정당해산심판 결정의 유형과 법적 효과
The decision types of ban of a political party and legal effect
1
조회
0
다운로드
10
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The ban of a political party should be carried out strictly limited in all the procedures of sue, complaint, hearing and execution. The quotation decision can be only justified in the case of organized party's clear and present danger is threatening democratic basic order. The first legal effect is compulsory winding-up the party. However, if this party's property is based on the members of it, there is no useful way of forfeit the properties. There will be a mechanism to correct any error of the Constitutional Court's decision by people's political fundamental rights exercise. For this reason, it is proved that Rallies and Demonstrations Law has few justification of prohibiting any rally or demonstration for achieving winded up political party's purpose. There are must be constitutional reason to deprive of congressmen's status because they are the part of constitutional institutions. If there were any other Korean constitution's intent concerned about depriving of congressmen's status, it would be any provisions of it. However, there is only explaining about free delegation of congressmen's conscience. The ban of party has a strong chilling effect which brings the people barely express his own opinion and finally it will shrink the spectrum of democracy. So, I suggest that it would be better including every parties in the democratic political process by natural selection to receive the judgment of the people. I believe, in this way, keeping the length of democracy healthfully.
Abstract
The ban of a political party should be carried out strictly limited in all the procedures of sue, complaint, hearing and execution. The quotation decision can be only justified in the case of organized party's clear and present danger is threatening democratic basic order. The first legal effect is compulsory winding-up the party. However, if this party's property is based on the members of it, there is no useful way of forfeit the properties. There will be a mechanism to correct any error of the Constitutional Court's decision by people's political fundamental rights exercise. For this reason, it is proved that Rallies and Demonstrations Law has few justification of prohibiting any rally or demonstration for achieving winded up political party's purpose. There are must be constitutional reason to deprive of congressmen's status because they are the part of constitutional institutions. If there were any other Korean constitution's intent concerned about depriving of congressmen's status, it would be any provisions of it. However, there is only explaining about free delegation of congressmen's conscience. The ban of party has a strong chilling effect which brings the people barely express his own opinion and finally it will shrink the spectrum of democracy. So, I suggest that it would be better including every parties in the democratic political process by natural selection to receive the judgment of the people. I believe, in this way, keeping the length of democracy healthfully.
참고문헌 (35)
- 김문현, "정당해산사유 및 정당해산시 의원신분상실 여부", 고시계 (1994)
- 김문현, "정당국가현상과 대의제 민주주의", 공법연구, 24(4) (1996), 한국공법학회
- 김문현, "政黨解散審判에 관한 小考", 성균관법학, 19(2), pp.1~14 (2007), 법학연구소
- 김선택, "민주주의와 선거: 민주적 선거의 과제 및 현실적 여건을 중심으로", 공법연구, 29(4) (2001), 한국공법학회
- 김선택, "한국 민주주의에 있어서 역사의 미래", 2014년 법과사회이론학회 춘계학술대회, 우리의 민주주의는 지금 어디에 서있는가? -민주주의의 현재적 상황과 도전 그리고 과제- (2014)
- 김종철, "민주공화국과 정당해산제도 - 통합진보당 해산심판청구를 소재로 -", 공법학연구, 15(1), pp.35~66 (2014), 한국비교공법학회
- 박규환, "정당해산 심판기준에 관한 연구 ― 해산기준 명확화를 위한 기본권이론 도입에 관한 제언 ―", 헌법학연구, 14(4), pp.479~508 (2008), 한국헌법학회
- 송석윤, "정당해산심판의 실체적 요건 - 정당해산심판제도의 좌표와 관련하여 -", 서울대학교 법학, 51(1), pp.27~65 (2010), 법학연구소
- 송석윤, "정당해산제도의 딜레마 -독일 연방헌법재판소의 독일 민족민주당 사건을 중심으로-", 세계헌법연구, 16(3), pp.59~90 (2010), 세계헌법학회한국학회
- 이성환, "현행 정당해산심판절차의 문제점과 개선방향", 세계헌법연구, 10, pp.191~210 (2004), 세계헌법학회한국학회
- 전광석, "정당해산심판에 대한 헌법적 및 정치적 이해", 헌법판례연구, 13 (2012), 한국헌법판례연구학회
- 전민형, "공화국원리와 공무원의 공익의무", 석사, 법학과, pp.2014
- 허완중, "헌법재판에서 필요성이 의심되는 법률적 효력과 형성력에 의한 그 대체 가능성", 안암법학, (28), pp.33~72 (2009), 안암법학회
- 허완중, "헌법기관충실원칙", 공법연구, 42(2), pp.27~61 (2013), 한국공법학회
- 구병삭, "신헌법원론" (1996), 박영사
- 권영성, "헌법학원론" (2010), 법문사
- 김철수, "헌법학신론" (2013), 박영사
- 김철용, "헌법재판절차의 개선을 위한 입법론적연구", 헌법재판연구, 4 (1993)
- 김하열, "헌법소송법" (2014), 박영사
- 김현철, "판례 헌법소송법 제2판" (2012), 전남대학교 출판부
- 신평, "헌법재판법 전면개정판" (2011), 법문사
- 이성환, "정당해산심판제도에 관한 연구", 헌법재판연구, 15 (2004), 헌법재판소
- 정종섭, "헌법소송법" (2014), 박영사
- 한수웅, "헌법학" (2012), 법문사
- 허 영, "한국헌법론" (2011), 박영사
- 헌법재판소, "헌법재판실무제요, 제1개정증보판" (2008)
- 콘라드 헷세, "독일헌법원론" (2001), 박영사
- 클라우스 슐라이히, "독일헌법재판론" (2001), 미리교역
- Hans Kelsen, "Verteidigung der Demokratie" (2006), Mohr Siebeck
- Jan-Werner Müller, "Constitutional Patriotism" (2007), Princeton University Press
- Josef Isensee, "Freistaatlichkeit - Prinzipien eines europäischen Republikanismus -" (2011), Mohr Siebeck
- Karl Loewenstein, "Militant Democracy and Fundamental Right. Ⅰ", The American Political Science Review, 31(3) (1937)
- Karl Loewenstein, "Militant Democracy and Fundamental Right. Ⅱ", The American Political Science Review, 31(4) (1937)
- Markus Thiel, "The 'Militant Democracy' Principle in Modern Democracies" (2009), Ashgate Publiching Company
- Volker Epping, "Eine Alternative zum Parteiverbot - Der Ausschluss von der staatlichen Parteienfinanzierung - , 1. Auflage" (2013), Nomos