같은 명령 형태의 사법결정에는 적용되지 않는다. 이 이외에 잠정조치 명령을 강제할 수 있는 수단이 존재하고 있지만 (안전보장이사회의 잠정조치 명령 통지수령권, 국제사법재판소의 잠정조치 명령의 재지시, 정보요청권 및 사전주의권) 이러한 수단은 자발적인 당사자의 잠정조치 이행을 강제할 수 있을 뿐이므로 ‘간접적’이라는 한계를 가지고 있다. 이러한 상황에서 잠정조치 명령 위반에 대하여 국가책임을 성립시킨 국제사법재판소의 판례는 매우 중요한 의미를 갖는다. 국제사법재판소는 「라그랑 사건」을 통하여 잠정조치 명령 불이행 여부를 본안에서 심사하여 미국이 잠정조치를 이행하지 않았음을 판결에서 확인해 주었다. 또한 「제노사이드 사건」에서는 잠정조치 명령 불이행에 대하여 국가책임 성립과 손해배상을 인정하여 주었다. 잠정조치 위반에 대하여 국가책임성립을 인정했다는 것은 앞으로 소송의 당사자가 될 국가들에게 잠정조치 명령에 대한 이행압박으로 작용하게 될 것이다. 이는 잠정조치 명령이라는 소송체제에 있어서 뿐만 아니라 국제법 체제 전반에 있어서 국제법 체제가 그 규범력을 확보하는 방향으로 발전하고 있음을 보여주는 것으로 국제법에 의한 법의 지배 확보에 있어서 상당히 중요한 의의를 갖는다고 하겠다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The legal binding force of the provisional measures of the International Court of Justice(hereafter ‘ICJ’) has been caught up in controversy since the Permanent Court of the International Justice, but the ICJ admitted the legal binding force of it through the jurisprudence of the LaGrand case, final judgement. It affects the compliance with the provisional measures so that the parties of the suit can not come to insist the non-legal binding force in excuse of the non-compliance. However, the international law is short of the method to compel the compliance with the provisional measures. First of all. the UN Charter’s article 94 (2) about the enforcement of the judgement cannot be applied in the enforcement of the order of the provisional measures. In addition, the methods to coerce the provisional measures, which are the power for the Security Council to receive the provisional measures’ notice and the second provisional order, the request of the information, the advance caution of the ICJ, just ask the voluntary execution of the party so that they have their own weakness as indirect methods. In this situation, the jurisprudence of the ICJ says that the non-compliance with the provisional measures constitutes the state responsibility. ICJ confirmed in the LaGrand case, final judgement that it could adjudicate whether the order of the provisional measures would be complied with or not. Also it admitted the state responsibility of the party which does not comply the order of the provisional measures in the Genocide Convention case, final judgement, which will act as the compression to the party that will have the obligation of the provisional measures in the future. It shows us that the international law develops in the direction of attaining the regulation power not only in the field of the international procedural law but also in the all of the international law system.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론
• Ⅱ. 잠정조치 명령의 효력과 그 이행
• Ⅲ. 강제집행 절차의 존재 가능성
• Ⅳ. 간접적 이행강제 수단
• Ⅴ. 국가책임 추궁을 통한 이행강제
• Ⅵ. 결론
• 국문초록
• ABSTRACT

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김석현, "국제법정의 결정의 이행 및 이행강제" 한국해양수산개발원 2008

2 Manley Ottmer Hudson, "Thirtieth Year of the World Court" 46 : 1952

3 Hans Kelsen, "The law of the United Nations: a critical analysis of its fundamental problems: with supplement" The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd 2000

4 Hersch Lauterpacht, "The development of international law by the International Court" Stevens & Sons 1958

5 Hugh W. A. Thirlway, "The Indication of Provisional Measures by the International Court of Justice, in Interim Measures Indicated by International Courts" Springer 1994

6 Michael W. Reisman, "The Enforcement of International Judgment" 63 : 1969

7 Bruno Simma, "The Charter of United Nations: A Commentary" Oxford Univ. Press 2002

8 Edvard Hambro, "The Binding Character of Provisional Measures of Protection Indicated by the International Court of Justice, in Rechtsfragen International ein Organization: Festschrift Fuer Hans Wehberg" 1956

9 Åke Hammarskjöld, "Quelques aspects de la question de la question des measures conservatoires en droit internationale positif, in Zeitschrift für Ausländishes Öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht" 1935

10 Eckhard Hellbeck, "Provisional Measures of the International Court of Justice - Are They Binding?" 9 : 1985

11 "Passage through the Great Belt (Finland v. Denmark), Provisional Measures, Order of 29 July 1991" I.C.J. 1991

12 "Nuclear Tests (Australia v. France), Interim Protection, Order of 22 June 1973" I.C.J. 1973

13 "Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Correspondence, No. 55"

14 "League of Nations Treaty Series" 6 (6): 379-,

15 Gerald Fitzmaurice, "Law and Procedure of the International Court of Justice, 1951-4: Questions of Jurisdiction, Competence and Procedure" 34 : 1958

16 Aloysius P. Llamzon, "Jurisdiction and Compliance in Recent Decisions of the International Court of Justice" 18 (18): 2008

17 Jerome B. Elkind, "Interim Protection: A Functional Approach" Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1981

18 E. Dumbauld, "Interim Measures of Protection" 168-, 1932

19 "Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment" I.C.J. 1997

20 Oscar Schachter, "Enforcement of International Judicial and Arbitral Decisions" 54 : 1960

21 "Electricity Company of Sofia and Bulgaria Order of 5 December 1939 (Request for the Indication of Interim Measures of Protection), A/B 79"

22 Niemeyer, "Einstweilige Verfügungen des Weltgerichtshofs, Ihr Wesen und Ihre Grenzen" 1932

23 C. H. Crockett, "Effects of Interim Measures of Protection in the International Court of Justice" 7 : 1977

24 "Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts" UN

25 Constanze Schulte, "Compliance with Decisions of the International Court of Justice" Oxford Univ. Press 2004

26 "Communication, Nicaragua to ICJ, 26 June 1984, 9(c), Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Correspondence, No. 55"

27 Brigitte Stern, "Chapter 17, The Elements of an International Wrongful Act, in The Law of International Responsibility: Oxford Commentaries on International Law" Oxford Univ. Press 2010

28 Karin Oellers-Frahm, "Article 41, in The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary" Oxford Univ. Press 2006

29 "Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Provisional Measures, Order of 13 September 1993" I.C.J. 1993

30 "Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Provisional Masures, Order of 8 April 1993" I.C.J. 1993

31 "Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Judgment of 26 February 2007" I.C.J. 2007

32 박기갑, "9⋅11이 유엔 집단안전보장체제에미친 영향" 국제법평론회 (30) : 75-107, 2009