logo

한국어

자료실

민주법연의 간행물인 민주법학의 원문을 보실 수 있습니다.
이 게시판은 RSS와 엮인글이 가능합니다.
로그인을 하시면 댓글을 쓰실 수 있습니다..
이 곳의 글은 최근에 변경된 순서로 정렬됩니다.
* 광고성 글은 바로 삭제되며, 민주주의법학연구회의 설립취지에 어긋나는 글은 삭제 또는 다른 게시판으로 이동될 수 있습니다.

공무원의 정치적 중립의무 비판 - 미국 공무원법제와의 비교법적 고찰 / 임재홍

[국문 주제어]

정치적 권리, 중립의무, 해치법


Critical Comment on Political Neutrality of the Public Officials
- Comparative Analysis with the Hatch Act in America -

Lim, Chae-Hong
Professor, Yeungnam Univ.

Members of the Korean Government Employee's Union(KGEU) announced their support for the Democratic Labor Party in the April 15 2004 general election at a press conference in Yoido, Seoul.
A controversy has erupted with the ongoing dispute over the political neutrality of government employees as unionized public servants on Tuesday announced their support for a political party advocating workers󰡑rights. The move by the KGEU conflicts with the Constitutional Court's decision that public servants should remain neutral in politics, as well as with government policy, and thus risks punitive measures being taken against them.
The arrest of the involved public officials came right after the Seoul Central District Court issued an arrest warrant for them, allegedly because they led the union's political engagement ahead of the April 15 elections. The arrest followed a government warning that public employees who were found to have been involved in illegal campaigning would be subject to stern punishment.
'The National Public Officials laws ban public workers from involving in political campaigns, but it doesn't necessarily mean that we can't express our political opinions,' KGEU said in a statement after an emergency meeting.
In a similar case, United States District Court stated, "when the strictures of the Hatch Act and the First Amendment seems to conflict it was the aim of the Congress that the Act be construed in favor of free expression", so "the statutory prohibition against taking an 'active part in political management or in political campaigns' encompasses only active participation in, on behalf of, or in connection with, the organized efforts of political parties, clubs, and candidates"(Blaylock v. Merit System Protection Board, 851 F.2d 1348(11th Cir. 1988) at 1354).
Also in Biller case, the court said, "Finding 'partisan activity' implicitly requires a nexus between the government employee and the effort to promote the political party or elect its candidate(Biller v. Merit System Protection Board, 863 F. 2d 1079(2d Cir. 1988) at 1090).
In October of 1993, legislation which substancially amended the Hatch Act was signed into law. the Hatch Act Amendsments of 1993 permit most federal employees to take an active part in partisan political management and partisan political campaigns. While federal employees are still prohibited from seeking public office in partisan election, most employees are free to work, while off duty, on the partisan campaigns of candidates of their choices.
For more than a half century the idea that public officials should not be involved in a partisan politics has been a fundermental civil service feature. This concept of neutrality was formalized in the Public Officials Acts and the National election Act. An underlying rationale for this idea is that efficiency in government service requires a lack of partisanship in administration.
In my opinion the public officials as private citizen enjoy political rights, therefore their participation in political management and political campaign should be guaranteed.


[Key Words]

Political right,  Political Neutrality, the Hatch Act

List of Articles
번호 제목 날짜 조회 수sort
1122 자료: 트럼프는 ‘승인’ 망언 취소하고 즉각 사과하라! file 2018-11-07 12
1121 자료: 콜텍 노동자들을 공장으로! 자본의 논리와 사법부 적폐를 청산하라! file 2019-03-07 13
1120 자료: 사회복지시설의 종교 강요, 이제는 끝내야 file 2018-11-07 15
1119 자료: 뒤늦은 인권위 결정, 이제라도 유성기업은 민주노조 조합원에 대한 차별을 중단하라! file 2019-03-07 16
1118 자료: 법관 블랙리스트 추가조사결과와 대법원 13인의 입장발표에 대한 우리의 입장 file 2018-03-12 20
1117 63호 자료: 새로운 세상, 길을 걷자. 박근혜 - 재벌총수를 감옥으로 대행진 file 2017-03-13 22
1116 64호 자료: 사람을 철거한 자리에 세운 송전탑, 한전사장 조환익은 산업자원부 장관 자격 없다. file 2017-07-12 22
1115 64호 자료: 주권자를 우롱하는 야합적 헌법개정 시도, 즉각 중단하라 file 2017-07-12 22
1114 63호 자료: 특권이 몸통이다! 이재용을 구속하라! file 2017-03-13 23
1113 63호 자료: 법원은 이재용, 박상진에 대한 구속영장을 발부하라 file 2017-03-13 25
1112 논문: 초․중등학생 보호자의 권리 유형과 침해에 대한 민사적 구제 / 임종수 file 2018-11-07 26
1111 전선: 경찰개혁위원회의 성과와 과제 / 박병욱 file 2018-11-07 27
1110 64호 자료: 헌법의 관점에서 보는 정국 수습방안: 헌법재판소의 탄핵인용결정을 환영한다 file 2017-07-12 29
1109 자료: 충청남도 인권조례 폐지 결정을 규탄한다 file 2018-03-12 29
1108 자료: 이재용 집행유예? 상식과 법감정에 반한 엉터리 법리해석과 노골적인 이재용봐주기에 분노한다 file 2018-03-12 29
1107 특집: 남북통일의 실질적 의미와 법제통합 ― 남북연합헌법과 노동문제를 중심으로 / 윤영상 file 2018-11-07 30
1106 번역: 사법체계의 독립에 관한 유럽의 기준들: 제2부 검찰 / 김종서 역 file 2019-03-07 30
1105 63호 자료: 오늘 받을 벌, 내일로 미루지 마라 file 2017-03-13 30
1104 63호 자료: 이재용에 대한 구속영장 기각에 분노하는 법학교수들의 입장 file 2017-03-13 30
1103 63호 자료: 이재용 구속영장발부를 환영하며, 이제는 법의 정의를 바로 세워야 한다 file 2017-03-13 30