본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

국회의원의 겸직금지와 법적 책임에 관한 비교법적 고찰

Comparative Legal Study on Congressmen’s Concurrent Office Holding and their Legal Responsibilities

0

조회

0

다운로드

3

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

Congressmen are members of National Assembly and representatives of the public. Meantime, Congressmen carry out critical functions on national level, in order to successful represent democracy and parliamentary system. Also, according to representative democracy principles of free delegation and related prohibitions, Congressmen are politically responsible for the consequences of country’s decision or policy making, but not legally responsible for such consequences. However, the representative democracy system is changing, due to the changing trend of party oriented state and administrative state,transformation of electoral system, declining quality of Congressman, and more public involvement in political participation. Especially, the opinion of the public’s representative organization indicates the nation’s opinion and its democratic legitimacy is mandated to be checked through various ways, including electoral system, voting system, and exercise of human rights. For changed principle of representative democracy and parliamentarism to come true harmoniously, it is necessary to redefine and update the responsibilities of Congressmen. In this aspect, there has been active discussions recently, of measures to restrict commercial activities while Congressmen are in office. This should be highly praised since the discussion is the measure for itself, in order to recover Congressmen’s original functions and to ensure their reasonable parliamentary activities. According to current Constitution Law clause three, it defines “Congressmen can not hold concurrent office that is enacted by law”. This is because concurrent office holding is prone to hinder the spirit of balance of power, or is prone to influence paddling. Related regulations is set by National Assembly Act. According to article one of clause twenty-nine, of National Assembly Act, in spite of other regulations that prohibit certain political activities or concurrent office holding, Congressmen can engage in other posts except the office set by article one of clause one of National Assembly Act. The intent of the regulations that prohibit Congressmen holding concurrent office, is to ensure fairness and independence when they carry out their duties. However, there are loopholes in the current National Assembly Act, to allow concurrent office holding. This is against the spirit of the Constitution, due to the limited scope of the current regulations. As a result, this thesis demonstrates the necessity of reviewing of reasonable criteria and alternatives about the socially controversial issue of Congressmen with concurrent office holding. Accordingly, this research intends to come up with reasonable legislative alternatives after reviewing similar regulations about concurrent office holding in other major countries and Korea.

Abstract

Congressmen are members of National Assembly and representatives of the public. Meantime, Congressmen carry out critical functions on national level, in order to successful represent democracy and parliamentary system. Also, according to representative democracy principles of free delegation and related prohibitions, Congressmen are politically responsible for the consequences of country’s decision or policy making, but not legally responsible for such consequences. However, the representative democracy system is changing, due to the changing trend of party oriented state and administrative state,transformation of electoral system, declining quality of Congressman, and more public involvement in political participation. Especially, the opinion of the public’s representative organization indicates the nation’s opinion and its democratic legitimacy is mandated to be checked through various ways, including electoral system, voting system, and exercise of human rights. For changed principle of representative democracy and parliamentarism to come true harmoniously, it is necessary to redefine and update the responsibilities of Congressmen. In this aspect, there has been active discussions recently, of measures to restrict commercial activities while Congressmen are in office. This should be highly praised since the discussion is the measure for itself, in order to recover Congressmen’s original functions and to ensure their reasonable parliamentary activities. According to current Constitution Law clause three, it defines “Congressmen can not hold concurrent office that is enacted by law”. This is because concurrent office holding is prone to hinder the spirit of balance of power, or is prone to influence paddling. Related regulations is set by National Assembly Act. According to article one of clause twenty-nine, of National Assembly Act, in spite of other regulations that prohibit certain political activities or concurrent office holding, Congressmen can engage in other posts except the office set by article one of clause one of National Assembly Act. The intent of the regulations that prohibit Congressmen holding concurrent office, is to ensure fairness and independence when they carry out their duties. However, there are loopholes in the current National Assembly Act, to allow concurrent office holding. This is against the spirit of the Constitution, due to the limited scope of the current regulations. As a result, this thesis demonstrates the necessity of reviewing of reasonable criteria and alternatives about the socially controversial issue of Congressmen with concurrent office holding. Accordingly, this research intends to come up with reasonable legislative alternatives after reviewing similar regulations about concurrent office holding in other major countries and Korea.

참고문헌 (19)

  1. 겸직금지 및 제한법제 운용의 합리성과 적정성 및 입법모델 연구, "강현철", 한국법제연구원, 1~114 (2011)
  2. 권영성, "헌법학원론" (2009), 법문사
  3. 국회, "2011 법제실무" (2011), 국회법제실
  4. 법제처, "법령입안심사기준", ~ (2006)
  5. 김승대, "헌법학강론(제2판)" (2012), 법문사
  6. 정종섭, "헌법학원론 제7판" (2012), 박영사
  7. 윤종빈, "국회개혁방안" (2004), 국회운영위원회
  8. 장영수, "헌법학, 제6판" (2011), 홍문사
  9. 정호영, "국회법론" (2012), 법문사
  10. 허영, "한국헌법론" (2012), 박영사
  11. Alpheus Thomas Mason, "American Constitutional Law: Introductory Essays and Selected Cases" (2002), Prentice HALL
  12. 한국의 민주화와 권력구조개편의 과제: 헌법개정론을 중심으로, In 한국의 권력구조개편: 헌법개정과제와 전망, "박경산", 국제평화전략연구원, 6~24 (2001)
  13. 조재현, "정부형태에 관한 헌법개정논의", 법학연구, 18(4), pp.225~258 (2008), 법학연구원
  14. 장용근, "선출직 공직자의 겸직금지규정에 대한 헌법적 검토", 홍익법학, 13(1), pp.257~283 (2012), 법학연구소
  15. 홍완식, "헌법개정에 있어서 국회 분야 논점", 헌법학연구, 12(4), pp.421~450 (2006), 한국헌법학회
  16. 국회의원의 의무와 법적 책임에 관한 연구, "이효원", 한국의회발전연구회, 1~99 (2008)
  17. 전진영, "국회의원 겸직제도의 쟁점과 해외사례, In 이슈와 논점 제458호" (2012), 국회입법조사처
  18. (2008년) 프랑스 헌법개정에 관한 연구, "정재황", 한국법제연구원, 1~146 (2008)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (13건)