자치입법권 보장을 위한 지방자치단체 규제개혁의 과제

Abstract

In order to overcome the regional imbalance centered on the metropolitan area, active discussions are being made for regulatory reform in the provinces, such as changing the regulatory paradigm that converts the entire legal system into a negative method. However, despite long-term discussions and policy promotion on regulatory reform, great results have not been achieved. There are three main reasons why the regulatory reform of local governments has not been carried out properly. First of all, the central government establishes uniform regulations, and accordingly, local governments' autonomous legislative power is in effect limited to the uniform regulations of local governments. Due to the uniform regulatory framework, local governments have limitations in reflecting regional characteristics through ordinances. In addition, while the central government entrusts regulatory matters and stipulates the processing procedures in detail, local governments have a problem of simply fulfilling their duties. In addition, there is a problem that local governments do not properly reflect regulatory reform because the central government's regulatory management is not unified. Regulatory reform of local governments to guarantee the autonomous legislative right of local governments first requires flexible discipline of regulatory reform. Regarding regulatory matters that require national uniformity, only the basic scope should be set and local governments should be able to specify it. In this process, it is necessary to substantiate the limitation of the ordinance-making power of Article 28 (2) of the Local Autonomy Act. In addition, in order for local governments to carry out their duties independently and to carry out practical regulations through this, the possibility of central government intervention should be minimized by converting prior approval or consultations of the central government into ex post notification or submission of opinions. In the process of prior legislative process, regulatory impact analysis should also be conducted on local governments, and institutional improvements should be made for this purpose. In the process of regulatory reform, participation should be expanded, such as expanding the right of residents to open and close ordinances and requiring local councils to submit regulatory review results. Now, a shift in regulatory reform that prioritizes the quality of regulations rather than the number of regulations must be made. Regulatory reform centered on local governments, not the central government, should be pursued in order to promote reform that residents can feel.