사전선거운동금지조항의 위헌성 －실제 사례를 중심으로－

Abstract

Public Election Campaign Act Article 58(1) provides that ‘election campaign’ means an act for winning an election, or for making another person be or not be elected. But Article 58(2) provides the exceptions; i.e. ‘a simple statement of opinion or manifestation of an intention on the election’ and ‘ordinary political party activities’. And the Act 59 provides under the title 【Period for Election Campaign】“An election campaign may be allowed during the period from the commencing date of election period to the day before the election day: 3. Where a person works on an election campaign by posting a writing or video clip on an internet web-site or its bulletin board or chatting room or sending an e-mail(referring to a communication system with which computer users exchange information in the form of text, voice, images, or video clips through a network; the same shall apply hereinafter). In such cases, persons who are permitted to send e-mails by entrusting the dispatch of e-mails to an agency shall be limited to candidates and preliminary candidates.”But the definition clause of election campaign is not clear so that not only candidates but also electors can’t estimate what is permitted as election campaign. It is the same concerning election campaign using internet. As a result, no one foresees what is prohibited as election campaign in the pre-period for election campaign. This results in the arbitrary execution of the authorities inevitably. We can see a lot of arbitrary-execution cases in the election cases. Most of all, limit on the period of election campaign is not concerned with the integrity of election, but merely restricts the freedom of election campaign of electors and candidates. Whereas liberalization of election campaign period serves participation of the electors to the politics, thus it contributes to improvement of democracy.