KOREAN ADMINISTRATIVE LITIGATION FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF THE RIGHT OF DEMOCRATIC CONTESTATION
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This article links elements of the republican theory-based concept of the right of democratic contestation, as articulated by Philip Pettit and Mattias Kumm, with administrative litigation as actually found in the real world. Upon ascertaining central theoretical elements of the applicable concepts from republican theory that are the criteria necessary to implement the right of democratic contestation. Such criteria include (i) procedural and substantive access to courts, (ii) judicial independence, (iii) procedural fairness, and (iv) adequacy of remedies. Then the article explains how such criteria can be utilized to analyze whether the right of democratic contestation is properly implemented in a particular administrative litigation context. After explaining the theoretical bases and practical aspects of each of the four criteria, this article then discusses concrete examples within the administrative litigation system of the Republic of Korea that can be analyzed using the four criteria. While this article identifies strengths and weaknesses in the Korean system, key weaknesses receive particular emphasis. They are areas that likely need to be improved to achieve suitable implementation of the right of democratic contestation. For example, the failure to provide the equivalent of a writ of mandamus in the Korean administrative litigation system limits the ability of the people to achieve practical realization of their rights. Another deficiency is the structural issues within the courts that limit the appearance of judicial independence in the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. Other strengths and weaknesses of the Korean administrative litigation system are also highlighted, with some suggestions for improvement and future research included.
Abstract
This article links elements of the republican theory-based concept of the right of democratic contestation, as articulated by Philip Pettit and Mattias Kumm, with administrative litigation as actually found in the real world. Upon ascertaining central theoretical elements of the applicable concepts from republican theory that are the criteria necessary to implement the right of democratic contestation. Such criteria include (i) procedural and substantive access to courts, (ii) judicial independence, (iii) procedural fairness, and (iv) adequacy of remedies. Then the article explains how such criteria can be utilized to analyze whether the right of democratic contestation is properly implemented in a particular administrative litigation context. After explaining the theoretical bases and practical aspects of each of the four criteria, this article then discusses concrete examples within the administrative litigation system of the Republic of Korea that can be analyzed using the four criteria. While this article identifies strengths and weaknesses in the Korean system, key weaknesses receive particular emphasis. They are areas that likely need to be improved to achieve suitable implementation of the right of democratic contestation. For example, the failure to provide the equivalent of a writ of mandamus in the Korean administrative litigation system limits the ability of the people to achieve practical realization of their rights. Another deficiency is the structural issues within the courts that limit the appearance of judicial independence in the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. Other strengths and weaknesses of the Korean administrative litigation system are also highlighted, with some suggestions for improvement and future research included.
참고문헌 (64)
- Alder, John, "Constitutional and Administrative Law" (2005), Palgrave McMillan Law Masters
- Besson, Samantha, "Legal Republicanism: National and International Perspectives 3" (2009), Oxford University Press
- ", former Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, The Rule of Law, Sixth Sir David William Lecture, sponsored by the Centre for Public Law (Nov. 16, 2006)"[URL]
- Bussel, Daniel J., "Doing Equity in Bankruptcy", Emory Bank. Dev. J, 34, pp.13~ (2017)
- Chang, Paul Y., "Protest Dialectics" (2015), Stanford University Press
- Choi, Chongko, "Law and Justice in Korea: South and North" (2005), Seoul National University Press
- 정하중, "行政訴訟法 改正에 있어서 豫防的 權利救濟의 導入", 강원법학, 36, pp.349~376 (2012), 비교법학연구소[DOI]
- Constitutional Court of Korea, "Decisions of the Korean Constitutional Court (2000)", ~ (2000)
- Constitutional Court of Korea, "Thirty Years of the Constitutional Court of Korea" (2018), Constitutional Court of Korea
- "Editorial, Review of Top Justices" (2009)[URL]
- "Editorial, Too Many Lawyers?" (2010)[URL]
- European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), "Report on the Rule of Law", ~ (2011)
- "Comparative Judicial Politics" (2004)[URL]
- "Radical Plans of Argentina’s Milei to Face Thorny Political Reality, Fitch Wire" (2023)[URL]
- Foster, Nigel, "Austrian Legal System and Laws" (2003), Cavendish Publishing
- 프리만, 트로이 크리스찬, "Administrative Litigation in the United States from the Standpoint of the Right of Democratic Contestation", 미국헌법연구, 31(3), pp.71~119 (2020), 미국헌법학회
- Funk, William F., "Administrative Procedure and Practice: Problems and Cases", pp.2006, Thompson
- Ginsburg, Tom, "Dismantling the “Developmental State”? Administrative Procedure Reform in Japan and Korea", Am. J. Comp. L, 49, pp.585~ (2001)
- Ismail, Shehabeldine Ismail, "Procedural Due Process and the Use of Technology and Artificial Intelligence in Online and Remote Proceedings", J. L Emerging Tech, 3, pp.131~ (2023)
- "South Korean President Proposes Extending Term Limits" (2018)[URL]
- Kearney, James J., "Problem of De Novo Judicial Review of Administrative Action", Notre Dame L. Rev, 14, pp.233~ (1939)
- "2011", 1
- 金昌錫, "義務履行訴訟 導入의 行政訴訟에 대한 影響", 저스티스, 75 (2003), 한국법학원
- "The Study of Public Administration in Korea: The Executive-Centered Approach to Public Administration and Its Legacy (Feb. 19, 2018) (Ph.D. dissertation)" (2018)[URL]
- "Overview"[URL]
- 금태환, "미국 행정입법의 사법심사에 관한 연구: 요건·심사범위·한국법과의 비교를 중심으로", 박사, 법학, pp.2003
- Kumm, Mattias, "Institutionalising Socratic Contestation: The Rationalist Human Rights Paradigm, Legitimate Authority and the Point of Judicial Review", Eur. J. Legal Stud, 1, pp.2~ (2007)
- Kumm, Mattias, "The Idea of Socratic Contestation and the Right to Justification : The Point of Rights-Based Proportionality Review", Law & Ethics Hum. Rts, 4, pp.140~ (2010)
- Lee, Hee-Jung, "The Structures and Roles in Judicial Review of Administrative Litigation in Korea", J. Kor. L, 6, pp.44~ (2006)
- 이상덕, "독일 행정법원법에서의 규범통제소송 제도에 관한 고찰 ― 우리 행정소송법 개정 논의에 주는 시사점을 중심으로 ―", 행정법연구, (32), pp.113~157 (2012), 행정법이론실무학회[DOI]
- "Administrative Litigation"[URL]
- Lim, Jibong, "Korean Constitutional Court and Due Process Clause", J. Korean L, 6, pp.1~ (2006)
- MacLean, Roberto G., "Judicial Discretion in the Civil Law", Louisiana L. Rev, 43, pp.45~ (1982)
- MacDowell, Elizabeth L., "Reimagining Access to Justice in Poor People’s Courts", Geo. J. Poverty Law & Pol’y, 22, pp.473~ (2015)
- Martí, José Luis, "Peace, Discontent, and Constitutional Law: Challenges to Constitutional Order and Democracy", pp.30~ (2021), Routledge
- Miller, Jan, "Tribunal Claims Rose After Fees Cancelled", NLJ, 168 (2018)
- Oh, Eunseong, "The Judicialization of Politics and the Independence of Constitutional Court: The Case of South Korea", J. Pol. Inquiry, 47 (2016)
- Pejović, Časlav, "Civil Law and Common Law: Two Different Paths Leading to the Same Goal", Poredbeno Pomorsko Pravo, 40, pp.7~ (2001)
- Pettit, Philip, "Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government" (1997), Oxford University Press
- Rhode, Deborah L, "Access to Justice" (2004), Oxford University Press
- "Argentines Voted to Dismantle Peronist Patronage" (2023)[URL]
- Săraru, Cătălin-Silviu, "Administrative Litigation Systems in Europe", Juridical Trib, 7, pp.227~ (2017)
- Scheinin, Martin, "Access to Justice as a Human Right", pp.135~ (2007), Oxford University Press
- Singh, Mahendra P., "German Administrative Law in Common Law Perspective" (2010), Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht
- "Population Census"[URL]
- Strnad, Grażyna, "The Sixth Republic Under Roh Tae Woo : The Genesis of South Korean Democracy", Polish Pol. Sci, 39, pp.204~ (2010)
- "Introduction"[URL]
- "The Court as an Institution"[URL]
- Jim Manis, "The Federalist" (2001), Pennsylvania State University
- The Federalist Society and American Constitution Society, "Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer, hosted by the Federalist and the American Constitution Societies", YouTube, ~ (2006)
- Thompson, Michael J., "The Two Faces of Domination in Republican Political Theory", European J. Pol. Theory, 17, pp.44~ (2018)
- Susan Ratcliffe, "Oxford Essential Quotations" (2017), Oxford University Press
- Viroli, Maurizio, "Republicanism" (2002), Hill and Wang
- "Global Insights on Access to Justice" (2018)[URL]
- "'Certification' in First Law School Evaluation - Officially Recognized for Outstanding Practical Education"[URL]
- "2004", 45
- Youngs, Raymond, "English, German & French Comparative Law" (2007), Routledge-Cavendish
- Yu, Seon Bong, "The Role of the Judge in the Common Law and Civil Law Systems", Int’l Area Rev, 2, pp.35~ (1999)
- "An Overview of Systemic Barriers to Access to Justice" (2011)[URL]