전자민주주의와 민주주의

장용근(Young Kyn Chang) 세계헌법학회 한국학회 2004 世界憲法硏究 Vol.9 No.-

I was greatly shocked when I heard E-Democracy. Over 50 years ago, we, koreans, started democracy but our political condition is not up to our first ideal. That means dictatorship or quasi-democracy. in this reason, I decided to study E-Democracy to be a little help to korean democracy. IN korean constitutional law, Article Ⅰ, clause 1 has it that Korea is democratic republic, and Article Ⅰ, clause 2 has it that Sovereignty rests with the people. however the real situation is different. I think that it is our urgent need to replace formal Sovereignty with substantial Sovereignty. To realize substantial Sovereignty, We need E-Democracy which will, I believe, satisfy our real political demand. the reason why the principle of Sovereignty became formal, I think mainly, is that we have no effective way to take part in political decision. Namely although citizens want to participate in political decision, they can do so only in election and an opinion poll etc. Through these rare chance, citizens cannot become ideal citizens. So ultimately Democracy cannot be completed. Constitutional law has political aspect and legal aspect. In political aspect, the most important principle is the principle of Sovereignty. Existing theory on the principle of Sovereignty is inclined to stationary and formal theory Which focuses on the notion of Sovereignty. But the principle of Sovereignty is active and functional political theory, not stationary theory. So principle of Sovereignty becomes formal. My doctor's thesis aims at changing stationary and formal principle of Sovereignty into active, functional and substantial principle of Sovereignty. I make a study of the relation between Democracy and E-Democracy. I think Democracy means functional approach of principle of Sovereignty. I demonstrate that Democracy meaning self-governance is the best political system, not the second best political system because of historical evidence. Democracy is not result but process because the best thing in national decision is not fixed but found in the process of debate.

감사원의 소속에 관한 헌법적 고찰-감사원의 독립성확보방안을 중심으로

장용근 ( Young Kyn Chang ) 세계헌법학회 한국학회 2006 世界憲法硏究 Vol.12 No.1

Over 50 years ago, we, koreans, started democracy but our political condition is not up to our first ideal. So in korea, revision of the constitution law is in dispute, Specially the term of president including the type of the government and strengthening of congress` power. One of these disputes is how to change belonging Of Audit Institution. The purpose of how to changestatus Of Audit Institution is, I think, to guarantee functional independence Of Audit Institution. The dispute of how to changestatus Of Audit Institution was begun to strengthen congress` financial control power on administration. All these disputes must be based on realities of korean constitution law and the principle of Sovereignty. To changestatus Of Audit Institution must be discussed together devising method of guaranteeing functional independence Of Audit Institution. In this thesis, independent type of Audit Institution is ideal in theory, but not desirable realities of korean constitution law culture because president and congress are the most powerful group. So the best ways is whether to maintain presentstatus Of Audit Institution or changestatus Of Audit Institution into congress in the point of efficiency. But to changestatus Of Audit Institution into congress needs revision of the constitution law. so before changingstatus Of Audit Institution into congress, We must focus on guaranteeing functional independence Of Audit Institution. After trying to revise many effective ways to guarantee functional independence Of Audit Institution, We must try to changestatus Of Audit Institution when these efforts are uneffective.

국회의원의 당적변경에 대한 헌법적 고찰

장용근 ( Young Kyn Chang ) 세계헌법학회 한국학회 2004 世界憲法硏究 Vol.9 No.-

예산의 법률주의로의 헌법개정의 타당성과 통제에 대한 검토

장용근(Chang Young-Kyn) 한국헌법학회 2006 憲法學硏究 Vol.12 No.3

  이 논문을 작성하게 된 계기는 결코 새로운 이론이나 정책을 제시하기보다는 국민의 생활에 매우 중요한 예산에 대해 의외로 헌법적 논의가 적은 점에 감안하여 기존의 이론과 헌법해석론을 정리해 보았다. 그리고 그에 기초해서 예산을 법률로 전환하는 것이 필요한지에 대해서 진지한 고민과 성찰을 통해서 헌법개정이 필요한지와 헌법개정이 이루어지기 전에 있어서의 현실적인 대안에 대해서 검토하고자 하였다.<BR>  서구선진국의 혁명의 시작 즉 국민주권주의의 시작은 국민들이 자신의 재산권에 대한 국가의 침해에 대한 저항에서 비롯됐다고도 할 것이다. 하지만 혁명을 거치지 않은 우리나라나 일본 그리고 형식적으로는 예산법률주의를 채택하고는 있지만 실질적으로는 법률과는 다른 규범으로 보는 독일 등의 예산에 대한 태도는 단지 입법례의 차이라기보다는 국민주권주의에 기초한 근본적 차이의 문제라고도 할 수 있다. 특히 국가의 수입 및 지출은 국민에게 중요한 사항이므로 국회에 의한 입법으로 규율하여야 하고 이것이 재정민주주의의 실질적 실현을 위해서도 바람직하다. 그 이유는 행정부의 정책입안과정도 나름대로 공개되고 투명하지만 국회라는 장은 국민에 의해 당선되고 국민의 의사를 반영하는 공간이라는 면에서 좀 더 민주적일 수 있기 때문이다. 따라서 예산을 법률로서 볼 수 있는 헌법개정이 필요하며 예산과 법률의 불일치도 최대한 줄일 수 있는 일관된 심의·결정절차가 필요하다고 생각된다. 하지만 우리나라의 법률제정절차에 관한 헌법규정을 고려하고 전세계적 입법례를 중심으로 검토할 때, 예산법률주의는 결코 의회만이 중심이 되는 것이 아닌 행정부와 의회의 상호협력을 전제로 한 예산법률주의임을 주의하여야 한다. 단지 국회로의 모든 예산 권한의 집중을 의미하는 것은 아니라고 보인다. 하지만 여기서 제도라는 것은 단지 제도적 특성보다는 그 사회적 특성에 기초한 논의가 중심이 되어야 한다고 생각한다. 예를들면 미국의 국회의원들이 행정부관리 못지 않은 우수한 자질과 전문가그룹을 보유한 채 예산을 제출하고 심의하기에 미국에서는 예산법률주의가 더 타당해 보이지만 반면 우리나라는 의원의 자질과 보좌관들의 자질이 미국에 비해 현저히 떨어지고 선심성공약과 자기 지역구챙기기에 급급한 현실속에서 우리나라에서도 동일한 효과를 기대하는 것은 금물이라고 생각이 든다. 다만 장기적으로는 이러한 문제가 해결된다는 전제조건하에서 공개되고 국민의 의사에 더 민감하게 반응하는 의회가 중요한 위치를 차지하는 예산법률주의가 민주적 관점에서 타당해 보인다.<BR>  예산 통제의 가장 중요한 요소는 납세자인 국민의 주인의식과 정치권의 정치결단 및 청렴의지인데, 이러한 것이 완성될 경우 참다운 선진 민주주의를 구현할 수 있을 것이다.<BR>  하지만 여기서 주의할 점은 결코 예산법률주의를 실현하면 재정민주주의라는 대전제를 충분히 충족시키리라는 환상은 조심하여야 할 것이다. 이는 설사 의회의 역할이 예산에서 중요한 위치를 가지더라도 의회가 진정으로 국민을 위한 법률을 제정하지 않고 단지 선거를 위한 예산은 책정한다면 이것은 진정으로 재정민주주의에 도움이 되는 것은 아니라고 볼 수 있기 때문이다. 결국 논의의 핵심은 의회니 행정부 중심의 법률제정이 아닌 국민을 위한 국민에 의한 재정의 통제가 가장 핵심적인 요소이어야 한다.   The reason why I came to write this report is that, instead of presenting new theory or policy, I arranged existing theories and interpretation of constitutional law because of few debates on the character and control of national budget. Based on this viewpoint, I tried to scrutinize the need of constitution revision to change the form of national budget into the form of law, and present the actual alternative proposal before constitution revision. This debate must be based on the principle of financial Sovereignty doctrine instead of strengthening the power of the Executive or the legislative body. The beginning of political advanced country" revolution start from the resistance against national goverment" violation of property rights. But our korea like Japan which did not undergo political revolution, do not adopt national budget in the form of law. Making budget in the form of law, means not the concentration of the power of the legislative body but cooperation between the power of the Executive and the legislative body in the point of international legislation case. In our constitution law system, the character of national budget can not be changed into the form of law without constitution revision. Although Constitution revision is made, the power of the Executive can draw up national budget, because our present Constitution permit the power of the Executive or the legislative body to present a draft of a proposed law. So I try to find many possible method to<BR>control national budget.<BR>  The debate only on the character of national budget can not give the satisfactory answer to present national budget problem. The purpose of the debate on the character of national budget is to make democratic control of national budget. So the debate on national budget must be focused on effective method to control national budget, not the character of national budget. In this report, I specially focus on the control of the legislative body, citizen, and constitutional law court decision.<BR>  Constitution revision is very difficult problem in the point of decision process because we need national congress decision and national referendum. So actually the debate on national budget must be focused on effective method to control national budget, not the character of national budget.

전자민주주의와 시민

장용근(Chang Young Kyn) 한국공법학회 2004 公法硏究 Vol.32 No.5

I think that it is our urgent need to replace formal Sovereignty with substantial Sovereignty. To realize substantial Sovereignty, We need E-Democracy which will, I believe, satisfy our real political demand. the reason why the principle of Sovereignty became formal, I think mainly, is that we have no effective way to take part in political decision. Namely although citizens want to participate in political decision, they can do so only in ejection and an opinion poll etc. Through these rare chance, citizens cannot become ideal citizens. So ultimately Democracy cannot be completed.I treat non-governmental section in this thesis. This thesis contains political rights of citizen, e-party, NGO, systematization of citizen so on. without discussing citizen(the subject of Sovereignty), I think, we can not change stationary and formal principle of Sovereignty into active, functional and substantial principle of Sovereignty.First, I discuss about E-Democracy and political rights of citizen, in the name of the status of citizen specially focusing on functional aspect of citizen' rights. E-Democracy change government structure Greatly because of participation method and strong desire of participation after participation. In conclusion, without the assumption of active citizen, all these discussions are unmeaningful. I conclude that E-Democracy is not just a dependent variable but an interactive depeudent.

직접민주주의규정의 헌법개정에 대한 검토

장용근(Chang Young-Kyn) 한국헌법학회 2006 憲法學硏究 Vol.12 No.4

  오늘날 우리나라에서는 대통령중임제한규정의 개헌여부와 관련하여 헌법개정이 한창이다. 하지만 이 시기에 단지 특정조항만이 아니라 헌법전반에 대한 개정검토의 논의는 매우 필요하다고 할 것이다. 특히 본인은 현재 대표제가 중심이 된 헌법현실의 문제점에 착안하여 직접민주주의규정의 도입여부에 대해서 검토하여 보았다.<BR>  논자에 따라서는 직접민주주의가 도입되면 우리나라에서는 정치적 혼란이 가중된다는 입장도 있다. 하지만 지금까지의 대의제정치는 국민을 더욱더 혼란에 빠뜨렸고, 그 해결책은 각종 시민운동과 국민들의 주인의식의 함양 등 이 나라의 주인인 국민으로부터 나오고 있다고 보는 것이 본인의 입장이다. 하지만 본인의 주장이 모든 대의제를 없애 버리고 국민에 의한 직접민주주의로 바꾸자는 견해는 아니다. 오히려 모든 사안에 있어서 직접민주주의로 바꾸는 것은 더 큰 문제를 야기시킬 수 있음을 검토하였고, 특히 전문적이고 국가의 위기상황 등에 있어서 국민투표나 국민발안을 한다는 것 자체는 너무 위험해 보인다. 하지만 본인이 검토한 바대로 그 투표의 방식의 수정 등으로도 어느 정도는 해결될 수 있지만 전면적인 국민투표 등의 직접민주주의의 도입은 결코 국민에게 도움이 되기보다는 오히려 국민들에게 해가 되어서 민주주의 자체의 중단이라는 문제가 있을 수 있기에 대의제에 있어서의 엘리트정치는 필요하고 다만 국민주권주의 하에서의 이념을 제대로 실현할 수 있고 대의제의 단점을 보완하는 차원에서의 직접민주주의를 제도화할 필요가 있고 이는 현재 수단적인 측면에서 문제가 되는 시간과 공간의 문제를 해결할 수 있는 전자민주주의의 등장은 적어도 원칙은 아니라고 할지라도 대의제를 보완하는 의미에서의 직접민주주의를 도입할 수 있는 여건은 갖추어 졌다고 보인다. 국민들이 직접 결정할 자질이 부족하기에 직접민주주의의 도입은 문제가 있다는 주장도 있으나 본인은 국민의 주인으로서의 자질향상을 위해서는 국민들이 직접 참여하여 대화하고 토론하여 결정하는 경험을 하기 위해서 직접민주주의는 필요하다고 반론하며 직접민주주의의 도입을 강력히 주장하고 싶으나 다만 국민의 대표기관이 이에 대해서 응할지는 의문이라고 보인다. 하지만 이도 지금까지는 헌정사적으로 보면 진정한 민주주의라는 것을 이룩한 미국과 프랑스 등의 선진국들은 피의 혁명을 통해서 민주주의를 이룩하였기 때문에 그 내용이 어느 정도는 민주주의라는 관점에서 정당하였고 우리나라는 일종의 외견적 입헌주의로서 말로만 민주주의였지 실제로는 민주주의를 부당한 통치의 정당화의 수단으로 사용하였기에 이 번 기회를 통해서 진정한 국민주권주의를 확립하는 것도 의미 있는 일이라고 생각이 든다.   About 60 years ago, we, koreans, started democracy but our political condition is not up to our first ideal. That means dictatorship or quasi-democracy. in this reason, I decided to study Direct-Democracy to be a little help to korean democracy" development.<BR>  Lately, in korea, revision of the constitution is be under debate. So I came to write this these to make Direct-Democracy proposal.<BR>  IN korean constitutional law, Article Ⅰ, clause 1 has it that Korea is democratic republic, and Article Ⅰ, clause 2 has it that Sovereignty rests with the people. However the real situation is different. I think that it is our urgent need to replace formal Sovereignty with substantial Sovereignty. To realize substantial Sovereignty, We need Direct-Democracy which will, I believe, satisfy our real political demand. The reason why the principle of Sovereignty became formal, I think mainly, is that we have no effective way to take part in political decision. Namely although citizens want to participate in political decision, they can do so only in election and an opinion poll etc, not through direct Democracy. only through these rare chance, citizens cannot become ideal citizens. So ultimately Democracy cannot be completed. In this reason, direct Democracy is essential in completing Democracy.<BR>  Existing thearies treat principle of Sovereignty, and representative system and direct Democracy separately, but principle of Sovereignty is closely connected with representative system and direct Democracy because whether principle of Sovereignty is formal or active, functional and substantial, can be defined by how much representative system and direct Democracy are partitioned.<BR>  My assertion is that semi-directory system is the best political system because representative system and direct Democracy are not perfect itself.<BR>  Specially, in this thesis, I treat direct Democracy not because direct Democracy can replace representative system, but because direct Democracy can make up for the defect of representative system.<BR>  The main reason why direct Democracy can not be practiced is not only ideological, hegemonic problem but also we have no efficient way to practice direct Democracy. In this point, To practice direct Democracy. is most needed Specially E-Democracy provides e-vote and space for debate on which direct Democracy is based. In addition, mature people will to take part in political decision, makes direct Democracy practicable. Through all changes, we can challenge bloodless revolution and achieve the purpose of substantial Democracy.

전자정부에 대한 헌법적 고찰

장용근 ( Young Kyn Chang ) 단국대학교 법학연구소 2006 법학논총 Vol.30 No.1

I was greatly shocked when I heard E-Democracy. Over 50 years ago, We, Koreans, started democracy but our political condition is not up to our first ideal. That means dictatorship or quasi-democracy. In this reason, I decided to study E-Democracy to be a little help to Korean democracy. In korean constitutional law, Article Ⅰ, clause 1 has it that Korea is democratic republic, and Article Ⅰ, clause 2 has it that sovereignty rests with the people. However the real situation is different. I think that it is our urgent need to replace formal sovereignty with substantial sovereignty. To realize substantial sovereignty, We need E-government which will, I believe, satisfy our real political demand. The reason why the principle of sovereignty became formal, I think mainly, is that we have no effective way to take part in government decision. Namely although citizens want to participate in government decision, they can do so only in election and an opinion poll etc. Through these rare chance, citizens cannot become ideal citizens. So ultimately democracy cannot be completed. E-Democracy change government structure greatly because of participation method and strong desire of participation after participation. In conclusion, without the assumption of active citizen, all these discussions are unmeaningful. Lately going discussion focus mainly on efficiency(specially service efficiency) not democratic legitimacy. But the most important condition of E-government, I think, information and citizen participation.

사이버공간에서의 프라이버시권의 보호

박익환 ( Ik Hhan Park ),장용근 ( Young Kyn Chang ) 세계헌법학회 한국학회 2005 世界憲法硏究 Vol.11 No.2

We live in information-oriented society. In political part, We are confronting E-Democracy, and In non-governmental section, We are confronting many dangers of privacy` violation. Specially In cyberspace, privacy` violation happened in many cases. Of course before information-oriented society, privacy` violation happened but after information-oriented society, privacy` violation happened more frequently than before. So the need to protect privacy in cyberspace became more urgent than before. Privacy` violation happened because of demand of imformation, freedom of expression, the surveillance of nation and non-governmental section. In this thesis, I analyzed the many causes and effects of privacy` violation. And then, I tried to find the effective method to protect privacy and relieve privacy` violation. I treated the effective method in the point of legislation, censorship of governmental section and non-governmental section, judicial relief considering imformation gap. IN korean constitutional law, Article 10, and 37, We can find that korean constitutional Law claim to stand for personalism, not rugged individualism and totalitarianism. So absolute protection of privacy is not permitted. In conclusion, privacy must harmonize with the social public interest. IN this thesis, I tried to focus on active and functional theory of privacy, not stationary theory.