일본의 조선 강점기 성노예제에 대한 국가책임의 해법
A Review of present condition and direction of Japanese Takesima/Dokdo Education
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Ahead the 50th anniversary of the Korea-Japan Settlement Agreement in 2015, the joint statement of 1,139 intellectuals of Korea and Japan proclaimed the Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty was originally "null and void" based on the 'historic justice' in 2010. And in August 2011, the Constitutional Court of Korea recognized the existence of unresolved disputes under Article 3 of the 1965 Korea-Japan Settlement Agreement. On May 24, 2012, the Korean Supreme Court reversed and remanded the original trial court’s rule that recognized the effect of a Japanese court decision, which viewed Japan’s colonial rule over Korea was legitimate and which therefore ran against the essential values of the Korean Constitution. Japanese government, however, still deny the illegality of its colonial rule and historical wrongful acts despite increasing calls from the international community. Japan's denial is against historical justice and poses a frontal challenge to the universal value of human rights. Recently, Korea and Japanese governments take steps for diplomatic negotiation. At this point, this article suggest the 'Korea-Japan Commission for Truth and Reconciliation' as a hybrid tribunal which assist the process of solving historical issues based on transitional justice. The hybrid tribunal will be helpful to start new discourses for the redress of the colonial rule in Korea and prosecution of the serious human rights crimes committed by Japan during 1910-1945
Abstract
Ahead the 50th anniversary of the Korea-Japan Settlement Agreement in 2015, the joint statement of 1,139 intellectuals of Korea and Japan proclaimed the Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty was originally "null and void" based on the 'historic justice' in 2010. And in August 2011, the Constitutional Court of Korea recognized the existence of unresolved disputes under Article 3 of the 1965 Korea-Japan Settlement Agreement. On May 24, 2012, the Korean Supreme Court reversed and remanded the original trial court’s rule that recognized the effect of a Japanese court decision, which viewed Japan’s colonial rule over Korea was legitimate and which therefore ran against the essential values of the Korean Constitution. Japanese government, however, still deny the illegality of its colonial rule and historical wrongful acts despite increasing calls from the international community. Japan's denial is against historical justice and poses a frontal challenge to the universal value of human rights. Recently, Korea and Japanese governments take steps for diplomatic negotiation. At this point, this article suggest the 'Korea-Japan Commission for Truth and Reconciliation' as a hybrid tribunal which assist the process of solving historical issues based on transitional justice. The hybrid tribunal will be helpful to start new discourses for the redress of the colonial rule in Korea and prosecution of the serious human rights crimes committed by Japan during 1910-1945.
참고문헌 (26)
- "대한민국과 일본국 간의 재산 및 청구권에 관한 문제의 해결과 경제협력에 관한 협정 제3조 부작위 위헌확인 결정", 헌재 2011.08.30, 2006헌마788, 공보제179호,1285, ~ (2011)
- 과학백과사전출판사, "20세기 특대형범죄-일본군성노예제도" (2004), 과학백과사전출판사
- 김명기, "정신대와 국제법" (1993), 법지사
- 김창록, "‘식민지 책임’의 청산과 일본군‘위안부’ 문제 In 한일협정체제와「식민지」책임의 재조명", 동북아역사재단 한일협정 50년사의 재조명 국제학술회의 자료집 (2012)
- 도시환, "한일조약체제와 ｢식민지｣책임의 국제법적 재조명", 국제법학회논총, 57(3), pp.17~45 (2012), 대한국제법학회
- 이장희, "1910년 ‘한일병합조약’의 역사적․국제법적 재조명" (2011), 아사연
- 최봉태, "헌법재판소와 대법원의 개인청구권 인정 이후의 과제", 한일협정47년 특별기자회견 국민보고 자료집 (2013)
- 최철영, "강제동원 관련 한인(조선인)소송에 있어 개인배상청구권 연구", 동북아역사논총, (19), pp.233~271 (2008), 동북아역사재단
- 최철영, "일본의 전후책임에 대한 외교적, 정치적, 그리고 법적 접근", 대구법학, 8(2) (2011)
- 최철영, "한ㆍ일과거사 청산과 이행기 정의(transitional justice) 개념의 적용", 성균관법학, 23(2), pp.237~261 (2011), 법학연구소
- 최철영, "식민지 청산과 이행기의 정의: 동티모르의 사례", 민주법학, (45), pp.47~79 (2011), 민주주의법학연구회
- "Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law", A, 69, pp.147, 2005[DOI]
- Commission on Human rights, Note Verbale from the Permanent Mission of Japan, "U.N. ECOSOC", ~, pp.U.N. Doc. E (1996), CN.4[DOI]
- Commission on Human Rights, Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Woman, its Causes and Consequences:Mission to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea and Japan on the issue of military sexual slavery in wartime, "U.N. ECOSOC", ~, pp.U.N. Doc. E (1996), CN.4[DOI]
- 강병근, "국제법" (2014), 삼우사
- Anthony D'Amato, "Superior Orders vs. Command Responsibility", A.J.I.L, 80 (1986)
- Bernd Shafer, "Historical Justice in International Perspective: How Societies are Trying to Right the Wrongs of the Past", GHI Bulletin, (33) (2003)
- Friedl Weiss, "Time limits for the prosecution of crimes against international law", B.Y.I.L, 53 (1985)
- Frits Kalshoven, "Remembering what we have tried to forget" (1997), ASCENT
- Gay J. McDougall, "Addressing State Responsibility for the Crime of Military Sexual Slavery during the Second World War: Further Attempts for Justice for the "comport Women"", Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law, 1(2) (2013)
- Karen Parker, "Compensation for Japan's World War Ⅱ War-rape Victims", Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, 17 (1994)
- M. Cherif Bassiouni, "Enslavement as an International Crime", New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 23 (1991)
- Renee Colette Redman, "The League of Nations and the Right to be Free from Enslavement: The first human right to be recognized as customary international law", Chicago-Kent Law Review, 70 (1994)
- Theodor Meron, "Rape as a Crime under International Humanitarian Law", A.J.I.L, 87 (1993)
- Yvonne P. Hsu, "'Comport Woman' from Korea : Japan's sex slaves and the legitimacy of their claim for reparation", Pacific Rim Law and policy Journal, 2 (1993)
- 吉澤文壽, "한일기본조약 체결 과정에서의 ‘식민지 책임’론, 식민지책임판결과 한일협정체제의 재조명", 동북아역사재단 한일협정 50년사의 재조명 국제학술회의 자료집 (2013)