북한에서 인권의 중대한 위반을 행한 개인에 대한 형사책임의 추궁
Criminal Accountability for Perpetrators Responsible for the Grave Violations of Human Rights in North Korea
2
조회
0
다운로드
8
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
북한에서 자행되고 있는 심각한 인권위반행위에 책임있는 자를 형사처벌할 수 있는 현실적인 방안을 논함에 있어서 유의하여야 할 점은 그러한 행위에 대한 단죄의 시기를 통일 이전으로 할 것인지 또는 통일 이후로 할 것인지 이다. 먼저 통일 이전에 가능한 형사처벌 방안으로는 국제형사재판소ICC)에 북한상황을 회부하는 것과 우리나라 또는 제3국의 국내법원에서 북한의 인권위반자들을 처벌하는 것을 들 수 있다. 전자의 방안은 북한이 현재 ICC규정의 당사국이 아니므로 오로지 안전보장이사회의 회부에 의해서만 가능한데, 그러한 회부결의가 채택되는 과정에서 상임이사국 중 중국의 거부권 행사가 예상되기 때문에 현실적으로 실현되기가 어려울 것이다. 후자의 방안은 북한의 현직 국가원수, 정부수반 및 외무장관과 같은 국가를 대표하는 지위에 있는 자에 대해서는 여전히 ‘인적 면제’를 인정해 주어야 하는 한계, 다시 말하여 외국의 국내법원은 이들에 대해 형사재판권을 행사할 수 없다는 한계를 가진다. 북한의 인권위반상황에 책임있는 그 이외의 북한관료들에 대해서는 각국은 보편적 관할권에 기초하여 기소하고 처벌할 수 있을 것이다. 왜냐 하면 국제법상 국제범죄를 범한 국가관료는 외국법원의 형사재판권으로부터 ‘물적 면제’를 향유하지 못한다는 것이 요즈음의 경향이기 때문이다. 다만 그 신병을 확보함에 있어서 또는 범죄인인도를 받음에 있어서 현실적인 어려움은 있을 것이다. 통일 후의 시기에 이용할 수 있는 방식으로서는 통일한국의 사법부에서 기소·재판하여 처벌하는 방식, 혼합재판소에서의 형사처벌 방식, ‘진실화해위원회에서의 사면’방식에 대해 논의할 필요가 있다. 먼저 통일이 순조롭게 이루어지는 경우 통일한국의 사법부가 북한인권상황에 책임이 있는 자들을 온전히 기소하여 처벌할 수 있을 것이다. 북한과 통일이 이루어진 경우 가장 실효적인 방안은 국제화된 재판소 또는 혼합재판소를 설립하는 것이다. 우리의 경우 북한인권위반상황과 유사하였던 크메르루즈 인권위반상황을 다루고 있는 캄보디아특별재판부의 설립이 따라야 할 하나의 모델이 될 수 있다. 다만, 캄보디아특별재판부가 가지는 약점을 극복하여 좀더 실효적이고 독립적인 혼합재판소를 설립하는 방안에 대하여미리 준비를 해야 할 것이다. 이와 더불어 고려해 볼 사항은 통일 이후 북한지역에 평화와 안전을 회복하는 과정에서 정의를 우선시 할 것인지, 아니면 평화를 우선시 할 것인지에 대한 결정이다. 따라서 통일 후 진실화해위원회를 설립할 것인지, 설립하는 경우 진실화해위원회에서 부여하는 사면의 범위와 효력을 어느 정도 인정할 것인지에 대하여도 사전에 충분히 논의해 보아야 할 것이다.
Abstract
This article focuses on the modes of criminal accountability for the perpetrators who have gravely violated human rights in North Korea and thus analyzes the best forum for the accountability of the North Korean officials. In doing so, this article has in mind the time for the accountability, that is, when the accountability can be pursued effectively. The two possible forums for the prosecution of the North Korean officials for grave human rights abuses before unification of the Korean Peninsula. The first one is the ICC where the North Korean human rights situations will be referred. This option might, however, be ineffective because the North Korea is not a party to the ICC Statute. Of Course the UN Security Council can refer it to the ICC, but its feasibility will be limited due to the veto power of one or two permanent members of the Security Council. The second forum is foreign domestic criminal courts outside the North Korea. These courts include those of South Korea. Foreign courts can exercise the criminal jurisdiction under the principle of universality over North Korean officials who committed the crimes against humanity in the area of the North Korea. But the immunity rationae personae protects high-ranking representatives of a State from being subjected to foreign criminal jurisdiction and covers official as well as private acts. And immunity rationae materiae which is attached to official acts is also conceived as a substantive defence, which ensures that an official does not incur individual criminal responsibility for crimes. At present days, the large majority of the domestic case law upholds immunity rationae personae of so-called ‘troika’ in office, that is, the incumbent heads of State, the heads of government, and ministers of foreign affairs, even when they committed international crimes such as crimes against humanity. They are considered to be absolutely immune during the tenure of their office for any international crimes. With respect to the immunity rationae materiae, former heads of State and other State officials are, however, considered to be individually responsible for the commission of international crimes including crimes against humanity. The forums which would be available after the unification of Korean Peninsula are as follows; The first one is the domestic courts of new unified Korea by exercising the jurisdiction on the basis principle of territoriality or universal jurisdiction as stipulated in existing Korean ICC implementation law. The second one is so-called hybrid or internationalized tribunals which can be established after unification between South Korea and North Korea. This forum will attempt to increase legitimacy, fairness, and flexibility in pursuing transitional justice, while providing a less expensive alternative to other less effective international criminal courts. Cambodian model can provide certain lessons with respect to the operation of the hybrid tribunals. Lastly, the appropriate forum for dealing with the worst human rights abuses in North Korea would be the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. This article analyzes whether the deference by the ICC may be appropriate when the Truth and Reconciliation process include amnesties which is conditional in character and directed specifically towards a certain class of perpetrators.
참고문헌 (48)
- 김영석, "국제형사재판소법강의" (2014), 법문사
- Dugard, John, "International Law: A South African Perspective" (2005), Juta
- Fox, Hazel, "The Law of State Immunity" (2002), Oxford Univ. Press
- Pedretti, Ramona, "Immunity of Heads of State and State Officials for International Crimes" (2015), Brill
- Werle, Gerhard, "Principles of International Criminal Law" (2005), T·M·C·Asser Press
- Akande, Dapo, "Immunities of State Officials, International Crimes, and Foreign Domestic Courts", European Journal of International Law, 21, pp.815~ (2010)
- Cassese, Antonio, "When May Senior State Officials Be Tried for International Crimes? Some Comments on the Congo v. Belgium Case", European Journal of International Law, 13, pp.853~ (2002)
- Dugard, John, "Reconciliation and Justice: The South African Experience", Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems, 8, pp.277~ (1998)
- Hayner, Priscilla, "Fifteen Truth Commissions-1974 to 1994: A Comparative Study", Human Rights Quarterly, 16, pp.597~ (1994)
- Kang, Grace M., "A Case for the Prosecution for Kim Jong Il for Crimes Against Humanity, Genocide, and War Crimes", Columbian Human Rights Law Review, 38, pp.51~ (2006)
- Kokott, Juliana, "No Immunity for Human Rights Violations in the Americas", Human Rights Law Journal, 14, pp.153~ (1993)
- O'Neill, Kerry Creque, "A New Customary Law of Head of State Immunity?: Hirohito and Pinochet", Stanford Journal of International Law, 38, pp.289~ (2002)
- Orentlicher, Diane F., "Setting Accounts : The Duty to Prosecute Human Rights Violations of a Prior Regime", Yale Law Journal, 100, pp.2537~ (1991)
- Orentlicher, Diane F., "Judging Global Justice: Assessing the International Court", Wisconsin International Law Journal, 21, pp.495~ (2003)
- Scharif, Michael, "The Letter of the Law: The Scope of the International Legal Obligation to Prosecute Human Rights Crimes", Law & Contemporary Problems, 59, pp.41~ (1996)
- Steven, Lee A., "Genocide and the Duty to Extradite or Prosecute: Why the United States is in Breach of its International Obligations", Virginia Journal of International Law, 39, pp.425~ (1999)
- Tan, Morse H., "Finding a Forum for North Korea", Southern Methodist University Law Review, 65, pp.765~ (2012)
- Totten, Christopher D., "The International Criminal Court and Truth Commissions: A Framework for Cross-Interaction in the Sudan and Beyond", Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights, 7, pp.1~ (2009)
- Tunks, Michael A., "Diplomats or Defendants? Defining the Future of Head-of-State Immunity", Duke Law Journal, 52, pp.651~ (2002)
- Van Panhuys, H. F., "In the Borderland Between the Act of State Doctrine and Questions of Jurisdictional Immunity", International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 13 (1964)
- Villa-Vicencio, Charles, "Pieces of the Puzzle: Keywords on Reconciliation and Transitional Justice" (2004), The Institute for Justice and Reconciliation
- von Sternberg, Mark R., "A Comparison of the Yugoslavian and Rwandan War Crimes Tribunals: Universal Jurisdiction and the Elementary Dictates of Humanity", Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 22, pp.111~ (1996)
- Waltts, Arthur, "The Legal Position in International Law of Heads of State, Heads of Governments and Foreign Ministers", Recueil des Cours, 247, pp.13~ (1994)
- Wickremasinghe, Chanaka, "International Law" (2003), Oxford Univ. Press
- "국제형사재판소 관할 범죄의 처벌 등에 관한 법률", 법률 제10577호, ~ (2011)
- "Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of Congo v. Belgium), Preliminary Objection and Merits, Judgement", ICJ Reports, ~ (2000)
- "Art. 163 of the Law(the Democratic Republic of Congo) No.024", 2002 of 18 Nov.2002, 2002
- "Art. 2008.7 of the Penal Code(Niger)", Law No. 2003-025 of 13 June 2003, ~ (2008)
- "Art 7 of the Law portant détermination des compétences et de la procedure de mise en oeuvre par les juridictions burkinabè, No.52 of 31 Dec.2009", ~ (2009)
- "Asser Institute"[URL]
- "Control Council Law No.10", ~ (1946)
- "ICC Statute", ~
- "Report of the commission of inquiry on human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, UN Doc. A", HRC, 63(, 2014[DOI]
- Report of the detailed findings of the commission of inquiry on human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, , UN, ~ (2014)
- "Resoluton on Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea", UN Doc, ~
- "UN Doc. A", HRC, 31, pp.L.25[DOI]
- "UN Doc. A", HRC, 22, pp.13[DOI]
- "UN Doc. A", HRC, 63, 2014[DOI]
- IsrSC 162033, "36 International Law Reports 277"
- "Bouzari v. Iran, Ontario Court of Appeal, 2004 CarswellOnt 2681, 243 D.L.R(4th) 406", ~
- In re Alan Garcia Pérez, "National Court of Spain, Order of 15 June 2001; In re Silvio Berlusconi, National Court of Spain", Order No.262, 2002
- In Re Bo Xilai, "128 International Law Reports 713(2005); Black and Cobain, “Barak faces war crimes arrest thereat during UK visit”", The Guardian, ~ (2009)
- In re Fidel Castro, "National Court of Spain, Sala de lo Penel", Order No.1999, 1999
- In re Rajapaksa, "Decision of the Attorney-General of Australia, 25 Oct. 2011, Anna Hood and Monique Cormier, Prosecuting International in Crimes in Australia: The Case of the Sri Lankan President", Melbourne Journal of International Law, 13, pp.235~ (2012)
- In re Theodoro Obiang Nguema, "National Court of Spain, Order of 23 Dec.1998; In re Slobodan Milosěvić", National Court of Spain, ~ (1999)
- "Peru v. Chile, Supreme Court of Chile, second instance, 21 Sept.2007, no.2242-06, I.L.D.C. 1443", ~ (2007)
- "Vallmajo I Sala v. Kabarebe, National Court of Spain, 6 Feb. 2008", Order No. 3, 2008 (2008)
- "Yousuf v. Samantar, 699 5. 3d 763", ~ (2012)