유럽인권협약과 프랑스 국내법원

변해철 한국외국어대학교 외국학종합연구센터 법학연구소 2004 외법논집 Vol.17 No.-

la Convention europe´enne des droits de l´homme est ne´e comme un instrument juridique qui pouvait contribuer a` la construction d'une nouvelle Europe. Pourtant, c'est la Cour europe´enne des droits de l'homme, la premie`re juridiction internationale de protection des droits fondamentaux, qui pre´cise l'intertpre`te supre^me de la Convention. La jurisprudence de la Cour ne va pas sans se heurter a` celle des instances internes des pays membres. Par exemple, la France n'ayant ratifie´ la Convention europe´enne que depuis 1974, elle se trouvait sur des situations ambivalentes entre la Cour europe´enne et ses instances internes. Mais, conside´rant que la Cour europe´enne devient une ve´ritable Europe judiciaire depuis son entre´e en fonction en novembre 1998 comme la Cour unique et permanente, la France est bien oblige´e de s'adapter a` la jurisprudence de la Cour europe´enne et de re´former son syste`me judiciaire. Par exemple, une ame´riolation des pratiques juridiques et des textes de lois en vigueur, une meilleure connaissance de la Convention, etc.

유럽연합 기본권헌장에 대한 개관

변해철 한국외국어대학교 외국학종합연구센터 법학연구소 2003 외법논집 Vol.14 No.-

Equality step by step in Korean Constitution

( Byun Hae-cheol ) 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 2011 외법논집 Vol.35 No.1

The desire for equal society is expressed in various ways in very different societies. The principle of equality being confirmed by many national Constitutions, the question is how we can overcome the inequality which has been formed in the society for a long time. Nowadays, it is considered that the concept of equality does not mean absolute/formal equality but relative/substantial equality. The concept of relative/substantial equality was not enough to answer to the questions of inequality in some fields where they were raised from the technical, material and/or spiritual problems. Analyzing some cases of Korean Constitutional Court, even it was not clearly determined by itself, we could find a kind of concept which has contributed to complete the concept of relative equality and to answer to the questions concerned. It could be the concept of ‘equality step by step’. The concept of equality step by step could be defined as equality, realized step by step by the policy of the State improving progressively inequality in a particular field, but in accordance with reasonable standards. In reality, this concept contributed to solve the difference between constitutional norm and constitutional reality. However, depending largely on the legislators’ discretion in achieving its goal, it could be a simple instrument of justifying legislative discrimination. In this regard, the Constitutional Court has to play some important roles in examining the equality in question. If it is concerned with limitation of rights, the concept has not to be applied in principle. And, even though it is concerned with complement of citizens’ rights, it should not result in partial preference, in particular, continuously.

인도네시아 헌법과 종교

변해철 ( Byun Hae-cheol ) 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 2012 외법논집 Vol.36 No.1

It is not very easy to generally define the relationship between state and religion because, when looking at the historical perspective, the relations between these two have appeared in various forms pending certain circumstances that the state faces. Nowadays, there is no exception when discussing the issue of this relationship. However, one can say the difference from the old time is that the constitution normally prescribes the relationship between the two. Indonesia has the largest Muslim population of any country in the world. During the period of constitutional reform from 1999 to 2002, several Muslim groups and political parties tried to introduce syari’ah into the Constitution. However, they recognized that their proposal would not make a consensus among different religions, political parties, etc. Pancasila-based State is considered as the only solution for the purpose of maintaining the unitary state in Indonesia. A State should be neutral to religion. although human legal thought could be inspired by religious laws, any religious laws cannot or may not be enforced by the state. All parts of society, such as the family, the religion, economy and political parties participating in decision-making, drafting any law, etc., they try to realize their interests and objectives. We can admit that religion can have an impact on public life. However, it should be processed and enforced through state mechanism, rather than religious law. To conclude, the state involvement in religions shall be understood in the scope of guaranteeing individuals’ freedom of religions as much as possible from the perspective of fulfilling its duty. Moreover, it should be formed in the scope of substantial equality between diverse religions and of preventing discrimination. This paper will discuss and analyze the relations between state and religion through the constitutional dispute in the religious areas.

태국의 헌법재판제도와 헌법현실 -한국과의 비교 고찰-

변해철 ( Byun Hae-cheol ) 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 2006 외법논집 Vol.21 No.-

The recent constitutional revisions in South-East Asia, especially in Thailand as well as in Indonesia, have been based on the people's deep enthusiasm for democracy. They adopted a new judicial review system - the Constitutional Court - to safeguard the Constitution. Particularly, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand reforming the Thai political system to encourage and promote greater participation by Thai citizens in political process, to bring honesty, transparency, accountability and legitimacy into the political system, and to ensure greater political stability, the Constitutional Court of Thailand has been created. The Court is empowered by the Constitution to review the constitutionality of all laws, to make judicial decisions on dissolution, establishment or resolution of a political party, and to pass judgment of competence dispute and counter corruption dispute. According to its jurisprudence, it could be considered to contribute to realize the main goals of the new Constitution. Especially, the political stability could be established through the cases on competence dispute and political parties. But, in the future, the Thai Constitutional Court has to contribute also to protect the people's fundamental rights, enlarged by the new Constitution.

태국과 한국 헌법상의 총리제도

변해철 ( Byun Hae Cheol ),( Nachcha Khunataff ) 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 2010 외법논집 Vol.34 No.1

양국에서의 총리의 지위와 권한에 대한 비교연구로서 과거 운영상의 문제점을 분석하고 그 개선방안에 대해 검토한다. 한국은 민주공화국으로서 그리고 태국은 입헌군주국으로서의 민주정체를 수립하고 권력분립을 이루고자 1948년과 1932년에 각각 총리제를 도입하였다. 그러나 각국은 민주주의가 성숙되어가는 과정에서 장기집권이나 쿠데타 등에 따른 권력집중이라는 부작용이 발생하였고, 이에 따른 헌법개정이 반복되었다. 한국 헌법에서는 정부형태의 변화(대통령제 내지 신대 The separation of powers has been regarded as principle of organization of the State’s powers. The Prime Minister system was introduced in Korean Constitutions for the purpose of controlling the power of the President in 1948. In Thai Constitutions, it was introduced when there was a change in the county's government system from the absolute monarchy system to the democratic system in 1932. The Prime Minister system was one of main topics in Korean and Thai constitutional revisions. In Korea, the status and powers of the Prime Minister were changed according to the forms of government. Under a pure or neopresidential system (1954 - 1960, 1962 - 1987) the Prime Minister played a administrative role as a simple assistant organ of the President. Under a parliamesidry system of government (1960 - 1961) the former played not onorma administrative role but also a political role as Head of the Administration. Under a mixted system of government (1948 - 1954, 1987 - ) his role was up to the President’s political philosophy or the parliamentary majority. In Thai, although a parliamentary system of government was always maintained in Constitutional revisions, the Prime Minister system worked differently and could be classified in three types: anti-democracy, semi-democracy and democracy, which had been circulated one by one. No matter how the governments were established by election or by military Coup d’Etat, the Prime Minister had a strong power. In Korea, a new constitutional revision is asked about the relationship between the President and the Prime Minister, we have actually no consensus about that. For the time being, the Thai Constitution of 2007 could contribute to keeping the balance between the political powers in reality.

연구논문 : 인도네시아의 입법절차에 관한 연구

변해철 ( Hae Cheol Byun ) 국제헌법학회,한국학회 2013 世界憲法硏究 Vol.19 No.3

인도네시아는 민주화에 따라 네 차례 헌법 개정을 하였고 그 중 1999년의 첫 번째 헌법 개정은 대통령의 권한을 축소하고 대통령과 의회의 불균형을 해소하는 차원에서 이루어졌다. 특히 통령의 입법에 관한 권한을 국민의회에 이동 내지는 재구성하였고 이를 구체화하기 위하여 법령정비작업을 진행하고 있다. 과거의 ‘대통령의 주도적 입법권 행사 및 이에 대한 국민의회의 통제’라는 입법 메커니즘 대신에 ‘국민의회의 주도적 입법권행사 및 대통령의 동반자적 참여’라는 새로운입법 메커니즘을 채택하였는데, 이는 권력분립적 측면에서 볼 때 매우 특이한 제도라고 할 수 있다. 그러나 현실적으로는 국민의회와 대통령 간의 입법권 행사상의 협력 강제는 다인종, 다종교, 다언어를 특성으로 하는 헌법현실 속에서 일정한 구조적 한계를 가지고 있다. 그밖에 과거와 현재의 규범체계간의 모순 내지는 충돌 현상이 과도기적으로 나타나고 있다. 인도네시아에서는 법률 및 의회규칙을 통하여 입법절차 상의 국민이나 지역 주민의 참여를 보장하고 있다. 기능적 권력분립원리를 실현한다는 의미를 부여할 수 있다. 그러나 법률상의 권리로서의 국민의 입법참여권은 현실적으로는 잘 보장되고 있지는 않은 실정이다. 근본적으로 국민의 입법 참여가 의회의 입법절차에서 무시되고 있는 실정이며, 나아가 국민 참여 원칙에 반하는 하위법령이 제정되기도 하였다. 시민사회의 적극적이고 자발적인 참여가 요구되는 대목이다. 이러한 문제를 해결하기 위한 국가기관간의 협력과 조정, 국민의 참여의식 확대 등이 지속적으로 요구된다. Indonesian Constitution of 1945 has been amended four times after 1990s` Democratization Movement. The first amendment in 1999 was especially focused on the restoration of balance of powers between the President of the Republic and DPR(the National Assembly) including the power to establish laws. The constitutional amendment in 1999 made shifting this power from the President to DPR. However, it faced, in pratice, some difficulies; disharmony between old regulations and new ones, lack of experiences in cooperating between the President and DPR, etc. It is by Law on formation of laws (Law No. 10 of 2004) that the right to participate in legislative procedure is allowed to the People (the Community). However, in practice, it has not been respected not only by DPR, but also by the Executive, including local governments. It could take time to resolve these problems, for which coordination between public institutions and the People`s will of participation in legislation are continually needed.

태국의 민주화와 1997년 헌법개정

변해철 ( Byun Hae-cheol ) 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 2005 외법논집 Vol.18 No.-

Thailand has had a rich experience in the constitutional system. In 1932, Thailand changed from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy. In the 72 years which have elapsed since that date, Thailand has had 16 Constitutions, some of which have also been amended. Thailand has had some Constitutions which provided majority support for the government in the parliament. Its parliament was made up of two kinds of representatives: half of the representatives were elected by the people, while the other half were appointed by the King on the advice of the Prime Minister. For a certain period, its parliament was consisted of the House of representatives of which members were elected by the people and the Senate of which members were appointed by the King on the advice of the Prime Minister. The political system was always controlled by the military until 1992, while the King played traditionally an important political role as “Head of State". The present Constitution of Thailand was adopted in 1997. The Constitution of 1997, fundamentally reformed, recognised more rights and freedoms than any other previous Constitution. It also made government more transparent through anti-corruption provisions, for example, establishment of a National Counter Corruption Commission, a Constitutional Court, the National Human Rights Commission, etc. In conclusion, regarding the historical reliance of Thais on patron-client relationships within its political culture, there is still a long way to go.

Sharing Economy and Freedom of Occupation in Korean Constitution

변해철(BYUN, Hae Cheol) 유럽헌법학회 2019 유럽헌법연구 Vol.0 No.30

통상적으로 인간은 자신의 지적이거나 육체적 활동을 통해 생활 수단을 확보한다. 따라서, 그 자신의 활동을 자유롭게 선택하고 영위할 수 있어야 한다. 이러한 직업의 자유는 직업의 선택 및 수행의 자유, 기업의 자유, 경쟁의 자유 등을 포함한다. 이는 모든 인간 활동을 국가가 계획하고 실행하는 계획경제질서와는 양립할 수 없다. 오늘날 과학기술의 발달로 모든 정보, 재화 등의 공유가 요구되고 있다. 새로운 체제의 도입은 기존질서에의 도전을 의미하며, 이에 따른 저항이 발생한다. 최근 한국에서는 SNS를 통한 카셰어링에 의한 운송업자와 기존의 택시영업자간에 마찰이 심하게 발생하고 있다. 두가지 형태의 운송업자 간의 충돌을 조화롭게 해결하는 것 또한 헌법적 요청이다. 우리 헌법재판소도 입법자가 일정한 직업이나 제도 등 기존질서에 억매이게 되면 공공복리적 수요에 따르는 사회 개혁을 실현할 수 없다는 점을 확인해준 바 있다. 이용자를 위한 차원에서의 경쟁보장, 새로운 창업 및 직업수행의 자유와 함께 기존 질서 보장 또한 헌법적 요청의 일부이므로, 사회 발전적 측면에서 그 보호의 수준을 결정하여야 하며, 과잉금지원칙이나 신뢰보호원칙 적용 시에 이를 고려한 적절한 기준 정립이 요구된다. As human beings get usually the means of living through their own physical and/or intellectual activities, it is normal that they have to be able to decide and exercise their own activities, so-called, freedom of occupation. It includes freedom of choice, freedom of exercising an occupation, freedom of business and enterprise, freedom of competitionIt, etc. And, it is not compatible, in principle, with planned economy order. Today, the development of science and technology requires the sharing of all information and goods. The introduction of a new system represents a challenge to the existing order, and resistance arises. Recently, in Korea, there has been a serious social conflicts between licensed taxi drivers and individual drivers sharing their cars through SNS. Sharing one’s car for a fee, as a type of sharing economy, it means an appearance of new type’s public transport like Uber taxi and one of a new job. It asks to share the taxi market between traditional taxi drivers and individual drivers offering their car to the public for a fee. Even though it is also a kind of constitutional requests to harmonize the two kinds of job, sharing means of transport can be advantageous for users through competition between them. And, it is doubtful whether we will be able to deny this time change. As KCC has already confirmed, it is impossible to reform the society, including the profession or the system, according to the needs of the public welfare if the legislator has to adhere to the existing order that has already been formed. Based on a certain degree of confidence protection, new changes must be actively accepted in legislation and in constitutional review, especially, in the field of freedom of occupation.

한국과 프랑스의 의원의 불체포특권에 관한 연구

변해철 ( Byun Hae Cheol ) 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 2015 외법논집 Vol.39 No.1

의원의 불체포특권은 1603년 영국의 의회특권법에서 명문화된 이후 각국의 헌법에 수용된 이래로 의원의 자주성을 보장하는 중요한 제도적 장치로 기능해왔음은 주지의 사실이다. 의회민주주의가 어느정도 정착된 국가의 경우, 최근에는 이러한 특권을 축소 문제가 제기되어 오고 있다. 프랑스의 경우, 1995년 헌법개정을 통하여 불체포특권을 내용적으로 축소하여 소추에 관한 특권을 제외하고 체포에 관한 특권에 한하도록 하였고 동시에 절차적으로도 불체포특권의 박탈을 용이하게 한바 있다. 그런데, 1995년 헌법개정으로 불체포특권의 적용범위는 축소되었지만 의회 회기의 연장, 소속 의회 의장단의 동의 대상의 확대 등으로 현실적으로는 오히려 역설적으로 의원에 대한 사법적 보호를 강화하였다는 평가를 받고 있다. 우리의 경우도, 의원의 불체포특권이 남용되고 있다는 비판 속에 이를 축소하자는 주장도 제기되고 있는 실정인데, 프랑스 사례를 참고로 하여 전체적 헌법체계에 합치되는 실효성있는 개선이 요구된다. 다만, 의원의 불체포특권의 확대나 제한은 헌법사항으로 헌법 개정을 통해서만 가능하다고 본다. It was by the Privilege of parliament Act in 1603 that immunity from arrest was given to English Members of Parliament against the King who used abusively arrest them. In France, It has been admitted to legislators since the Constitution of 1791 after French Revolution. Being not criminally responsible for their speeches, votes and other actions as Members of Parliament, legislators are, however, responsible for their actions as normal citizens. There are, however, strong limitations as to their prosecution. Before the French Constitutional revision in 1995, the arrest immunity was not only applied to the arrest, but also to the prosecution. This immunity raised many questions. French people wanted to reduce the parliamentarian privilege concerned by amending their Constitution. Actually, according to the article 26 paragraph 2 of the French Constitution of 1958, no Member of Parliament shall be arrested for a serious crime or other major offence, nor shall he be subjected to any other custodial or semi-custodial measure, without the authorization of the Bureau of the House of which he is a member. Such authorization shall not be required in the case of a serious crime or other major offence committed flagrante delicto or when a conviction has become final. The parliamentarian privilege being admitted only as immunity from arrest, it was considered to be in practice enlarged. At first, permission of the Bureau of the House for removing the privilege is not only needed for arrest but also for any other custodial or semi-custodial measure. Secondly, the ordinary session is extended from 6 months to 9 by constitutional amendment. (Article 28 paragraph 1) Sometimes, to be a member of Parliament, especially Senator who is elected by an electoral college in France, it could be considered as a way to prevent a politician from being prosecuted for various alleged crimes of corruption and misuse of public funds. That’s why immunity from arrest is still at issue.