국민주권과 대의제도: 이상인가 환상인가?
Popular Sovereignty and Representation: Ideal or Illusion?
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
국민주권에 입각한 헌법질서 하에서는 국민의 주권의지에 따라 법과 정책을 입안할 뿐 아니라 헌법 자체도 국민이 직접 만들어야 한다는 시각이 널리 퍼져있다. 주권은 대표자를 통해 간접적으로 행사될 수 없다는 루소의 주장이 일반화된 셈이다. 이에 반하여 본 논문에서는 국민주권이 본질적으로 ‘대표’ 혹은 ‘대의’라는 개념을 떠나서는 이해될 수 없는 이념임을 밝히고자 한다. 그러기 위해 우선 군주주권과 국민주권이라는 이념을 비교해 볼 때, 후자가 전자보다 더 많은 추상적 사고력 내지 상상력을 요구하는 이념이라는 점을 상기해보고자 한다. 국민이라는 단일한 주체가 통일된 주권의지를 지닐 수 있다는 일종의 믿음이 전제되어야 하기 때문이다. 반면, 그런 믿음의 대상을 객관적인 사실이라고 착각할 때 민주주의를 위협하는 결과가 초래될 수 있음도 살펴보고자 한다. 통일된 의지를 지닌 국민이라는 단일한 주체는 선험적으로 주어진 것이고 그 의지를 따르는 것이 곧 국민주권주의라고 생각할 때 국민은 맹목적인 복종만을 요구하는 공포스런 신으로 ‘격상’되기 때문이다. 따라서 ‘국민’은 선험적으로 주어진 것이 아니라 헌법을 제정하고 운용하는 과정을 통해서 그 정체성이 드러나는 존재임을 인식해야 한다. 그 국민의 ‘주권의지’도 사전에 통일적으로 존재한다기보다 대의절차를 통해서 성립되고 확인되는 것임을 기억해야 한다. 결국 국민주권에 입각한 헌법질서 하에서 민주적인 정치를 실현하려면 국민주권이 다분히 역설적(paradoxical)인 이상임을 인지하고 그 역설을 유지할 줄 아는 추상적 사고능력이 요구되는 것이다. 시간적으로 볼 때 국민의 정체성 및 국민의 주권의사는 비록 사후적으로 확인될 수밖에 없지만, 규범적인 면에서는 마치 사전에 존재하여 헌법제정 및 법집행과정을 규율하는 것처럼 생각할 줄 아는 능력이 필요한 것이다. 본 논문에서는 역사학자 에드먼드 모건(Edmund Morgan)이 제시한 ‘정치적 픽션(political fiction)’이라는 개념과 정치철학자 클로드 르포르(Claude Lefort)가 언급한 ‘권력의 빈 자리(empty place of power)’라는 개념을 원용하여 이상의 논점을 밝히고자 한다.
Abstract
This article seeks to clarify the conceptual relationship between popular sovereignty and representation. It seeks to show that the common notion that popular sovereignty should ultimately be practiced through direct democracy is a misconception. It starts by pointing out that the idea of popular sovereignty requires a higher level of abstract/imaginative thinking compared to monarchic sovereignty. As noted by historian Edmund Morgan, we need to make believe that there is a unified entity called ‘the people’ which is capable of having a coherent will and of making a decision. The danger lies in our propensity to confuse such fiction with fact by positing a god-like sovereign people toward whom the only proper attitude is one of abject obedience. The article then shows that the boundary of the people are not pre-given such that it must be constructed through constitution-making processes. Further, it will be shown that the will of the sovereign people can only be formulated through a representational process. Taking its cue from political scientists’ discussion on the ‘constitutive’ role of representation, the article then proposes that there is an inherent paradox in the idea of popular sovereignty, which must be not only recognized but also maintained. That is, although from a temporal perspective, both the identity of the people and its will cannot precede the process of representation, from a normative point of view, the people and its will must be regarded as something pre-existing and prior to the constitution. The ideal of popular sovereignty, in other words, will remain an illusion unless we recognize and are able to maintain a proper balance between fact and fiction. The article ends by suggesting that unfortunately this ability to engage in such a balancing act will typically be in short supply among the citizens of any constitutional order, which may be one of the reasons why so many countries that have constitutions premised on popular sovereignty tend to exhibit disappointing performance.
참고문헌 (52)
- 정종섭, "헌법학원론" (2016), 박영사
- 한수웅, "헌법학" (2016), 법문사
- 허영, "한국헌법론" (2016), 박영사
- 강희원, "「픽션(fiction)」으로서 국민주권 ― 헌법상의 「국민주권」원리에 대한 단상 ―", 법철학연구, 23(2), pp.7~68 (2020), 한국법철학회
- 권경휘, "『정치신학』에 나타난 “예외상태”에 대한 슈미트의 이해방식", 법철학연구, 20(3), pp.189~222 (2017), 한국법철학회[DOI]
- 김성호, "헌법제정의 정치철학: 주권인민의 정체성과 인민주권의 정당성", 한국정치학회보, 42(3), pp.5~27 (2008), 한국정치학회[DOI]
- 양선숙, "국민주권성과 통일헌법", 철학, (129), pp.205~228 (2016), 한국철학회[DOI]
- 오세혁, "법에 있어서의 의제", 중앙법학, 17(1), pp.337~372 (2015), 중앙법학회[DOI]
- 함재학, "드워킨의 헌법사상: 헌법적 통합성과 파트너십 민주주의", 법철학연구, 12(1), pp.183~222 (2009), 한국법철학회
- 함재학, "국민주권과 정치신학: 헌법이론의 탈주술화는 요원한가?", 법철학연구, 19(2), pp.177~206 (2016), 한국법철학회
- Achen, Christopher H., "Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government" (2017), Princeton University Press
- Anderson, Benedict, "Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism" (2006), Verso
- Bailyn, Bernard, "The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution" (1967), Belknap Press of Harvard University Press
- Bobbio, Norberto, "The Future of Democracy" (1987), University of Minnesota Press
- Brubaker, Rogers, "Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany" (1992), Cambridge University Press
- Caldwell, Peter C., "Popular Sovereignty and the Crisis of German Constitutional Law: The Theory & Practice of Weimar Constitutionalism" (1997), Duke University Press
- Elshtain, Jean B., "Sovereignty: God, State, and Self" (2008), Basic Books
- Harding, Andrew, "The Constitution of Malaysia: A Contextual Analysis" (2012), Hart Publishing
- Huscroft, Grant, "The Challenge of Originalism: Theories of Constitutional Interpretation" (2011), Cambridge University Press
- Kantorowicz, Ernst, "The King’s Two Bodies" (1957), Princeton University Press
- Landemore, Hélène, "Open Democracy: Reinventing Popular Rule for the Twenty-First Century" (2020), Princeton University Press
- Lefort, Claude, "The Political Forms of Modern Society: Bureaucracy, Democracy, Totalitarianism" (1986), MIT Press
- Lefort, Claude, "Democracy and Political Theory" (1988), Polity
- Manin, Bernard, "The Principles of Representative Government" (2010), Cambridge University Press
- Morgan, Edmund S., "Inventing the People: The Rise of Popular Sovereignty in England and America" (1989), WW Norton & Company
- Müller, Jan-Werner, "What Is Populism?" (2016), University of Pennsylvania Press
- Mutz, Diana C., "Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative versus Participatory Democracy" (2006), Cambridge University Press
- Otto, Rudolf, "The Idea of the Holy" (1923), Oxford University Press
- Pitkin, Hanna F., "The Concept of Representation" (1967), University of California Press
- Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, "The Social Contract and other later political writings" (1997), Cambridge University Press
- Schmitt, Carl, "Political Theology" (1985), MIT Press
- Schmitt, Carl, "The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy" (1988), MIT Press
- Schmitt, Carl, "Constitutional Theory" (2008), Duke University Press
- Schumpeter, Joseph A., "Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy" (2010), Routledge
- Sieyès, Emmanuel Joseph, "What Is the Third Estate?" (1964), Praeger
- Tan, Kevin Y.L., "The Constitution of Singapore: A Contextual Analysis" (2015), Hart Publishing
- Baker, Keith M., "Inventing the French Revolution: Essays on French Political Culture in the Eighteenth Century" (1990), Cambridge University Press
- Baker, Keith M., "Inventing the French Revolution: Essays on French Political Culture in the Eighteenth Century" (1990), Cambridge University Press
- Breen, Michael, "In Korean Democracy, the People are a Wrathful God", Foreign Policy, ~ (2016)
- Corrias, Luigi, "Populism in a Constitutional Key: Constituent Power, Popular Sovereignty and Constitutional Identity", European Constitutional Law Review, 12(1) (2016)
- Dann, Philipp, "Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law vol. 10" (2006)
- Disch, Lisa, "Democratic Representation and the Constituency Paradox", Perspectives on Politics, 10(3) (2012)
- Garsten, Bryan, "Political Representation" (2010), Cambridge University Press
- Hasebe, Yasuo, "Constitutional Borrowing and Political Theory", International Journal of Constitutional Law, 1(2) (2003)
- Lindahl, Hans, "The Paradox of Constitutionalism: Constituent Power and Constitutional Form" (2007), Oxford University Press
- Morgan, Edmund S., "The Fiction of ‘The People’", New York Review of Books, ~ (1992)
- Plotke, David, "Representation is Democracy", Constellations, 4(1) (1997)
- Rakove, Jack N., "Joe the Ploughman Reads the Constitution, or, The Poverty of Public Meaning Originalism", San Diego Law Review, 48, pp.575~ (2011)
- Rosanvallon, Pierre, "Democracy Past and Future" (2006), Columbia University Press
- Troper, Michel, "The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law" (2012), Oxford University Press
- Tuck, Richard, "Popular Sovereignty in Historical Perspective" (2016), Cambridge University Press
- Yack, Bernard, "Popular Sovereignty and Nationalism", Political Theory, 29(4) (2001)