지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This article deals with two main issues: ①the Nature of state parties’ obligations of International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights(ESCR) and ②Roles of National Human Rights Institution.
The understanding of human rights including ESCR in Korea has not shown difference with that of the international community. From the normative point of view, ESCR have been recognized in the Korean Constitution even long before Korea ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights(ICESCR), yet they have received much less attention than civil and political rights. For a long time Korean society has recognized ESCR as programmatic rights when interpreting them in terms of constitutional basis, and consequently limited ESCR to the obligation to strive or aspiration toward life worthy of human beings. For that reason, it has been broadly accepted that the individual ESCR prescribed in the Constitution cannot be implemented without them into legislation.
The state obligations under the international human rights instruments are understood to be multi-faceted. That is to say, state obligations are understood to have a three or four layered structure, emphasizing obligations to respect, protect, fulfill or to promote. The understanding that state obligations are multi-dimensional makes it possible to have realistic approach in the domestic implementation of ESCR. The dichotomy between civil and political rights and ESCR, namely that civil and political rights are negative rights and ESCR are positive, has made individual rights under the ICESCR just declarations in a vacuum.
Recently, in its second term, National Human Rights Commission(NHRC) has listed the implementation of ESCR among its priorities. The most important factor in studying ESCR is to understand the nature of the rights and state obligations, for without the understanding that the nature of state obligation in ESCR is not different from that of civil and political rights, there is hardly any room for work for ESCR by the human rights institution.
NHRC was established following the Paris Principles. Thus the Commission is mandated to recommend human rights policies to institutions concerned and to conduct investigation of complaints as well. However, compared to no limitation on policy recommendation, the statutory legislation called The National Human Rights Act clearly puts limitation on investigation of complaints, which should be, in principle, an alleged violation of civil and political rights. In order to overcome the limitation, while trying to revise the Statute, the Commission is dealing with limited ESCR violation cases by interpretation of the Constitution at the moment. That is to say, Article 10 of the Korean Constitution stipulates the right to human dignity and to pursuit of happiness, and the violation of Article 10 falls into the Commission’s mandate of complaints investigation. Therefore, with the interpretation of the general provision, the Commission has decided whether or not the government violates ESCR.
Finally, the author suggests NHRC to implement state obligations of ICESCR in Korea several tasks:
1. NHRC shall make standards on state obligations of ESCR to recommend government bodies and legislature.
2. NHRC shall make a realistic action plan to substantiate the above goal. In this regard roles of investigation and monitoring function of the NHRC shall be more stressed.
The understanding of human rights including ESCR in Korea has not shown difference with that of the international community. From the normative point of view, ESCR have been recognized in the Korean Constitution even long before Korea ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights(ICESCR), yet they have received much less attention than civil and political rights. For a long time Korean society has recognized ESCR as programmatic rights when interpreting them in terms of constitutional basis, and consequently limited ESCR to the obligation to strive or aspiration toward life worthy of human beings. For that reason, it has been broadly accepted that the individual ESCR prescribed in the Constitution cannot be implemented without them into legislation.
The state obligations under the international human rights instruments are understood to be multi-faceted. That is to say, state obligations are understood to have a three or four layered structure, emphasizing obligations to respect, protect, fulfill or to promote. The understanding that state obligations are multi-dimensional makes it possible to have realistic approach in the domestic implementation of ESCR. The dichotomy between civil and political rights and ESCR, namely that civil and political rights are negative rights and ESCR are positive, has made individual rights under the ICESCR just declarations in a vacuum.
Recently, in its second term, National Human Rights Commission(NHRC) has listed the implementation of ESCR among its priorities. The most important factor in studying ESCR is to understand the nature of the rights and state obligations, for without the understanding that the nature of state obligation in ESCR is not different from that of civil and political rights, there is hardly any room for work for ESCR by the human rights institution.
NHRC was established following the Paris Principles. Thus the Commission is mandated to recommend human rights policies to institutions concerned and to conduct investigation of complaints as well. However, compared to no limitation on policy recommendation, the statutory legislation called The National Human Rights Act clearly puts limitation on investigation of complaints, which should be, in principle, an alleged violation of civil and political rights. In order to overcome the limitation, while trying to revise the Statute, the Commission is dealing with limited ESCR violation cases by interpretation of the Constitution at the moment. That is to say, Article 10 of the Korean Constitution stipulates the right to human dignity and to pursuit of happiness, and the violation of Article 10 falls into the Commission’s mandate of complaints investigation. Therefore, with the interpretation of the general provision, the Commission has decided whether or not the government violates ESCR.
Finally, the author suggests NHRC to implement state obligations of ICESCR in Korea several tasks:
1. NHRC shall make standards on state obligations of ESCR to recommend government bodies and legislature.
2. NHRC shall make a realistic action plan to substantiate the above goal. In this regard roles of investigation and monitoring function of the NHRC shall be more stressed.
목차
Ⅰ. 글머리에: 사회권을 둘러싼 실무상의 고민
Ⅱ. 사회권에서의 국가의 의무, 그 성격에 대한 새로운 고찰
Ⅲ. 사회권의 보장과 국가인권위원회의 역할
【참고문헌】
【Abstract】
참고문헌 (16)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문과 연관된 판례 (5)
-
헌법재판소 1998. 2. 27.자 97헌가10, 97헌바42, 97헌마354(병합) 전원재판부 결정
1.청구인의 유족연금 지급거부처분 취소 청구가 구 국가유공자예우등에관한법률 제77조 소정의 소멸시효완성을 이유로 기각된 것이 아님이 분명하고, “이 법에 의하여 보상을 받을 권리는 법 제6조 제1항의 규정에 의한 등록신청을 한 날이 속하는 달로부터 발생한다”고 규정한 같은 법 제9조가 위헌으로 결정되어 청구인의 이 사건 헌법소원심판청구가 인용된다고 하더라도
자세히 보기 -
헌법재판소 2003. 5. 15. 선고 2002헌마90 전원재판부
가.국가유공자의 상이등급에 따라서 기본연금지급에 차등을 두는 것은 국가유공자등예우및지원에관한법률의 보상원칙에 부합하고, 실질적 평등을 구현하는 것이며, 차등의 정도와 방법도 입법재량의 범위내에 있으므로, 그 차등지급에는 합리적인 이유가 있어서 평등원칙에 위배되지 않는다.
자세히 보기 -
헌법재판소 2000. 6. 1. 선고 98헌마216 전원재판부
가. 이 사건 규정은 보상금수급권의 종류 및 요건, 시설보호규정과 함께 국가유공자의 공헌과 희생에 대하여 예우하고 보상할 구체적인 방법, 즉 국가유공자에게 보상금을 지급할지 아니면 양로시설 등에서 보호할지, 국가의 재정상 한정된 보상금을 어떻게 배분할지 등의 기본적 방법을 정하는 입법내용으로서, 전체적으로 볼 때 국가유공자에 대한 보상내용을
자세히 보기 -
헌법재판소 1995. 7. 21. 선고 93헌가14 全員裁判部
가. 재판의 전제성(前提性)이라 함은,
자세히 보기 -
헌법재판소 2001. 9. 27. 선고 2000헌마342 전원재판부
가.청구인들 중 이 사건 심판청구 당시 이미 특별채용된 자들의 경우에는 특별채용이 된 날 이 사건 법률 제7조 제5항 본문 중 `사실상 근무기간은 경력과 호봉으로 인정되지 아니하며` 부분과 관련하여 기본권침해사유가 발생하였음을 알았다고 할 것이므로 그때부터 청구기간을 기산하여야 할 것인바, 이 사건의 경우 2000. 5. 24. 헌법소원심판
자세히 보기
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
법적 권리로서 경제적, 사회적 및 문화적 권리의 확립
법학연구
2013 .08
-
한국과 태국에서의 인권보장: 국가인권위원회를 중심으로
동남아연구
2007 .01
-
사회권규약의 발전과 국내적 함의
국제법학회논총
2016 .06
-
국내적 인권과 국제적 인권? : 인권 개념의 이중성에 대한 소고
한양법학
2011 .08
-
인권의 국제적 실천성에 대한 연구
사회과학연구
2006 .02
-
국가인권위원회에 의한 인권보장과 과제
유럽헌법연구
2011 .01
-
국제연합 사회권위원회와 인권이사회를 통한 주거권 보장
인권과 정의
2019 .01
-
복지권의 구성과 성격
한국사회복지학
2003 .12
-
국가인권위원회의 개혁방향
서강법률논총
2012 .08
-
인권사상의 현대적 전개
법학연구
2005 .12
-
Regional Human Rights Mechanism and the Alternatives for Asia
동북아법연구
2017 .01
-
인권개념의 ‘세대’적 접근에 대한 비판적 고찰
법학연구
2018 .05
-
인권기본법 제정을 위하여
저스티스
2012 .04
-
인권과 시민권은 어떻게 등장하고 발전해 왔나
시민과세계
2009 .06
-
A Study on the Public Awareness Towards Children’s Rights to Live in Better Environments - Based on the Analysis of Decision Cases of the National Human Rights Commission of Korea
법학논총
2020 .05
-
「국가인권위원회법」의 개정방향에 관한 연구
홍익법학
2018 .01
-
법에 의한 인권 보호의 한계와 국가인권기구의 존립근거 - ‘정규 국가기구’로서의 인권위의 기능과 위상 -
고려법학
2010 .01
-
사회권의 법적 성격
법학논총
2010 .02
-
하버마스의 인권 개념에 관하여
법철학연구
2011 .08
-
해외진출 한국기업의 인권침해에 대한 책임구성 고찰
일감법학
2013 .01
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2013-360-000704158