정당민주주의와 한국 정당제도의 개선방안

양정윤(Yang Jeong Yun) 헌법이론실무학회 2016 헌법연구 Vol.3 No.1

오늘날 민주주의 국가에서 정당은 필수적인 제도로서 인식되고 있고 정당이 없는 정치란 생각을 할 수 없는 실정이 되었다. 그렇다면 민주주의 국가에서 반드시 필요로 하는 정당이란 어떠한 존재이며 무엇이어야만 하는지에 대해서 생각해보지 않을 수 없게 한다. 정당의 본질을 크게 두 가지로 나누어 본다면, 첫째는 정당은 전체가 될 수 없다는 것인데, 그것은 만약 전체가 된다면, 정당은 단일정당만이 존재하게 되고 그러한 국가는 공산주의, 나찌즘, 파시즘과 같은 전체주의가 될 가능성이 높기 때문이다. 이러한 점에서 정당은 부분이어야 하고, 정치적 다원주의의 필요성을 제기하게 하는 것이다. 둘째는 정당은 반드시 공적 이익을 추구하여야 한다는 것인데, 만약 단순히 사적 이익에만 있다고 한다면, 집권당은 자신들의 이익을 위하여 국민의 이익을 스스럼없이 버릴 수 있게 된다. 이러한 점에서 정당은 ‘공적 이익’으로서의 정치적 갈등의 요소를 안고 출발하는 것이고, 그러한 갈등을 국민적 합의로서 이끌어 내어야 하는 것이다. 그러므로 정당정치의 출발점은 자유로운 선거이며, 선거를 통해 대표를 선출하고 정부를 구성한다는 점에서 선거의 경쟁이 얼마나 공정하게 이루어져야 하는지는 상당히 중요해진다. 즉 선거의 민주성이 담보되어져야만 한다는 것이다. 민주정치는 대의정치이며, 대의정치는 정당정치인 동시에 의회정치라는 것이다. 그러나 이러한 정당이 과연 지킬 수 있는 가의 질문은 또 다른 새로운 문제를 만들어 낸다. 예컨대, 정당의 대표자가 곧 정당의 의사를 대표하는 것이라면, 정당의 정책이 국민을 위한 정책이 아니라면, 집권당이 반대당의 의사를 무시하는 구조라면, 정당은 민주주의와 부합할 수 없다는 점이 그것이다. 다시 말해서, 정당이 민주주의와 연결되는 것은 정치현실에서는 ‘민주주의’라는 ‘체제’가 반드시 공고하게 되어야만 정당은 민주적일 수 있다는 것을 의미한다는 것이다. 그러므로 오늘날 정당민주주의의 함의는 “정당이 없는 민주주의는 불가능하다.” 라는 명제에 두기보다는 “민주주의를 실현가능하게 하는 정당은 무엇인가? 무엇이어야만 하는가?”로 옮겨가야만 한다는 점이다. 그런데 민주주의를 실현하기 위한 현재의 한국 정당제도는 정당의 민주적 기능 조건들에 해당하는 자유의 지위, 평등의 지위, 공공성의 지위, 당내 민주주의 등에 있어서 다소 문제점을 안고 있는 것으로 보인다. 특히 소수정당은 언제나 선거에 참여할 수 있는 재정적 뒷받침이 원활하지 못하다는 사실에서 다원주의를 지향해야하는 민주주의의 대화채널에서 소수정당은 제거될 가능성이 크다는 문제점이 있다. 다원성은 민주주의의 근간이고 놓아버릴 수없는 핵심적 가치이기 때문에 소수정당의 정치적 다원성을 확보하여 주는 것이 옳다고 판단한다면, 소수정당의 활로를 어떻게 제도적으로 열어줄 수 있을 것인지, 다른 법적 방안은 없는지도 함께 고민하여야 할 시점으로 보인다. The political party cannot help being recognized as the essential system in the democratic nation, today. And we cannot think about democracy without a political party. The political party has the element of the political discord as 'the public profit' and we have to settle the problem to the national consensus. Therefore, the starting point of the party politics is the free election, and it is very important for us to have to elect the representative through the election and organize the government. That is, it is essential to consider the equitable competition on election, and to be mortgaged the democracy of the election. The democratic politics is the representation politics. The representation politics is the party politics, and at the same time, is the assembly politics. In other words, the meaning of the party democracy has to be moved the proposition called "What is the political party to actualize democracy? What does it have to be?” than "It is impossible to consider the democracy without the political party”, today. But the current Korean Party System has the problem as the status of the freedom, the status of the equality, the status of the public, and intraparty democracy corresponding to the democratic functional requirements of the political party. Because Pluralism is the basis of the democracy and the core value, it is needed to secure the political polyphyletic of the political party. It is the time for us to worry how the way out of the minor political party can be institutionally opened, whether there is other legal room or not, together.

정당법의 위헌성과 지역정당의 정당성: 헌재 2006. 3. 30. 2004헌마246 결정 비판

김종서 민주주의법학연구회 2022 민주법학 Vol.- No.80

In this thesis, I intended to demonstrate that the Political Party Act(the PPA, hereinafter) preventing local parties for over 60 years is unconstitutional on the one hand, and to make clear that the local party system is constitutionally legitimate and would make the innovation of Korean political culture on the other. To do this, I tried to expose the absurdity and irrationality of the 2006 abjudication of the Constitutional Court, which regrettably had missed the opportunity to rectify the unconstitutionality of the PPA. I carried out the critique of the decision as follows: First, I proved that the Constitutional Court had erred in extending the conceptual marks of the political party without solid foundation. Second, I demonstrated, to the contrast to the Constitutional Court, that the PPA denying the local party could not pass the constitutional test of the proportionality: the aim of the Act could not be justified since it was violating the principle of plural democracy; the excessive registration requirements in the PPA did not satisfy the necessity principle; and the balancing test was not met in that the interest of political stability could not outweigh the fundamental right to freedom of establishing political parties. Third, I asserted, unlike the Constitutional Court, that the current party registration system constituted a violation of equality principle as an indirect discrimination against new political forces; it infringed the plural party system by preventing legitimate activities of small or local parties; and also it did not conform to the principles of local self-government and national sovereignty. Furthermore and finally, besides proving the unconstitutionality of the current registration requirements of the PPA, I positively assert the constitutional legitimacy and political value of the local party system: First, it would contribute to the innovation of Korean political culture by repealing a political climate overdependent on local connections; second, the abolition of exclusion of local parties would open an unprecedented door of opportunity for the new political forces; and finally it would save the sovereign, that is, the present and prospective voters from the hatred of and disinterest in the politics. 이 글은, 쿠데타 정권에 의하여 제정되어 60년간 지역정당의 설립을 봉쇄해 온 정당법상 등록조항들의 위헌성을 논증하고, 나아가 지역정당의 설립이 헌법상 정당성을 가질 뿐 아니라 한국 정치문화의 혁신을 가능케 할 것임을 밝히는 것을 목적으로 한다. 이를 위하여 필자는 정당법의 위헌성을 바로잡을 기회가 있었음에도 이를 놓쳐버리고 만 헌법재판소의 2006년 결정의 허구성과 편협성을 폭로하고 비판한다. 헌법재판소 결정에 대한 비판은 다음과 같은 순서로 이루어진다. 첫째, 헌법재판소 결정의 토대가 된 정당의 개념표지 문제에 대한 헌법재판소의 오류를 논증한다. 여기서 헌법재판소가 제시한 일곱 가지 개념표지들 중 헌법 규정에 따른 것을 제외하고는 모두 정당의 개념표지가 될 수 없음을 밝힌다. 둘째, 헌법재판소가 정당설립의 자유 침해가 아니라며 만장일치로 합헌이라고 했던 정당등록제도가 사실은 위헌 여부 판단에서 요구되는 과잉금지의 원칙을 통과하지 못했음을 논증한다. 우선 군소정당과 지역정당의 배제라는 정당등록제도의 입법 목적은 다원주의적 민주주의의 기본원칙에 반하는 것으로 그 정당성을 인정할 수 없다. 또한 현행 정당등록제도는 새로운 정치세력들에게 과도한 등록요건을 부과하는 것이어서 침해의 최소성 원칙에 반하며, 안정적 양당제의 확보라는 이익은 결코 정당설립의 자유 침해라는 근원적 기본권 침해를 앞설 수 없는 것이어서 법익의 균형성 원칙에도 반하는 것이다. 셋째, 헌법재판소가 다루지 않았거나 소홀히 다룬 부분들에 대해서도 위헌 주장을 전개한다. 현행 정당등록제도는 외형상의 평등한 적용―이를 근거로 헌법재판소는 평등원칙 위반 문제가 없다고 했다―에도 불구하고 신생 정치세력에게 불리할 수밖에 없는 등록요건을 포함하고 있어 간접차별에 해당한다. 또한 정당에 대한 동등한 대우를 부정하고 군소・지역 정당의 정당한 정치활동을 가로막는다는 점에서 복수정당제에 위반된다. 나아가 지역정당의 부정을 통해 지방자치를 단순한 지방행정으로 격하함으로써 지역 수준의 정치를 제도적으로 보장하고자 하는 지방자치제의 본질에도 반한다. 뿐만 아니라, ‘현재 및 장래의 유권자들이 자신들의 의사와 이익을 결집하고 이를 공유하고 관철해 나갈 수 있는 민주적 의사결정과정을 보장하는 조직’이 정당이고 이는 국민주권 원칙의 실현을 위한 조건임에도 불구하고 지역성・군소성을 이유로 정당 등록을 거부하거나 등록을 취소함으로써 국민주권 원칙을 침해하고 있다. 마지막으로 필자는 지역정당이 헌법상의 원리나 요청에 적극적으로 기여한다는 점을 밝힘으로써 소극적 위헌 주장에 머물지 않고 적극적 제도개혁의 필요성을 주장한다. 지역정당은 헌법재판소가 지역정당 배제 필요성의 근거로서 제시했던 상황 즉 “지역적 연고에 지나치게 의존하는 정당정치풍토”를 혁파하는 데 크게 기여할 것이고, 지역정당 배제의 폐지는, 전국적 규모의 조직과 인력을 갖추지 못하면 새로운 정치적 도전을 시도조차 해 볼 수 없는 신진정치세력에게 전례 없는 기회의 문을 열어줄 것이며, 이처럼 신진세력의 진출과 지역주의적 정치풍토의 변화를 가져옴으로써 궁극적으로 주권자, 즉 장래 및 현재의 유권자들을 정치에 대한 혐오와 무관심으로부터 구해낼 것이다. 이처럼 현행 정당등록제도의 위헌성과 지역정당의 헌법 ...

지구당 폐지 전후 한국정당의 변화 및 발전방안 연구

지우효(Jee Woohyo),전성욱(Jeon Seongwook) 호남대학교 인문사회과학연구소 2016 인문사회과학연구 Vol.51 No.-

본 연구는 지구당 폐지 전후 한국정당의 변화를 비교분석하여, 지구당 폐지의 효과와 정책적 시사점을 제공하는데 그 목적이 있다. 중앙선관위에서 발행되는 1995년부터 2014년까지 『정당 활동개황 및 회계보고』를 통해 정당의 조직, 운영, 참여 측면에서 변화를 비교분석하였다. 분석결과, 정당 조직의 변화는 지구당 폐지 이후 당원이 급격하게 줄어들었다가 당내 경선으로 인한 지지자들의 유입으로 다시 증가추세를 보이고 있다. 운영상의 변화는 기본경비는 감소했으나, 조직 활동비를 포함한 정치 활동비 명 목은 오히려 증가하여 중앙집권적 고비용체제가 여전히 유지되고 있는 것으로 나타났다. 정당에 참여도 변화는 지구당 폐지와는 무관하게 정치에 대한 국민의 무관심과 불신으로 선거투표율은 지속적으로 감소하고 있으며, 자발적 정당 후원회 활동도 침체되고 있음을 확인하였다. 결론적으로 제도적 방향은 조직의 경량화와 효율성 추구로 나아가고 있으나, 현실적 운용행태 는 여전히 선거구에 기초한 고비용 정치구조를 보이고 있다. 본 연구는 민감하고 복잡한 이해관계를 가진 정치적 이슈를 실증분석을 통해 정책에 대한 효과성을 검증함으로써, 정당정치 활성화를 위한 정책적 시사점을 제공하였다는 데 의의가 있다. 이를 통해 정당참여, 민주성 제고, 대의민주주의, 대중정당이라는 정치 패러다임 정착에 기여하기를 기대한다. This study aimed to provide policy implications through an empirical comparative analysis of the party structure, operations, and grassroots participation in the political process before and after the abolition of local parties via data from the"Political Party Activity Outlook and Financial Report"published annually by the National Election Commission over a twenty-year period between 1995 and 2014. The results of the analysis suggest that the main goals of political party reform efforts, including alleviating the high-cost, low-efficiency political processes, improving the transparency of political party operations, and the nurturing of"true"party members, were not accomplished even after the abolition of the local party chapter scheme. On the contrary, it caused more problems such as excessive centralization of party power, weak control of party members, lack of lower-level party organizations, continuation of political indifference among voters, and weakening of political participation by the public. The analysis has been conducted to contribute to the improvement of political party participation and the participatory democratic process within the Republic of Korea.

정당민주주의와 정당개혁

정연주 법조협회 2020 法曹 Vol.69 No.1

Political Party is the essential element of the realization of domocracy and separation of powers. So, democracy is today party democracy. Diverse legal and institutional conditions should be arranged for the vitalization of party democracy. The conditions are the guarantee of the freedom of establishment of political parties and the plural party system, the protection of the State for political parties, the guarantee of equal opportunity among political parties, democratization of political parties, etc. In order to accomplish the conditions, the concrete reforms of political party system must be realized as follows; 1. the amendment of Aricle 8 of the Constitution, 2. the mitigation of the requirements of establishment of a political party including the permission of local parties, 3. the mitigation of the requirements of Revocation of Registration of a political party, 4. the mitigation of the requirements of negotiating party, 5. the mitigation of election threshold, 6. the expansion of the rate of the proportional representative National Assembly members, 7. democratization and legalization of recommendation procedures of candidates by political parties, 8. the transfer from open primary to closed primary, 9. the legalization of loss of office of the National Assembly member or the local council member of the relevant party in the dissolution of the unconstitutional political party. The above-mentioned concrete reforms of political party system should be realized for the successful settlement of the mixed-member propotional system according to the recently revised Public Official Election Act and for the vitalization of party democracy based on plural democracy. 정당은 민주주의와 권력분립의 실현을 위한 필수적인 요소이다. 즉 정당은 민주주의 실현의 주도적 역할을 하고 있다. 따라서 오늘날의 민주주의는 정당민주주의라고 할 수 있다. 그런데 이러한 정당민주주의가 제 기능을 발휘하기 위하여는 그것을 가능케 하는 다양한 법적·제도적 여건이 마련되어야 한다. 정당과 관련한 기본권의 보장, 정당에 대한 국가의 지원, 효율적인 정당기속과 그 한계, 정당간의 기회균등, 정당내부민주주의 등이 그것이다. 이를 위해 구체적으로는 첫째, 헌법상 정당조항의 개정, 둘째, 정당설립요건의 완화, 특히 지역정당의 허용, 셋째, 등록취소요건의 완화, 특히 국회의원선거에서의 득표율 등에 따른 정당등록취소조항의 폐지, 넷째, 원내교섭단체요건의 완화, 다섯째, 봉쇄조항의 완화, 여섯째, 비례대표의석비율의 확대, 일곱째, 국회의원선거의 후보자추천절차의 민주화와 법정화, 여덟째, 국민참여경선제의 재고, 아홉째, 위헌정당해산 시 소속 국회의원이나 지방의회의원의 의원직 상실 여부의 법제화 등이 요구된다. 이러한 정당과 관련된 다양한 제도의 개혁은 최근에 개정된 공직선거법의 성공적인 시행과 연동형 비례대표제의 정착 및 다원적 민주주의를 바탕으로 한 정당민주주의의 활성화를 위하여 필수적이라고 생각한다.

정당의 정치활동의 자유 제한 입법에 대한 고찰 - 정당의 옥외광고물 설치와 관련하여 -

이부하 한국입법학회 2022 입법학연구 Vol.19 No.2

Normal party activities include publicizing the party's policies, recruiting party members, posting a banner in the name of the party, and operating the party member council. The act of a political party to promote its party’s policy or its position on political issues by using printed materials, facilities, advertisements, etc. and activities to recruit party members are normal party activities. Party A installed and posted a banner for publicity of the presidential election and recruitment of the electoral college. Six banners were stolen. Party A submitted a complaint to the police requesting an investigation. The police, who received the complaint, visited the outdoor advertising department in Uijeongbu and confirmed that six banners were removed due to crackdown. In the case of Gijang-gun, in the case of Gijang-gun, after reporting an assembly in accordance with Article 6 (1) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, the Ministry of Legislation and Public Administration reported the assembly in accordance with Article 8 (4) of the Act on the Management of Outdoor Advertisements and Promotion of Outdoor Advertisement Industry. It violates the principle of clarity because it cannot be predicted that a person with sound common sense and ordinary legal sentiment can only post banners marked and installed for political activities, such as recruiting political party presidential candidates. In other words, it violates the constitutional principle of clarity because it is impossible to predict that a person with sound common sense and ordinary legal sentiment has no obligation to report to political activities such as recruiting political party candidates for the presidential election. Events for legitimate political activities hosted by a political party are held indoors, and only the promotional material is affixed to the outside. Therefore, imposing a report duty on the installation of banners to promote events for legitimate political activities hosted by a political party is an excessive exercise of public power, which is prohibited in principle. Events for political activities hosted by political parties do not come in direct contact with subjects of other fundamental rights, there is no risk of conflict with other legal interests, and unlike outdoor assemblies, there is no case of inconvenience to the general public such as traffic disturbances. In addition, there is no risk of maintaining order because it does not entail collective action by a large number of people. In Article 8, No. 4 of the Act on the Management of Outdoor Advertisements, an individual or group considers the display and installation of publicity materials for events for legal political activities and the display and installation of publicity materials for use at assembly the same. It is inconsistent with the purpose of guaranteeing freedom of expression in the Constitution to be subject to regulations on prohibitions and restrictions.

EXPLORING POLITICAL BRAND IDENTITY AND POLITICAL BRAND IMAGE IN NON-PARTY CONTEXTS FROM A MULTI-STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVE

G. Armannsdottir,C. Pich 글로벌지식마케팅경영학회 2018 Global Marketing Conference Vol.2018 No.07

Introduction Understanding political brands is a pertinent concern for the British Crown Dependency of Guernsey. Guernsey is a Channel Island, part of the British Isles yet not a member of the European Union. In addition, Guernsey currently has a nonpolitical party system and all thirty-eight Members of Parliament [otherwise known as Deputies] are independent figures. Further, deputies stand as individuals, and members often form informal alliances repeatedly referred to as collections of constantly changing coalitions of support or ‘quasi-political parties’ Guernsey is set to hold an island-wide referendum by March 2018 on the island’s electoral process, moving from seven constituencies to one island-wide constituency. The Guernsey Government believe the 2018 referendum will impact the way Members of Parliament are elected and envisage the creation and introduction of ‘political parties’, or formal alliances in anticipation for the 2020 General Election. The creation and introduction of political parties [political brands] on Guernsey would be unprecedented to the current-historic political environment of a non-party system structured by independent, individual politicians. Further, it is unknown whether the creation and introduction of political ‘party’ brands would have the same appeal, benefits and success compared with independent ‘individual’ political brands. This presents a unique opportunity for the proposed piece of research, which will have an impact as to whether political parties [political party brands] are desired by Guernsey’s elected representatives and Guernsey citizens-voters, and if so, how will new political parties be created and conceptualised. However, in order to address this we need to frame the study within the sub-discipline of political branding. The application of commercial branding theory to politics is nothing new (O’Cass and Voola 2011; O’Shaughnessy and Baines 2009; Rutter et al. 2015). There is a shared understanding that political parties, pressure groups, politicians, candidates and campaigns can be conceptualised as ‘brands’ (Guzman and Sierra 2009; Needham and Smith 2015; Peng and Hackley 2009; Pich et al. 2016; Scammell 2015; Smith 2009). Further, the sub-discipline of political branding has become a ‘critical’ and ‘priority’ issue that warrants continued attention (Speed et al. 2015). The application of branding to politics has been described as the most appropriate way to understand the political ‘product’ and a mechanism to frame the deconstruction process to understand the political promise put forward by political actors (Scammell 2015). Political brands are complex, multi-layered entities which are often difficult to unbundle (Lees-Marshment 2009; Lock and Harris 1996; Phipps et al. 2010). Further, political brands are powerful tools used as a short-cut mechanism to deconstruct the rational and irrational elements of the political offering (Scammell 2015). This is reinforced with continued calls for future research to focus on generating deeper insight into how political brands are developed and understood particularly in new settings and contexts (Needham and Smith 2015; Nielsen 2016; Ormrod and Henneberg 2011; Pich and Dean 2015; Scammell 2015; Speed et al. 2015). Subsequently, the objectives of this study are to: - Investigate how current non-party political brands create, develop and communicate their brand identity from the perspective of elected representatives - Explore how current non-party political brand image is understood from the perspective of Guernsey voters - Ascertain whether elected representatives and Guernsey voters desire political ‘party’ brands for the 2020 General Election. Theoretical Background Political brands can be considered a trinity of elements including the party, leader and policy (Butler et al. 2011; Davies and Mian 2010; Pich and Dean 2015; Speed et al. 2015). The trinity of elements need to ensure clear identification and differentiation from political competitors (Ahmed et al. 2015; Nielsen 2016; O’Cass and Voola 2011; Smith 2008). In addition, effective political brands should be strong, appealing, trustworthy, offer resonance, act as a decision making driver which in turn will support strategy development and build awareness in the mind of voters-citizens (Ahmed et al. 2015; Baines and Harris 2011; O’Cass and Voola 2011). However, the existing literature has tended to focus on ‘party’ political systems and overlooked political brands from non-party political systems where all candidates and politicians are independent candidates and representatives. Nevertheless, what about other typologies of political brands like in non-party systems? In addition, the existing body of knowledge has not explained how political brands exist or develop without the ‘party’ element from the trinity. This proposition is supported the demand for more depth and understanding on political brands especially non-party ‘individual’ political brands [elected representatives] (French and Smith 2010; O’Cass and Voola 2011; Peng and Hackley 2009; Scammell 2015). Despite the calls for more research in this area, there are a few studies that have investigated ‘individual’ political brands. More specifically, studies have focused on politicians or candidates from political ‘parties’ in terms of brand personality, equity, identity or image and often compared ‘corporate’ and ‘individual’ political brands (Cwalina and Falkowski 2014; De Landtsheer and De Vries 2015; Milewicz and Milewicz 2014; Smith and Spotswood 2013; Speed et al. 2015). For example, Smith and Spotswood (2013) comparatively considered the brand equity of the UK Liberal Democrat Party from a corporate and individual-local perspective. Smith and Spotwood (2013) highlighted that successful political brands whether corporate or local-individual) communicated clear expectations, focused values, believable promises to constituents, which is often easier at a local rather than national level. Further, Smith and Spotwood (2013) argued that successful corporate political brands would depend on consistency between corporate and local-individual political brands. However, the work by Smith and Spotswood (2013) was developed from speeches, articles and other discourse rather than from the personal perspective of internal stakeholders. Therefore, more depth and understanding from a multi-stakeholder perspective would reveal greater insight into the individual-local political brand particularly in non-party contexts. Existing political branding research primarily adopts either an internal (Busby and Cronshaw 2015; Cwalina and Falkowski 2014; de Landtsheer and Vries 2015; Milewicz and Milewicz 2014; Smith and Spotswood 2013) or external perspective to frame studies (French and Smith 2010; Peng and Hackley 2009; Phipps et al. 2010). More specifically, research devoted to an internal ‘brand identity’ perspective directs its attention to the political party, candidate or politician. Brand identity can be conceptualised as the current intended projection formulated and communicated by the brand’s creator with the aim of attempting to establish a desired identity in the mind of the consumer (de Chernatony 2007; Kapferer 2008). Further, brand identity can be seen as a useful approach to generate a deep understanding from an internal standpoint and capture the ‘central ideas of a brand and how the brand communicates these ideas to stakeholders’ (de Chernatony 2007:45; Ross and Harradine 2011; Saaksjarvi and Samiee 2011). In contrast, research focusing on an external ‘brand image’ perspective considers the political offering from a citizen-voter orientation (Needham and Smith 20015; Nielsen 2016; O’Cass 2001). Brand image can be considered as the current-immediate associations perceived and formulated in the mind of the consumer, which is often out of control of the brand’s creator (Nandan 2005; Rekom et al. 2006). In addition, brand image is externally created, and manifested through unique associations and perceptions, experiences and expectations linked to physical and intangible elements of a brand (Bosch et al. 2006a; Nandan 2005). Therefore, future research should attempt to capture insight into how political brands develop and communicate identity and how political brands are understood from an internal [revealed by the politician] and external perspective [revealed by the voter] (Baines et al. 2014; Needham and Smith 2015; O’Cass and Voola 2011; Pich and Dean 2015). However, how can we actually comprehend current political brand identity and political brand image? One study that explored an ‘internal-relational orientation’ of several individual political brands was the work by Pich and Dean (2015). Pich and Dean (2015) explored the internal brand identity of UK Conservative Party politicians prior the 2010 UK General Election with the support of Kapferer’s brand identity prism (Kapferer 2008). Further, the work by Pich and Dean (2015) not only revealed the complex related yet distinct nature of individual political brands and their relationship with their ‘corporate Conservative Party’ political brand but also demonstrated the problematic nature of applying the brand identity prism in its original form to deconstruct the internal orientation of a political brand. Pich and Dean (2015) concluded with a revised framework known as the ‘political brand identity network’ and challenged future studies to consider this as a workable tool to understand individual political brands from an internal-relational perspective. However, Pich and Dean (2015) concluded that the ‘political brand identity network’ could also support the understanding of external brand image. Therefore, could the ‘political brand identity network’ aid the exploration of internal political brand identity and external political brand image of non-party political brands? Responding to this gap in the body of knowledge, this research will explore the internal brand identity of an ‘individual’ political brand from the perspective of elected representatives and investigate the external brand image of non-party political brand from the perspective of Guernsey voters. In addition, this study will assess the operationalisation of the ‘political brand identity network’ put forward by Pich and Dean (2015). Further, responding to the challenge from Pich and Dean (2015), this study will assess the usability of the political brand identity network to understand non-party political brand identity and political brand image. This will address the limited development of ‘appropriate models’ and frameworks that can be used to assist political entities in understanding their offering and support strategy development (Nielsen 2015; O’Cass and Voola 2011; Ormrod 2011; Scammell 2015). Confusion and advancement can be addressed by building on existing research by assessing existing models and frameworks in comparison with new settings and contexts (Nielsen 2016; O’Cass 2001; O’Cass and Voola 2011; Ormrod and Henneberg 2011; Scammell 2015; Speed et al. 2015). Research Design As this study aims to explore non-party political brands from a multi-stakeholder perspective, a qualitative interpretivist approach is adopted (Creswell 2007; Welch et al. 2011). This is consistent with the calls across the political branding discipline for more exploratory empirical research (French and Smith 2010; O’Cass and Voola 2011; Peng and Hackley 2009; Scammell 2015). This study will involve two stages. Stage one involves twenty-one semi-structured interviews with current elected Deputies. Deputies from across the eight districts of Guernsey namely; Vale, Vale-West, St Sampson, St Peter Port-North, St Peter Port-South, South East, West and Castel (www.gov.gg) have been selected. Interviews will last between 60-90 minutes and will be conducted by the researchers from March 2018-May 2018. Stage two involves twelve focus group discussions with Guernsey citizens-voters. Focus group discussions will be organised according to voter age group following the conventional approach adopted by research organisitions such as YOUGOV and IPSOS-MORI to explore political brand image. More specifically, this study will adopt purposive sampling framework and Guernsey citizens will be grouped from 18-24, 25-34, 35-44, 45-54, 55-64 and 65+ and each group will serve to frame each focus group discussion (Gillham 2005; Malhotra and Birks 2003). Focus group discussions will be conducted July-September 2018. Pilot interviews and focus group discussions were conducted in October 2017 to assess the usability of the interview-focus group schedules and aided developmentrefinement (Gillham 2005). The ‘political brand identity network’ (Pich and Dean 2015) serves as a conceptual framework to provide some structure the interviews-focus group discussions and be incorporated into the interview-focus group schedules (Gillham 2005; Zikmund 2003).Transcripts from the semi-structured interviews and the focus group discussions will be thematically analysed with the support of Butler- Kisber’s (2010) two-stage analytical approach. Findings The findings from stage one of the study will generate insight on how current nonparty political brands create, develop and communicate their brand identity from the perspective of elected representatives. For example, the findings will highlight how non-party political brands create-develop communication strategies and tactics, the significance of individual political personality as a tool to provide differentiation and whether personal values are used to characterise the brands (Ahmed et al. 2015; Nielsen 2016; O’Cass and Voola 2011; Smith 2008). The findings from stage two of the study will reveal how current non-party political brand image is understood from the perspective of Guernsey voters. For example, the insights linked to political brand image will reveal consistencies and incoherencies with communicated identity and awareness of communication strategies-tactics, personality characteristics and personal-cultural values of Deputies (Pich and Dean 2015). Stage two will also reveal understanding as to whether Guernsey citizens-voters desire political ‘party’ brands. This will address the third objective of the study. This in turn will highlight the ideal conceptualised political brand for Guernsey developed from a multi-stakeholder perspective. Discussion This study will also reveal the relationships between current Deputies and constituents, personal-working relationships with stakeholders across government departments and understanding of attitudes and opinions of political issues such as the introduction of parties. This in turn will introduce first-hand accounts of current non-party political brand identities. In addition, this stage will reveal if the ‘party’ dimension is the only missing element from the triad and provide understanding of the relevance of the ‘policy’ and ‘leader-politician’ dimensions (Butler et al. 2011; Davies and Mian 2010; Pich and Dean 2015; Speed et al. 2015). Further, this study will provide understanding into the relationships between voters and Deputies and highlight the perceptions, associations and imagery Guernsey voters ascribe to non-party political brands (Bosch et al. 2006a; Nandan 2005). This research will also reveal understanding as to whether Guernsey citizens-voters desire political ‘party’ brands. This in turn could result in a reconceptualization of political brands, which extends the political brand triad (Butler et al. 2011; Davies and Mian 2010; Pich and Dean 2015; Speed et al. 2015). Further, a revised definition could be tailored to the unique setting of island communities and this could have implications to other jurisdictions with non-traditional political brands. Finally, the applied findings will address the challenge put forward by Pich and Dean (2015) to assess the usability of the ‘brand identity network’ as a mechanism to explore internal political brand identity and external political brand image. This will go some way in addressing the limited number of ‘appropriate frameworks’ than can be used to assist researchers to understand brands and develop strategies to address any inconsistencies or misalignment between communicated identity and understood image (Nielsen 2015; O’Cass and Voola 2011; Ormrod 2011; Scammell 2015; Speed et al. 2015). Conclusion Subsequently, this study will seek to understand how independent elected representatives currently create and develop political brand identity and explore how Guernsey voters understand political brand image of non-party brands. Further, the findings will highlight a contribution to practice. For example, this study will reveal implications of the introduction of political ‘party’ brands to the prospective of an island-wide voting environment from the perspective of internal [Deputies] and external [citizens-voters] stakeholders. This research will offer internal political stakeholders insight into the perceptions, attitudes and opinions of external citizensvoters in terms of prospective political ‘party’ brands, desired configuration of political ‘party’ brands and highlight whether political ‘party’ brands have a role to play in the reformed electoral process on Guernsey. Further, the findings will offer internal political stakeholders the opportunity to design, create and develop their political brands in line with the wants and needs of the electorate, which in turn should strengthen political engagement, maintain personal relationships between politicians-voters and allow for the establishment of a tailored approach to political brand management in non-traditional political environments. Further, the findings will have a direct impact on the debate as to how Guernsey’s electoral process develops following the 2018 Island Wide Referendum and legislates prior the 2020 Guernsey General Election. The findings will also have implications beyond non-party systems of government for example it may offer existing party-systems of government practical methods and initiatives to strengthen voter engagement and develop stakeholder relationships across jurisdictions and constituencies. This study will also contribute to academic theory. For example, the addressed objectives will offer the researchers an opportunity reconceptualise political brands particularly in non-traditional contexts based on deep insight from the perspectives of citizens-voters, which in turn will allow the sub-discipline of political branding to advance-develop as an area of study (Needham and Smith 20015; Nielsen 2016; O’Cass 2001; Pich et al. 2016; Scammel 2015). In addition, this study will address explicit calls for future research in this area by outlining how independent political brands exist or develop without the ‘party’ element from the trinity assess the applicability of the ‘trinity’ concept to new jurisdictions. Finally, this study will assess the applicability of the ‘political brand identity network’ (Pich and Dean 2015) as a tool to explore internal political brand identity and external political brand image of non-party political brands from a multi-stakeholder perspective.

종교정당에 관한 한·일 비교: 청우당과 공명당을 중심으로

박세준 동양사회사상학회 2018 사회사상과 문화 Vol.21 No.1

Constitutions of South Korea and Japan do not forbid religious political parties to be active. In South Korea, no political party with religious affiliation have entered the National Assembly. In Japan, on the other hand, Komeito as a religious political party entered the parliament successfully and now forms a coalition government with the Liberal Democratic Party, the ruling party. This research aims to identify the factors responsible for religious political parties in South Korea and Japan to take such different paths. The focus is on the inner and outer environments surrounding religious political parties. Inner environment refers to the congregation, religious doctrine of specific religions, and policies and actions of religious political parties. Outer environment includes political landscapes, religious terrains in a nation, and international order. Variations on seven factors, four inner environmental and three outer environmental, are utilized in making comparison between religious political parties in South Korea and Japan. Cheondoist Chungwoo Party and Komeito are analyzed. When it comes to the congregation, Choendogyo has 200,000 in South Korea and 1,800,000 in North Korea. Soka Gakkai International has 5,000,000. In terms of religious terrains, Cheondogyo was the third largest congregation in South Korea next to Christianity and Buddhism while the largest in North Korea. Soka Gakkai International, though categorized as a new religion out of Buddhism, was and still has more followers than Christianity in Japan. Both Cheondogyo and Soka Gakkai International stress the importance of social and political participation in their doctrines. Religious political parties were organized and participated in politics as way of practicing what is preached. The policies by Cheondoist Chungwoo Party were close to that of center-left, “Chosun Democracy”. Soka Gakkai International’s policies, though claimed to be centrist, were of rightest orientation. Cheondoist Chungwoo Party, both in South and North Korea, acted in accordance with other groups. On the other hand, Komeito acted alone in the beginning. Komeito first entered politics in Japanese 1955 System born out of the Cold War. Around the time when the Cold War ended, Komeito became one of the ruling parties. Political landscapes around the time Cheondoist Chungwoo Party was active favored the right in South Korea and the left in North Korea. Such political landscape is the outcome of the Cold War at the time. Different paths of Cheondoist Chungwoo Party and Komeito can be explained by the policies of religious political parties implemented in response to the national political landscapes structurated by international order. The fact that Komeito turned to the right upon connecting to conservative party after the Cold War makes the point clearer. Religious terrains, congregation and specific actions can serve as a foundation for religious political parties to enter the realm of politics. However, they do not contribute to the success of religious political parties in joining the Parliament. 대한민국과 일본의 헌법에는 종교정당의 활동을 금하는 명확한 내용은 없다. 대한민국의 경우는 종교를 내세운 정당이 의회에 진출한 적이 없다. 일본에서 종교를 내세운 정당이 의회에 진출했고, 연정을 통해 여당으로 활동하고 있다. 양국의 종교정당이 이처럼 다른 모습을 보이는 데에는 어떠한 요인들이 작용했는지를 밝히는 것이 본 연구의 목적이다. 이러한 목적을 달성하기 위해서 종교정당을 둘러싸고 있는 내부환경과 외부환경을 비교해서 살펴본다. 종교정당의 내부환경은 종교정당의 모체가 되는 종교의 교세와 그 종교의 교리, 종교정당의 정책 그리고 종교정당의 활동이다. 종교정당의 외부환경은 해당국가의 정치상황, 해당국가의 종교지형 그리고 국제질서다. 내부환경 요인 네 개와 외부환경 요인 세 개, 총 일곱 개의 요인을 비교해서 한국과 일본의 종교정당을 비교한다. 한국의 경우는 남북한의 천도교청우당을, 일본의 경우 공명당을 연구대상으로 한다. 교세의 면에서 남한의 천도교는 20여만 명, 북한은 180여만 명, 창가학회는 500여만 명이다. 이들은 당시 종교지형에서 남한은 기독교와 불교에 밀려 세 번째였고, 북한은 신도가 제일 많은 종교였다. 창가학회는 불교로 볼 경우 전통신토를 제외한 최대 종교의 일원이고, 불교계 신종교로 봐도 기독교나 전통신토계 신종교보다 많은 교세를 자랑하고 있다. 천도교와 창가학회 모두 교리에 사회참여와 정치참여에 적극성이 있다. 이러한 교리 실천의 방법으로 종교정당을 만들어 현실정치에 참여한다. 천도교청우당의 정책은 “조선적 민주주의”라는 중도좌파에 가까웠고, 창가학회의 정책은 중도주의를 표방했으나 우파에 가까웠다. 이러한 정책으로 천도교청우당은 남과 북 모두 다른 세력과 연계를 통해 활동했다. 남쪽의 천도교청우당 경우, 신파는 중도좌파를 포함한 좌익계와 구파는 중도우파를 포함한 우익계와 연계했다. 반면 공명당의 경우 보수당과 혁신당이 신경쓰지 않는, 틈새를 파고들며 활동했다. 보수에 유리한 보혁대립이라는 정치지형이 공명당의 “틈새전략”과 맞아떨어진 것이다. 공명당의 정계진출 시작이 됐던 일본의 “55년 체제”는 냉전의 산물이었고, 공명당이 연정의 동반자로 처음 여당이 된 시기는 냉전이 해체되던 시기였다. 남과 북에서 천도교청우당이 활동하던 정치지형은 남쪽은 우익에 유리한 좌우분열이었고, 북쪽은 좌익에 유리한 좌우분열이었다. 이에 중도좌익 노선이었던 천도교청우당은 남쪽에서는 불리한 위치였고, 북쪽은 유리한 위치였다. 물론 이러한 정치지형은 냉전의 시작기였기 때문이다. 이상에서 봤을 때, 천도교청우당과 공명당은 국제질서로 인해 구조화된 국내 정치지형에 맞는 종교정당의 정책에 따라 실패와 성공으로 나아가게 됐다. 특히나 중도주의를 표방했던 공명당이 냉전해체 이후 보수정당과 손을 잡으면서 우편향 됐다는 점을 보면 확실히 알 수 있다. 종교정당은 결국 대중정당이기 때문이다. 해당 국가 내에 종교지형이나 교세, 종교정당의 활동과 같은 요소들은 종교정당의 등장이나 종교정당이 정계에 진출할 수 있는 밑거름이 될 수는 있다. 하지만 의회에 진출할 수 있는, 즉 종교정당의 성공요소는 아니다.

지역정치 활성화를 위한 지역정당 설립 방안 연구: 해외 주요국 지역정당 사례의 비교분석

차재권,옥진주,이영주 한국지방정치학회 2021 한국지방정치학회보 Vol.11 No.1

The main purpose of this study is to diagnose the problems of the current Korean party law system that is preventing the establishment of local political parties and to draw up realistic plans to enable the establishment of local political parties in order to revitalize local and civic politics. For this purpose, this study aims to analyze the cases of regional political party activation in major foreign countries such as the UK, Germany, Spain, USA, and Japan, where the establishment of regional political parties is free and local political parties are relatively active, and to find policy implications for revitalizing regional political parties in Korea. The results of comparative case analysis are as follows. First, it is difficult to find countries with stronger regulatory characteristics than the requirements for political party establishment in Korea, among the major overseas countries included in the analysis of this study. Second, it was confirmed that the political parties do not regulate the participation of political organizations in elections as a legal requirement of political parties in countries where local political parties exist and actively operate. Third, it was confirmed that the more difficult the legal regulatory conditions for political parties, the weaker the legal base for the existence of local political parties. It is virtually impossible to apply the examples of major foreign countries examined in this study to the political party law system of Korea as it is. This is because not only the historical paths in which political systems and local autonomy systems have been applied are different, but also the political culture and social environment of political societies where political systems work are different. Therefore, it is necessary not only to demand that the current political party law system, which is thoroughly protected by the political interests of the two vested parties, be reformed unconditionally, but also to make efforts to realize more concretely the realistic measures that can activate local politics and civil politics under the current political party law system, that is, the effective measures to establish a limited regional party. 본 연구는 지역정당 설립을 가로막고 있는 현행 우리나라 정당법 체계의 문제점을 진단하고 지역정치와 시민정치를 활성화하기 위해 지역정당 설립을 가능케 하는 현실적 방안을 도출하는데 연구의 주된 목적을 두고 있다. 이를 위해 본 연구는 지역정당의 설립이 자유롭고 지역정당이 비교적 활발하게 운영되고 있는 영국, 독일, 스페인, 미국, 일본 등 해외 주요국가의 지역정당 활성화 사례들을 분석함으로써 우리나라 지역정당 활성화를 위한 정책적 시사점을 찾아보고자 한다. 사례의 비교분석 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 본 연구의 분석 대상에 포함된 해외 주요국가 중에서 우리나라의 정당법에서 정하고 있는 정당 성립요건보다 더 규제적 성격이 강한 국가들은 찾아보기 어렵다. 둘째, 지역정당이 존재하고 활발하게 활동하는 국가에서는 정당의 법적 요건으로 정치단체의 선거 참여를 규제하지 않는 것이 공통된 특징으로 확인되었다. 셋째, 정당에 대한 법적 규제 조건이 까다로울수록 지역정당이 존재할 수 있는 법적 기반 또한 약해진다는 점이 확인되었다. 본 연구에서 살펴본 해외 주요국가의 사례들을 원형 그대로 우리나라의 정당법 체계에 적용하기는 사실상 불가능하다. 정치제도나 지방자치제도가 적용되어 온 역사적 경로가 다를 뿐 아니라 정치제도가 작동하는 정치사회의 정치문화나 사회적 환경이 다르기 때문이다. 따라서 양대 기득권 정당의 정치적 이해관계에 의해 철저히 보호되고 있는 현행의 정당법 체계를 무조건 개혁하라고 요구만 할 것이 아니라 우선 현행 정당법 체계 하에서 지역정치와 시민정치를 활성화할 수 있는 현실적인 방안, 즉 제한적인 지역정당 설립 효과를 가져올 수 있는 방안들을 보다 구체적으로 실현해 보려는 노력이 선행될 필요가 있다.

현행 정당공천제도의 헌법적 문제점

최병훈 ( Byung Hoon Choi ) 안암법학회 2010 안암 법학 Vol.0 No.32

The main political parties have adopted the intraparty competing nomination-the direct primary election system-in the 16th and 17th presidential election to enable electorates to select the party`s nominees. And for the 5th Nationwide Local Elections on June 2nd, 2010, political parties amended the party rules toward enlarging the participation of the non-members(unaffifiated voters). This direct primary election system was modeled upon that of the United States. It was one of various efforts to reform political parties and politics in Korea. It purports to take root of upward nomination within the party, which helps to fasten the internal party democracy in Korea. The Korean primary election system is still fledgling in light of its short history especially in the legal perspective as well as the practical perspective. In addition, Korean political parties permit unaffiliated voter to vote in the nomination of candidates and it makes use of surveys of public opinions of the candidates in high proportion in evaluation. It casts serious doubts on the possible injury to the party`s ideology and representation. That becomes, in turn, the unconstitutional burden to the party`s rights of association. In the Jones case, the U.S. Supreme Court held unconstitutional that the state`s election law ordered the blanket primary election in lieu of the closed primary election since it violated the political parties` First Amendment rights of association. On the other hand, as mentioned before, Korea has recently adopted the direct primary election system similar to that of the U.S. To study these matters, this paper applies "the Tripartite Model of Political Parties"-the new definition for constitutional muster of the U.S. Supreme Court-to the intraparty competing nomination of the direct primary election system in Korea. In summary, the direct primary election system is founded upon the principle of the political party democracy and party autonomy embodying rights of association and it necessitates the structural compliance with the Korean Constitution. However, the current Public Office Election Act and the political party`s charters and bylaws have some unconstitutional provisions. Some of these include the qualification and selection clauses of voters as well as application of surveys of public opinions of the candidates in the process of nomination to represent the political party. These could inflict material injury to the structural compliance with the Korean Constitution. Finally, it should be noted that the open intraparty competing nomination needs to comply firmly with the triangular structure of political party democracy, political party autonomy, and national election for passing constitutional muster.

개인의 자유로서 정당의 자유 - 헌법상 정당조항에 대한 민주적 해석론 -

윤정인 한국비교공법학회 2023 공법학연구 Vol.24 No.1

The unstable party system in Korea is a product of long-standing authoritarian politics, and it is greatly influenced by the Parteinstaat-model and political system formed in that era. The conventional interpretation of the party clause of the Korean Constitution and the Political Parties Act is dominated by the theoretical background and jurisprudence of the era in which they were enacted. That has significantly impacted the distorted party system and closed party competition to this day. Accordingly, this paper presents a new interpretation of the party clause, article 8, of the Constitution, which is the basis for guaranteeing the party institution and freedom of political parties. By doing so, this paper presents a normative basis for the political parties to be understood and utilized as political platforms for the people, not as tools for the power holders. First of all, I argued that the constitutional freedom of political parties should be reinterpreted from the perspective of the individual right of political participation through political parties. And, the theory of institutional guarantee (Einrichtungs- garantee) and the Parteinstaat-model, which have been the theoretical and doctrinal basis for the interpretation of the party institution in Korea so far, were revisited. Based on this, a new interpretation of the party clause of the Constitution suggests that: paragraph 1 of article 8 should be more emphasized as a basis for the constitutional guarantee of the freedom of political parties, rather than its institutional aspects; paragraph 2 should be understood as basic requests on running the parties, not the limitation on the freedom of political parties; paragraph 3 imposes the state an active duty to protect political parties legally or institutionally, not only financially; and paragraph 4 secures the existence of political parties. Furthermore, I argued the unconstitutionality of the party registration and de-registration systems under the Political Parties Act, which have maintained the ‘political party system without the people’ for a long time and have been obstacles that restrict the individual right to form political parties. In addition, I argued the unconstitutionality of the party registration requirements, being practically a requirement for the establishment of political parties, through reviewing the Constitutional Court’s decisions in 2006 and 2022. Especially, by closely examining the recent decision(2019Hun-Ma445) made on November 24th, 2022, I pointed out that the constitutional scholarship and the Court, need to improve their argumentation on freedom of political parties from the perspective of realizing individual political freedom. 한국의 불안정한 정당체제는 오랜 권위주의 정치의 산물인 동시에 그 시대에 형성된 정당국가적 정당모델과 정치제도의 영향이 크다. 헌법 제8조의 정당조항과 정당법에 대한 종래의 해석론은 그것이 도입된 시대의 이론적 배경과 법리에 지배되어 왜곡된 정당제도와 폐쇄적인 정당경쟁을 고착화하고 있다. 이에 이 논문에서는 한국헌법상 정당제도와 정당의 자유 보장의 근거조항인 헌법 제8조 정당조항에 대한 새로운 해석관점을 제시함으로써, 정당이 국민과 국가를 단절시키는 권력의 도구가 아니라, 국민의 정치적 플랫폼으로 이해되고 활용될 수 있는 규범적 기초를 제시하고자 하였다. 우선 헌법상 정당의 자유는 ‘개인의 정당을 통한 정치적 참여의 자유’라는 관점에서 다시 해석되어야 할 것이다. 다음으로, 종래 한국의 정당제도의 해석의 이론적ㆍ법리적 기반이 되어온 제도보장론과 정당국가적 정당제도모델을 비판적으로 검토하였다. 이를 바탕으로, 헌법 제8조 정당조항의 의미를 재해석하였다: 동조 제1항은 정당의 자유의 헌법적 보장의 근거로서, 동항 후단의 복수정당제 보장은 국민의 정치적 자유를 강화시키는 방향으로 해석되어야 하고, 제2항은 정당의 자유에 대한 한계가 아니라 정당의 조직과 운영에 대한 헌법의 기본적 요청으로, 제3항은 정당에 대한 국가의 법적ㆍ제도적 차원의 적극적 보호의무로, 그리고 제4항은 정당의 존립을 보장하는 국가의 소극적 보호의무의 근거로 해석할 것을 제안하였다. 나아가, 오랜 세월 동안 국민없는 정당체제를 유지시키고, 국민의 정당설립의 자유 실현에 장애물이 되어온 대표적 사례로서 정당법상 정당등록제도와 등록취소제도의 위헌성을 논하였다. 그리고, 실질적으로 정당성립요건으로 기능하고 있는 정당등록요건의 위헌성을 2006년과 2022년 헌법재판소의 결정을 통해 논증하였다. 특히 최근의 헌재 2022.11.24. 2019헌마445결정의 논증과정에서 나타난 정당의 자유 논증과정의 한계를 비판적으로 검토함으로써, 개인의 정치적 자유의 실현의 관점에서 정당의 자유에 대한 이해를 제고하여야 할 필요성을 지적하였다.