이 게시판은 RSS와 엮인글이 가능합니다.
로그인을 하시면 댓글을 쓰실 수 있습니다..
* 광고성 글은 바로 삭제되며, 민주주의법학연구회의 설립취지에 어긋나는 글은 삭제 또는 다른 게시판으로 이동될 수 있습니다.
국가인권위원회 각하와 기각 결정에 대한 평가 / 신수경
원문 내용 공개(PDF 파일 등)는 민주법학 통권 제34호 발간 후에 이루어집니다.
민주법학 통권 제33호는 온라인서점 등에서 구입하실 수 있습니다.
민주법학 통권 제32호까지의 원문 내용은 본 자료실에서 확인하실 수 있습니다.
국가인권위원회, 인권단체, 진정, 각하, 기각
How to Understand Two-type Unacceptable Decisions by the NHRCK since November 2001
Shin, Soo Kyoung
Secretary for Policing and Planning of
Human Rights Solidarity for New Society
The National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea(NHRCK) was established five years ago. The NHRCK had resulted from three-year devotions and strivings of Korean human rights organizations and non-governmental organizations to establish it as a state authority not a corporation having a special status under the Ministry of Justice(MOJ).
It was one of the best policy-making, I think, that Korean society decided to introduce the NHRCK as a state body for human rights affairs, under the circumstances most structural and systematic human rights violations or abuses have been committed by the public forces in the transitional Korean society.
In spite of the Korean people’s willing and hopes, the NHRCK has failed to perform its redress function satisfatorily, one of key functions, dismissing or rejecting many of the people’s complaints or petitions concerning human rights violations and discriminations.
Although there have been limits including time limits under the National Human Rights Commission Act, we should point that the weak administration or operation capacities of the NHRCK caused many dismissals or rejections. We also find that out of high ratios of non-violations decisions compared with other state bodies, apparently, many complaint cases were canceled by the complainants themselves. However, it was important that many petitioners’ withdrawals resulted from the long time efforts to settle their cases in the process of the NHRCK.
The NHRCK may not deal with the complaints or cases that have been pending in the police or the court, except of officers’ oppressions under the Act. But the Commission has narrowly interpreted the related provisions, like above mentioned legal limits, and not admitted investigating or deciding those cmplaints that contain different facts from the pending cases in the police or courts.
Almost Korean human rights groups have criticized that the NHRCK has not adapted in accordance with the human rights principles and international standards in the consideration of its human rights complaints and the members of the NHRCK have had no or very weak human rights sensibility.
All state bodies, especially the NHRCK as a human rights authority, should be based in or among people and human rights victims. So the NHRCK should investigate the human rights violations and discriminations cases thoroughly. Because all human rights victims have the right to redress of their grievances, the authority has the obligation to provide them with proper remedies. In this context, I propose to introduce a review or second consideration procedure that would deal with the cases rejected or dismissed by the sub-committee of the NHRCK.
National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea, human rights organization, Complaint, Dismissal, Rejection