본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

2019년 ‘인도에 반한 죄의 방지 및 처벌에 관한 ILC조문초안’에 대한 평가와 개선방향의 제시

Evaluation and Improvement of 2019 ILC Draft Articles on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Humanity

최태현
법학연구원 (Legal Research Institute of Korea University)|2023.06|법학논총 (The Legal Studies Institute of Chosun University)|제40권 제2호|pp. 235-267

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

prevention처벌conventionpunishmentcrimes against humanity방지협약International Law Commission인도에 반한 죄국제법위원회국가간 협력조문초안Draft Articlesinter-State cooperation
주제분류법학

초록

집단살해죄, 전쟁범죄, ‘인도에 반한 죄’라는 세 가지 국제범죄는 국제공동체 전체가 염려하는 가장 심각한 범죄이며, 이러한 범죄를 행한 자에 대한 불처벌을 종식시켜야 하는 대상이 되고 있다. 앞의 두 가지 범죄에 대해서는 이미 세계적인 협약이 체결되어 국가들이 그 국내법을 통하여 그러한 범죄들을 방지하고 처벌할 것과 그러한 목적으로 국가간 협력할 것을 요구하고 있다. 그러나 ‘인도에 반한 죄’와 관련하여서는 이 범죄를 방지하고 처벌하는 것과 이를 위하여 국가간 협력을 증진시키는 데 기여하는 세계적인 협약은 아직 마련되고 있지 않다. 국제법위원회(ILC)는 2019년 제2차 독회를 마친 후 ‘인도에 반한 죄의 방지 및 처벌에 관한 조문초안‘을 UN총회(제6위원회)에 제출하였고, 이 조문초안에 근거하여 UN총회 또는 국제적 전권대표회의에서 협약을 마련해 줄 것을 권고하였다. ILC조문초안은 ‘인도에 반한 죄’의 방지, 수사, 기소 및 처벌을 위한 국제적인 법적 장치를 강화하고 있는 듯이 보인다. 이 조문초안은 법적인 측면 및 실제적 측면에서 국제적 기준에 따라 국가들의 협력 도모뿐만 아니라 국가들의 ICC 및 기타 국제적 법원 및 법정과의 협력을 수월하게 할 것이다. ILC조문초안에 대한 일반적 평가는 장래에 ‘인도에 반한 죄’를 규율할 새로운 국제규칙들은 현행 조약상 규범을 보완하고 보충해야 한다는 것이다. 특히 로마규정과의 합치성을 보장하는 것은 상호간의 협력을 강화하는 데 있어서 긴요하다. 따라서 ILC조문초안이 로마규정상의 ‘인도에 반한 죄’의 정의를 도입하고자 한 선택은 환영받을만 하다국내법체계에서 ‘인도에 반한 죄’에 대해 관할권을 확립할 의무는 여러 조약 및 관습국제법에서 나타나고 있다. 그러나 ‘인도에 반한 죄’에 대한 규율과 관련하여 특정하고도 적절한 국제적 기준이나 규범이 부재하는 경우 이 범죄에 대한 수사, 기소 및 처벌의 실효성과 신속성이 저해될 수도 있다. 따라서 국제사회는 ‘인도에 반한 죄’를 진압함에 있어서 국가에게 국가관할권을 확립할 여러 가지 새로운 의무의 부과를 통하여 좀 더 효율적이고 실효적이며 실제적인 장치를 도입하기 위해 그와 같은 중대한 간극들이 채워질 것을 요구하고 있다. 이러한 바람직한 목표를 달성하고 ILC조문초안의 실효성을 증진시키기 위하여 이 논문은 다음과 같이 몇 가지 개선방향을 제시한다. i) 조문초안 제2조 두문에 있는 “민간주민”의 의미는 재해석되거나 확대되어야 한다. ii) “박해”죄와 관련하여 조문초안 제2조 제1항 h호에 규정되어 있는 ‘인도에 반한 죄’의 정의의 범위는 확대되어야 한다. 따라서 “이 항에 언급된 모든 행위와 관련하여”라는 문구는 삭제되어야 한다. iii) 조문초안 제2조 제2항 i호의 “강제실종”죄의 구성요건인 “묵인”이라는 용어는 삭제되거나 또는 그 ‘묵인’의 의미가 로마규정 범죄구성요건문서의 각주에 명시되어 있는 정책요건과 합치하도록 해야 한다. iv) ‘인도에 반한 죄’ 발생에 대한 억지효과를 제고하기 위하여 ‘인도에 반한 죄’를 행하는 경우 개인의 형사책임뿐만 아니라 국가책임도 발생한다는 점을 조문초안에 명시해야 한다. v) ‘인도에 반한 죄’의 강행규범적 성격을 고려하여 이 범죄에 대한 사면은 명시적으로 금지되어야 한다. vi) 로마규정 제27조 제2항에 규정되어 있는 바와 마찬가지로 공적 지위로 인한 절차법적 면제도 인정되지 않음이 조문초안에 규정되어야 한다, vii) ‘인도에 반한 죄’의 피해자가 완전한 배상을 받기 위하여 소멸시효는 민사소송에도 적용되지 않는다는 조항을 포함해야 한다. viii) 로마규정 제120조가 규정하고 있듯이, ‘인도에 반한 죄’를 규율하는 협약문언에 대한 유보는 허용되지 않는다는 조항을 포함해야 한다, ix) 협약 해석의 일관성을 유지하고 협약의 실효성을 확보하기 위해 이행감독장치라는 조약상 기구를 창설할 수 있는 선택방안이 조문초안 내에 제시되어야 한다. . x) 분쟁해결조항을 재구성하는 것이 바람직하다. 현재의 선택적 배제체제는 유보가 허용되지 않는 경우에만 수락될 수 있다. 만일 유보가 허용된다면, 이 선택적 배제체제는 불필요하므로 삭제되어야 한다. xi) 장래 협약의 기초가 되기 위하여 이 조문초안은 유보, 비준 또는 가입, 발효, 탈퇴 및 개정 등을 언급한 최종조항이 포함되어야 한다.

Abstract

Three typical international crimes - the crimes of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity - are the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole and the target crimes which is determined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes. The first two former is already the subject of global conventions that require States within their national laws to prevent and punish such crimes, and to cooperate among themselves towards those ends. There is, however, no such a global convention dedicated to preventing and punishing the crimes against humanity and promoting inter-State cooperation in that regard, The International Law Commission(ILC) submitted the final Draft Articles on Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Humanity to the UN General Assembly(the Sixth Committee) in 2019 after second reading of it and recommended the elaboration of a convention by the General Assembly or by an international conference of plenipotentiaries on the basis of the Draft Articles. In 2022 session, the Sixth Committee decided through its resolution that it should resume its consideration of all aspects of the Draft Articles over two sessions, one in April 2023 and the second in April 2024. The Draft Articles seem to be aimed at strengthening the international legal framework for the prevention, investigation, prosecution and punishment of the crimes against humanity. The Draft Articles will facilitate the cooperation of States with the International Criminal Court and other international courts and tribunals as well as between states, in accordance with international standards, in both the legal and the practical sense, A general evaluation of the Draft Articles is that a new international set of rules to regulate the crimes against humanity in the future should supplement and be complementary to existing treaty structures. In particular, ensuring consistency with the Rome Statute is the key in strengthening the mutual cooperation. Therefore the choice underpinning the Draft Articles to incorporate the definitions of crimes against humanity of the Rome Statute would be welcomed. The obligation to establish national jurisdiction over crimes against humanity in domestic legal systems follows from various treaties and from customary international law. The lack of specific and adequate international standards or norms regarding the regulation of the crimes against humanity, however, could hamper the effectiveness and speediness of the investigation, prosecution and punishment of these crimes. Therefore, important gaps need to be filled in order to further shape, through the imposition of some new obligations of establishing national jurisdictions to States, more specifically efficient, effective, and practical mechanism in combating the crimes against humanity. To improve the effectiveness of the Draft Articles in achieving its desirable objective, this article suggests some revisions as follows. i) The meaning of the “civil population” in the chapeau of Art. 2 of the Draft needs to be reinterpreted and extended. ii) The scope of the definition of the crimes against humanity provided in Art. 2(1)(h) of the Draft in relation to the crime of “persecution” needs to be extended. The phrase of “in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph” should be deleted. iii) The term of ‘acquiescence’ in the crime of “enforced disappearance” in Art. 2(2)(i) of the Draft Articles should be deleted or the meaning of ‘acquiescence’ should be in line with the policy requirements expressed in the footnote in ‘the Elements of Crimes’ of the Rome Statute. iv) In the commission of the crimes against humanity, it should be explicitly stipulated in the Draft Articles that State responsibility is also incurred besides individual criminal responsibility in order to enhance the preventive effect. v) Amnesties should be explicitly prohibited in relation to the crimes against humanity because of the jus cogens nature of the crimes. vi) The denial of procedural immunity should also be provided in the Draft Articles, as stipulated in Art. 27(2) of The Rome Statute, vii) Statutory limitation also should not be applied to civil proceedings where victims of the crimes against humanity seek full reparation. viii) There should be a provision that no reservation to its text is permitted, as stipulated in Art. 120 of The Rome Statute, ix) The option for creating a treaty body of monitoring mechanism should be presented in the Draft Articles to perform the consistent interpretative work and ensure its effectiveness. x) It is desirable to reformulate the provisions on the dispute settlement. The current opt-out system will be acceptable, only if no reservation is permitted. If reservation is permitted, this opt-out provision should be deleted as redundant. xi) As the basis of a future convention, the Draft Articles should include the final clauses on reservation, ratification or accession, entry into force, withdrawal, and amendment.

참고문헌 (53)

  1. Akhavan, Payam, "Crimes of Omission: Why a UN Treaty on Genocide but Not on Crimes Against Humanity?", Just Security, ~ (2021)
  2. Comments and Observations on the 2017 Draft Articles on Crimes against Humanity as Adopted on First Reading at the Sixty-ninth Session of the International Law Commission, "Crimes Against Humanity Initiative Steering Committee", Whitney R. Harris World Law Institute, ~ (2018)
  3. Galbraith, J., "Treaty Options : Towards a Behavioral Understanding of Treaty Design", Virginia Journal of International Law, 53, pp.309~ (2013)
  4. Goldstone, Richard, "As the Draft Crimes Against Humanity Treaty Moves Forward, a View on How It Relates to the Rome Statute for the ICC", Just Security, ~ (2021)
  5. Kittichaisaree, K., "International Criminal Law", pp.121~ (2002), Oxford University Press
  6. W. A. Schabas, "The International Criminal Court: A Commentary on the Rome Statute" (2016), Oxford University Press
  7. Masło, Krzysztof, "Crimes against humanity in the works of the International Law Commission on the draft articles on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity", Polish Review of International and European Law, 8, pp.9~ (2019)
  8. Murphy, Sean, "Striking the Right Balance for a Draft Convention on Crimes against Humanity", Just Security, ~ (2001)
  9. Orentlicher, D., "Forging a Convention for Crimes Against Humanity" (2013), Cambridge University Press
  10. Pedretti, Ramona, "Immunity of Heads of State and State Officials for International Crimes" (2015), Brill
  11. Pensky, M., "Amnesty on Trial: Impunity, Accountability, and the Norms of International Law", Ethics and Global Politics, 1, pp.1~ (2008)
  12. Pineda, Ana, "The Relay Race of Defining Crimes Against Humanity – From the International Tribunals to the Draft Articles", Just Security, ~ (2021)
  13. Rapp, Stephen J., "Impact-Based Jurisdiction and Crimes Against Humanity Statutes Are Needed for Effective Accountability", Just Security, ~ (2021)
  14. Relva, Hugo, "The Draft Convention on Crimes Against Humanity Should Enshrine the Highest Standards of International Law", Just Security, ~ (2021)
  15. Sadat, Leila. N., "Exile, Amnesty and International Law", Notre Dame Law Review, 81, pp.955~ (2006)
  16. Sadat, Leila N., "New Developments in State Practice on Immunity 0f State Officials for International Crimes", Insight, ~ (2021)
  17. Sadat, Leila Nadya, "Towards a New Treaty on Crimes Against Humanity: Next Steps", Just Security, ~ (2021)
  18. Sadat, Leila N., "Universal Jurisdiction, National Amnesties, and Truth Commissions: Reconciling the Irreconcilable", Universal Jurisdiction, ~ (2004)
  19. Scharf, M., "The Amnesty Exception to the Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court", Cornell International Law Journal, 32, pp.507~ (1999)
  20. Triffterer, Otto, "Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: Observers’ Notes, Article by Article" (2008), Hart Publishing
  21. Werle, Gerhard, "Principles of International Criminal Law" (2005), T.M.C. Asser Press
  22. Amnesty International, "International Law Commission: Initial Recommendations for a Convention on Crimes Against Humanity" (2015)
  23. "Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2001, vol. II (Part Two). General Assembly resolution 56", 83 (2001. 12. 12.) 및 A, 49(Vol. I), pp.Corr. 4
  24. "Explanation of Position – Crimes Against Humanity(Mexico)" (2020)[URL]
  25. "ILC Draft Articles on Crimes against Humanity - Comments and Observations of the Kingdom of the Netherlands"[URL]
  26. "International Committee of the Red Cross, “Customary IHL: Rule 159. Amnesty”", ~
  27. "Murphy, Sean (Special Rapporteur on Crimes Against Humanity), First Report on Crimes Against Humanity, U.N. Doc. A", CN.4, ~
  28. "Murphy, Sean, Third Report on Crimes Against Humanity, U.N. Doc.A", CN.4, ~
  29. "Principles of International Law recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, and commentaries thereto, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1950, vol. II, document A", 1316, Part III
  30. L. N. Sadat, "Forging a Convention for Crimes Against Humanity" (2013), Cambridge University Press
  31. "Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its sixty-fifth session (2013), Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A", 68, ~
  32. "Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its seventy-first session (2019), Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2019, Seventy-first Session, vol. II, Part Two", ~
  33. "Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its seventy-first session (2019), Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A", 74, ~
  34. "UNGA Resolution, A", C.6, L.4 (2022. 11. 24.), Seventy-seventh session, Sixth Committee, Agenda item 78(Crimes against humanity), Para 4[DOI]
  35. - Khmer Rouge trials, 22 May 2003, Annex,
  36. "Compilation of Government Reactions to the UN International Law Commission’s Project on Crimes Against Humanity" (2017)[URL]
  37. Compilation of Government Reactions to the UN International Law Commission’s Work on Crimes Against Humanity (2013-2020), "Whitney R. Harris", World Law Institute, ~ (2021)
  38. "Agreement between the United Nations and the Government of Sierra Leone pursuant to Security Council resolution 1315 (2000) of 14 August 2000", ~
  39. "Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (New York, 10 December 1984), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1465, No. 24841", ~
  40. "Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity (New York, 26 November 1968), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 754, No. 10823", ~
  41. "Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Paris, 9 December 1948), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 78, No. 1021", ~
  42. "Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind with commentaries, in Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its Forty-Eighth Session (A", 51, ~
  43. "International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (New York, 20 December 2006), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2716, No. 48088", ~
  44. "International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (New York, 30 November 1973), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1015, No. 1486", ~
  46. "Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome, 17 July 1998), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2187, No. 38544", ~
  47. "U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Rule-of-Law Tools for Post-Conflict States: Amnesties, U.N. Doc. HR", PUB, 1, U.N. Sales No. E.09.XIV.1 (2009)[DOI]
  48. "UN Security Council, Seventh Report of the Secretary-General of the United Nations Observer Mission in Sierra Leone, S", 1999, ~
  49. "United Nations Convention against Corruption (New York, 31 October 2003), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2349, No. 42146", ~
  50. "United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (New York, 15 November 2000), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2225, No. 39574", ~
  51. "Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Merits, Judgment, 2007 I.C.J. Rep. 43 (26 February 2007)", ~
  52. "Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002", ~
  53. "Prosecutor v. Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, Case No. ICC-01", 11-01, ~

관련 논문AI추천

전시 민간인 살해 범죄에 관한 국제형사법적 검토 및 제언 - 러시아-우크라이나 전쟁을 중심으로 -공예원, 김가경, 이민재, 천영은고려대학교 법학연구원 · 고려법학2022 · 제107호국제형사재판소 관할범죄에 대한 형사사법공조체계의 문제점과 개선방안변용남, 이수진, 최석윤한국비교형사법학회 · 비교형사법연구2016 · 제18권 제3호유엔 강제실종협약의 국내적 이행방안과 형사법적 쟁점이호중민주주의법학연구회 · 민주법학2007 · 제35호‘반인도적 범죄’: 국제법적 개념과 국내적 수용방안박찬운대한변호사협회 · 인권과 정의2002 · 제313권 국제형사절차에 있어서 인권보호박병도사단법인 법조협회 · 법조2008 · 제57권 제10호집단살해죄 관련 국제형사재판소(ICC)의 법리 분석김영석법학연구소 · 법학논집2016 · 제21권 제2호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (8건)

역사법학파와 19세기초 독일 법전화 논쟁이 오늘날의 사법에 주는 시사점 — 사비니와 티보의 긴장 구도를 중심으로 —김형석pp. 1-42국가인권위원회의 조사구제 분야 개선방안에 관한 소고박찬운pp. 43-78재물과 재산상 이익의 관계 정립과 관련 문제이학철pp. 79-104일본의 회사법제상 자기주식취득규제 및 그 시사점오성근pp. 105-160징벌적 손해배상제도의 개선 방안에 관한 연구이훈종, 황성광pp. 161-195
원문 보기