주제별 논단 : 기타 ; 우리나라 중앙은행의 독립성 구현을 위한 바람직한 조직 형태

노철우 ( Chul Woo Rho ) 한국금융법학회 2011 金融法硏究 Vol.8 No.1

In modern capitalistic nation, the independence of central bank is regarded as a indispensible factor for the stabilization of currency value and financial system, and sound growth of the national economy. But previous studies have focused on the empirical view of economic science, and have the limitation not to consider the institutional form of central bank as a subject of national economic administration. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the independence of central bank from the perspective of constitutional and administrative law. This thesis derives the normative request for the central bank`s independence from constitutional principles such as the principle of separation of the powers and the democratic principle, and extracts the ideal form to realize the central bank`s independence by comparative studies and the adaptation of administrative law`s theories. When discussions on the reorganization of central bank take place in Korea in the future, I really hope that this paper will be a useful reference material. The first chapter of this thesis deals with the purpose and scope of this study. The second chapter considers the definition and functions of central bank. In the third chapter, I investigate the definition of central bank`s independence and the past pros and corns of discussions on the independence. In the fourth chapter, I derives the normative request for the central bank`s independence by harmonizing constitutional principles such as the principle of separation of the powers and the democratic principle. The fifth chapter draws the ideal type to come true the central bank`s independence by comparative studies and the adaptation of administrative law`s theories. The sixth chapter forms a conclusions of this thesis. In this paper, I extract twelve types of the central bank`s independence through combinations of three variables which are the legal basis, the position, and the legal characteristic of the institution. Among them, the constitutional public establishment to be independent from the government is concluded as the ideal institutional form of the Bank of Korea for realizing independence of the Bank.

3·1운동 시기 ‘독립’의 국제법적 의미

오시진 한국독립운동사연구소 2019 한국독립운동사연구 Vol.0 No.67

It is necessary to consider the international legal nature of the March First Movement. It is not necessary to reiterate that the March First Movement was an independence movement. Then, it is significant to analyze the legal character of “independence” because it is essential to identify what it means to claim independence. In general, the March First Movement is explained within the framework of self-determination iterated in Wilson’s Fourteen Points. Indeed, the principle of self-determination was invoked by various other nations after Wilson’s formulation. However, the principle of self-determination was only accepted as a legal norm after World War II, and it was only a political principle right after WWI. From this perspective, the independence claimed in the March First Movement could be nothing more than a political slogan. However, it is critical to distinguish the principle of self-determination from “independence.” There are two legal meaning of independence. First, the meaning of independence is the right to separate and be independent of other nations. Second, the meaning of independence is the right of independence, claiming non-interference and non-intervention. The significance of this study lies in perceiving the Provisional Government of Korea founded in 1919. If the notion of independence is interpreted as the former, the Provisional Government was a failure. However, if it is taken from the latter meaning, the endeavors could be seen in a different light. Therefore, this research attempts to delve into the legal meaning of independence in the March First Movement. It will be suggested that the idea of independence had a legal character by the time of the March First Movement, and that the notion was claimed in terms of non-interference and non-intervention. 3·1운동 자체에 대한 국제법적 성격을 고찰해볼 필요가 있다. 3·1운동의 성격이 독립운동이었다는 것은 재언할 필요가 없다. 그렇다면 ‘독립’의 법적성격에 대해서 검토해볼 필요가 있다. 일반적으로 당시 3·1운동은 Wilson의 14개조에 영향을 받았다고 설명한다. 자결원칙은 당시 전 세계에 퍼져나갔고, 많은 국가들이 이를 원용한 사례가 있다는 역사학자들의 연구가 있다. 그러나 자결권은 당시 미국이라는 승전국의 정치적 원칙에 불과하였고, 국제법으로 확립된 법규범이라고 할 수 없었다. 일반적으로 자결권의 법규범화는 제2차 세계대전 이후라고 본다. 이런 시각에서 보자면, 3·1운동의 독립 주장은 정치적 구호에 불과하다고 할 수 있다. 그러나 자결권과 독립은 같은 의미일까? 독립은 두 가지 법적 의미를 가지고 있기 때문이다. 첫째, 독립은 당시 자기결정원칙과 유사하게 ‘분리 독립’의 의미를 가지고 있다. 둘째, 독립은 ‘타국의 간섭을 배제할 독립’의 의미로도 사용된다. 이러한 법적 개념에 대한 연구는 그 파급효과가 크다. 만일 이 독립의 의미가 ‘분리 독립’이라고 한다면, 사실 임시정부는 분리 독립에 실패한 것이라 할 수 있다. 그러나 독립의 의미가 간섭 배제 차원에서의 독립이라면 상황은 다르다. 따라서 본고에서는 3·1운동 시기 주장한 독립의 법적 의의가 무엇인지에 대해서 당시 국제법적 기준에 따라 검토하고자 한다. 본고에서는 3·1운동 시기 주장한 독립의 성격이 법적성격을 갖추고 있었다고 볼 여지가 있고, 그 의미가 중의적이지만, ‘타국의 간섭으로부터 독립’의 의미가 강조된 것이라 볼 수 있다고 주장한다.

무죄추정원칙에 관한 헌법재판소 판례 검토 -헌재 2010. 9. 2. 2010헌마418 결정에 대한 평석을 중심으로-

김현철 전남대학교 법학연구소 2012 법학논총 Vol.32 No.2

The Korean Constitutional Court has established its firm position on the principle of ‘presumption of innocence’ as follows: The principle of ‘presumption of innocence’ is that not only the suspect-who has not yet been instituted a public action-but also the accused-who is instituted a public action-should be treated as innocent in principle until he is given a final decision of ‘guilty.’ Also, he should not be treated with disadvantages. Even if he can be treated disadvantageously,such treatment should be at the minimum level. Here, ‘disadvantage’, which is forbidden by the principle of ‘presumption of innocence’, means a disadvantage as a result or effect of admitting the guilt which brings about tangible or intangible discrimination in the legal and factual aspect. Furthermore, this also applies to disadvantages not only within criminal procedure but also restriction of basic rights in other general legal aspects of life. However, the Court was not able to show that it has a consistent stance on how to determine the legal character of the principle of ‘presumption of innocence’—whether to regard it as a personal basic right or as a constitutional principle. Recently, with ‘subject decision of review (2010Hun-Ma418, September 2, 2010)’ as a turning point, it seems that the principle has been treated as a constitutional principle. This is a correct judgment considering the examples of foreign legislations and constitutional interpretations and the legislative history of the Korean Constitution (Article 27 Section 4). Then the issue becomes what position and function the principle of ‘presumption of innocence’ has in the review of the constitutionality of laws when it is regarded as a constitutional principle. From the previous decisions to the ‘precedent (2002Hun-Ma699etc., May 26, 2005),’ the Court has applied the principle of ‘presumption of innocence’ as an ‘independent standard of constitutional review.’ However, since the ‘subject decision of review,’the Court has been applying the ‘Principle,’ along with the rule of excessive restriction, as a measure or method to discern the status of violation of related basic rights, such as the right to hold public office. The principle of ‘presumption of innocence’ should be applied as an independent standard of constitutional review to decide the constitutionality of laws, like the principle of legal reservation, the principle of the prohibition of blanket delegation, the principle of the prohibition of cumulative penalties, and the principle of self-liability: first, the ‘Principle’ is expressly stipulated in the text of the Constitution(Article 27 Section4). Second, the prohibited disadvantage and the areas where the ‘Principle’ is applied are defined by the Court’s decisions. Finally,there is an established method of judgment on the violation of the ‘Principle,’ like the ‘principle of proportion.’ In short, the principle of ‘presumption of innocence’should go beyond the reviewing measure or method to judge the violation of basic rights (e.g. right to hold public office). It is an independent standard of constitutional review, therefore the sanction against the ‘Principle’ in itself constitutes the violation of the Constitution. 헌법재판소는 “무죄추정의 원칙이라 함은, 아직 공소제기가 없는 피의자는 물론 공소가 제기된 피고인이라도 유죄의 확정판결이 있기까지는 원칙적으로 죄가 없는 자에 준하여 취급하여야 하고 불이익을 입혀서는 안되며 가사 그 불이익을 입힌다 하여도 필요한 최소한도에 그쳐야 한다는 원칙을 말하고,” “여기서 무죄추정의 원칙상 금지되는 ‘불이익’이란 ‘범죄사실의 인정 또는 유죄를 전제로 그에 대하여 법률적·사실적 측면에서 유형·무형의 차별취급을 가하는 유죄인정의 효과로서의 불이익’을 뜻하며,” “이는 비단 형사절차 내에서의 불이익뿐만 아니라 기타 일반 법생활 영역에서의 기본권제한과 같은 경우에도 적용된다.”는 확립된 입장을 밝혔다. 그런데 무죄추정원칙의 법적 성격에 대하여는 이를 개인의 기본권(무죄추정권)으로 볼 것인지, 아니면 헌법상의 원칙 내지 지도원리로 볼 것인지에 대하여 헌법재판소는 일관된 입장을 보이지 못하였다가 최근에 ‘평석대상결정’(헌재 2010. 9. 2. 2010헌마418)을 전환점으로 하여 헌법상의 원칙으로 보는 견해로 정리한 것으로 보이고, 이는 외국의 입법례·헌법해석례를 보거나, 우리 헌법(제27조 제4항)의 입법연혁을 살펴볼 때 올바른 판단인 것으로 생각된다. 문제는, 헌법상의 원칙 내지 원리로 보는 경우에 법률에 대한 위헌심사에서 무죄추정원칙이 어떠한 위치와 기능을 가지는가 하는 점이다. 헌법재판소는 이전의 결정에서부터 ‘선례’(헌재 2005. 5. 26. 2002헌마699 등)에 이르기까지 무죄추정원칙을 법률에 대한 위헌심사에 있어서 “독자적인 심사기준”으로 적용해 왔다. 그런데 ‘평석대상결정’에서부터 무죄추정원칙을 과잉금지원칙과 나란히 공무담임권 등 관련 기본권침해 여부를 판단하는 도구 내지는 방법으로 적용하기 시작하였다. 그런데 무죄추정원칙이 헌법에 명문(제27조 제4항)으로 규정되어 있는 점, 금지되는 ‘불이익’의 내용 및 무죄추정원칙이 적용되는 영역이 판례로서 밝혀져 있는 점, 동원칙 위반여부를 판단함에 있어 소위 “비례원칙”이 적용되는 등 동 원칙의 위배여부를 판단하는 심사의 도구 내지 방법이 확립되어 있는 점 등을 고려할 때, 무죄추정원칙은 법률유보원칙이나 명확성원칙, 포괄위임금지원칙, 그리고 이중처벌금지원칙, 자기책임의 원리 등과 같이 법률의 위헌성을 판단하는 독자적인 심사기준으로 적용되어야 한다. 즉, 무죄추정의 원칙은 (공무담임권 등) 관련 기본권의 침해여부를 판단하는 심사도구 내지 방법에 그치는 것이 아니라, 무죄추정원칙에 반하는 제재는 그 자체로서 헌법위반을 구성하는 독자적인 심사기준인 것이다.

국제거래에 있어서 추상적지급약정의 독립성과 그 예외

김선국 한국경영법률학회 2009 經營法律 Vol.19 No.3

Letters of credit and independent bank guarantees have been a major factor in the dynamic growth of international commerce. Although these two instrument have a different role, they have characteristics in common. The basic characteristics of them is a abstraction. The principle of abstraction gives them a vital role in international trade community, however, sometimes it results in serious problem. The international trade community has devoted itself to solve those problems resulted from the misuse or abuse of the principle. Korea is not free from those problems. There are so many cases regarding abstract principle of the abstract payment undertaking in Korea. The reasoning of the Korean Supreme Court Decisions are still so unclear that the problems are yet to be solved. This Article emphasizes that the exception should be narrowly admitted. Since the independence principle of the abstract payment undertaking is a corner stone of its commercial effectiveness, the vitality of international business transactions relies on the principle. Problems are more critical in the independent bank guarantees. Recent Korean high court decision shows that the Korean court are not familiar with the abstract payment undertaking. In determining the independence rule and its exception, the key is the commercial effectiveness of abstract payment undertaking. we should bear in mind the famous proverb regarding the abstract payment undertaking "pay first, dispute later".

북한의 불교학 연구에 대한 재검토 : 불교연구원칙과 불교비판을 중심으로

이병욱(Lee, Byung-Wook) 국제고려학회 서울지회 2010 국제고려학회 서울지회 논문집 Vol.13 No.-

In this paper, I study how to estimate North Korean buddhist research. Firstly, I study North Korean buddhist research principle. These are the principle of sovereignty and independence, the principle of historical theory and the principle of party and worker class. In this, the principle of sovereignty and independence, the principle of historical theory can be accepted in South Korea. Secondly, I study the universal validity of North Korean buddhist criticism.I oppose North Korean buddhist criticism on a whole. But I accept the universal validity of North Korean buddhist criticism restrictedly. What will South Korea learn from North Korean buddhist criticism? If we look Korean buddhism from viewpoint of North Korean buddhist criticism that we can accept the universal validity restrictedly, I expect that the new study of Buddhism will open. These are the objective understanding of buddhism, the critical understanding of buddhism on the basis of a affirmative viewpoint, and the creative harmony of North Korean and South Korean academic world.

예산편성권의 주체 및 법원 등 독립기관의 예산편성권의 독립의 헌법적 검토

장용근 홍익대학교 법학연구소 2024 홍익법학 Vol.25 No.1

It is said that the revolutions, or the beginning of democracy, in Western politically advanced countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States, and France originated from people's resistance to the unjust infringement of property rights by the state. It is also said that true democracy is based on fiscal democracy, which was already established in the Magna Carta and the Honorary Revolution in England, which established the tax legalism of no taxation without representation. Korea's fiscal system should be governed by the Constitution, because if important principles of finance are stipulated by laws or parliamentary rules, the parliament can design a fiscal system that favors the parliament through amendments to laws or amendments to parliamentary rules, and if the fiscal system is governed by laws or parliamentary rules in a situation where the ruling and opposition parties are highly confrontational and ideological, it may be contrary to fiscal democracy for the peopl Fairness of National court system is based on impartiality of National court system impartiality of National court system comes from independence of National court system. finally the reason National court system is regarded as independent constituitional institute is that impartiality of National court system is guaranteed. The doctrine of checks and valances is based on natural juctice, natural juctice has two principles. the first principle is that the problem must be judged by impartial third party. the first principle is that chance of excuse must be given. so National Finance Act clause 40 is justified because National court can submit the reasosn why the cut budget of National court is necesaary to the congress. Considering korean real congress’political situation, because many congress member’ case is on trial, korean congress can not control National court’ budget decision. So National Finance Act clause 40 is justified because korean congress can not control National court’ budget decision perfectly.

삼균주의 立論의 定則과 발전 단계론

김인식 숭실사학회 2023 숭실사학 Vol.- No.51

The Principle of Three Equalities(Sam Kyun chuui) is the synthesis of Cho SoAng's theory of national movement. It is containing that the reality of Japaneseimperial aggression, a ploy for national independence, the Argument of StateFormation after liberation and a plan to make the world peaceful. In the process ofcreating and completing such a system of the Sam Kyun chuui, a rule is identified. The Sam Kyun chuui has always begun to strengthen the Korean ProvisionalGovernment and its ruling party, the Korean Independence Party. This is closelyrelated to the theoretical system of the Sam Kyun chuui. The theory to get the country back and the theory for establishing a countryform the foundation and superstructure of the Sam Kyun chuui, respectively. Toexplain it further more, the ‘theory of National Revolution’ forms the foundation, andthe ideal of ‘Three Equalities(Sam Kyun)’ forms the superstructure. The theory ofNational Revolution again consists of ‘the one-party system(Party-State System)’,based on of the ‘National Unique Party(Idangchiguk)’, and the ‘imperative supportplan on Provisional Government’ that demands the dominance of ProvisionalGovernment. In The Declaration of Korean Independence of Korea(1919), the initial stage of theSam Kyun chuui is confirmed. But the concept of ‘the organize a positive party’wasn’t formed at that time. Since 1922, Cho So Ang has suggested the ideal typeabout the independence party to strengthen the Provisional Government, and theconcept of ‘the organize a positive party’ here for the first time. When the KoreanIndependence Party was founded in January 1930, the Sam Kyun chuui became theparty principle. As a result, the ‘National Unique Party’ and ‘Imperative support planon Provisional Government’ became the basis of the Sam Kyun chuui. And fanally,the framework of the Sam Kyun chuui was completed. The 1930s was a time that the Sam Kyun chuui were advocated internally and externally. In November 1941,the Provisional Goverment proclaimed the Konkukgangryeong(Principles and Plansfor National Reconstruction). The Sam Kyun chuui was recognizwd as the ‘bestaxiom’ to build a contry in the Konkukgangryeong. In this way, the Sam Kyunchuui has moved to the stage of practice.

국제인권법으로 본 국가인권위원회의 의의와 독립성

박찬운 ( Chan Un Park ) 한양대학교 법학연구소 2009 법학논총 Vol.26 No.3

Since the inauguration of President Lee Myung-bak, the National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea (NHRCK) has faced obstacles. Following an attempt to place it under the authority of the Presidential Office, 20 % of the NHRCK`s staff was forcefully reduced by the Ministry of Public Administration and Security despite the commission`s opposition. Under these circumstances, the independence of the NRHCK has been the center of the debate on whether or not the government`s policies meet the principle of independence. The Paris Principles and the relevant intranational human rights norms enunciating the independence of NHRIs are of paramount importance regarding the status of NHRIs. This paper aims to identify the meaning of NHRIs in international human rights norms and the nature of the independence of NHRIs. In addition, considering the above Korean situation, the author examines the constitutional issues in relation to the independence of the NHRCK. Finally, this paper argues that the NHRCK, though highly commended since its establishment in 2001, may be being underestimated (undermined?) due to institutional weakness.

헌법질서 내에서의 법원의 지위와 역할

박종현(Park Jonghyun) 한국헌법학회 2016 憲法學硏究 Vol.22 No.1

법원의 헌법상 지위와 역할에 대한 논의는 일반적으로 헌법 제5장의 사법권, 법원의 구성 및 조직, 사법의 독립 등에 대한 규정을 중심으로 전개된다. 분립된 삼권 중 하나이지만 상대적으로 약한 권한으로 인하여 법원에 대한 헌법적 논의는 독립 보장을 핵심으로 하는 특별한 규정을 중심으로 이루어졌다. 하지만 법원 도 대의제 민주주의 하의 권력기관이고 법관도 공무원인 이상 법원도 국민에 책 임을 져야 하므로 독립성 논의를 넘어 다른 권력기관과 마찬가지로 그 지위와 역할을 논함에 있어서 국민주권주의, 권력분립 원리, 견제와 균형의 원리 등에 기초한 헌법원리적ㆍ정치철학적 고찰이 요구된다. 사법부의 구성 및 운영에 관한 헌법적 원리에 대한 논의에 있어서 독립성의 원리와 책임성의 원리는 양 축을 구성한다. 국민들의 법적 분쟁을 어떠한 외부적 간섭 없이 법에 따라 공정하게 해결하기 위해서, 즉 법치주의의 구현을 위해서 독립성의 원리는 법원의 지위와 역할을 논의함에 있어 가장 중요한 원리로 취급 되어 왔다. 하지만 법원ㆍ재판ㆍ법관의 독립으로 이해되는 독립성 원리는 그 자 체로 목적이 아닌, 법치주의 실현과 국민의 권리 보장이라는 목적에 봉사하는 원 리로 보아야 한다. 따라서 목적달성의 필요 범위에서 제한이 가능하고 한계를 가 지는데, 법원의 관료화의 폐해를 막고 재판에 있어 진정한 독립을 확보하기 위해 서 재판의 과정과 결과의 공정성에 대한 외부적 평가가 필요하다. 주권자인 국민 의 의사, 그리고 그것의 반영인 헌법으로부터 완전한 독립은 사법부의 독립성의 진정한 의미가 아니며 결국 사법부는 민주적 책임성을 확보해야만 한다. 책임성 원리는 정치적 책임성, 판결의 책임성, 행동의 책임성으로 나누어 살펴볼 수 있는데 이들은 비선출직으로 구성되는 사법부의 민주적 정당성을 확보할 수 있게 하며 사법권한의 존립근거로 사법부 독립성의 전제라고 할 수 있다. 결국 민주주의와 법치주의가 동시에 구현되어야 하고, 권력분립 원리가 견제와 균형의 원리 를 포섭하고 있듯이 독립성 확보와 책임성 확보는 통합적으로 이루어질 수밖에 없다. 이러한 헌법원리적 고찰을 넘어 현실에 있어서도 정치의 사법화 경향 속에서 사법부에 대한 민주화 요청, 인권보호의 요청은 사법의 독립성ㆍ책임성에 대한 제고를 포섭하고 있다. 이에 부응하기 위해 법원은 헌법에 근거한 사법활동을 해 야 하며 일상적 업무활동에서 끊임없이 헌법에 대한 고려를 해야 한다. 적극적 헌법해석과 그에 근거한 법률해석은 대의제 하의 법원의 구성상의 약점을 보완 하고 보다 법체계 정합적인 판결을 가능하게 하여 사법활동의 민주적ㆍ실질적 정당성을 확보시킬 것이다. The general discussion of the constitutional position and role of judicial branch(court) mainly focuses on constitutional provisions enhancing judicial power and judicial independence because the power of the judicial branch, one of separated governmental powers, has been thought to be weaker than those of other branches. However, this exceptional theoretical approach to the court should be reconsidered for the court is just one of governmental branches in a representative democracy system, which emphasizes on a political accountability of each governmental power for the will of people, and therefore should be subject to the sovereignty of people, the principle of separation of power and checks and balances doctrine as other branches are. Thus, the principle of judicial independence and that of judicial accountability as well have to compose the constitutional argumentation regarding judicial branch. Although the former principle has been regarded as a ultimate goal and absolute doctrine of judicial activity because a fair trial by an equal application of law necessarily requires the realization of judicial independence, it is evident that the former is just means for the genuine goals of adjudication, such as establishing rule of law and protecting basic rights of people, and might be limited for the fulfillment of the goals. The latter principle(judicial accountability) would control the former because the conception of accountability includes a binding to the evaluation of the outside of the court, such as other branches, people and, most importantly, the constitution. To prevent the rise of bureaucracy of judicial technocrat and construct the democratic legitimacy of countermajoritarian court, the principle of judicial accountability consisting of political accountability, decisional accountability and behavioral accountability should be realized in judicial branch as a prerequisite for judicial independence. Above all, court has to reflect the constitution in an ordinary adjudication and build a coherent decisional system under the constitution to meet the demands of people, which mean the democratization of judiciary and the protection of human rights.

국가인권위원회 10년, 독립성 평가와 과제

정영선 전북대학교 부설법학연구소 2011 法學硏究 Vol.34 No.-

The National Human Rights Commission of Korea(NHRCK) has contributed to the promotion and protection of human rights in Korea since it has established 10 years ago. The NHRCK has played a key role of a axis of democracy, so it is, recommendation on policy and legal procedure on human rights, protection of human rights for the minorities, remedy for discrimination cases, education and public awareness on human rights, etc. The independence of the NHRCK is a key factor of functions of national human rights institutions. If the NHRCK loses the independent feature, it can't properly check and monitor the governmental powers, therefore, its independence is an critical factor to evaluate if the NHRCK has the real mean of independency. During the past 10 years, under the People's Government (Kim Dae Jung regime)and the Participation Government(Roh Moo Hyun regime), the NHRCK had kept more independent status compared to the current government, Lee Myung Bak regime. Under the Lee's government, the NHRCK has not played as a fully independent institution, because the government has denied the independence of the NHRCK and has appointed the chairperson and commissioners of the NHRCK with illegible qualification. Therefore, it seems that the NHRCK has become not an advocate institution for human rights but an alibi institution to guard the state powers. Literally, the NHRCK, as the multi-functioning institution for the promotion and protection of human rights, has to keep an independent institution which checks and monitors the state powers. It also has to advocate the human rights for the minorities without discrimination, investigate violent cases against the human rights, produce the strong human rights policies, recommend the direction of promotion of human rights. The main obligation of the NHRCK is to check and monitor the state powers, therefore, its stance and status can't be flexible according to the political ideologies. The NHRCK is an institution which designates the direction and principle in view of human rights standards, therefore, it doesn't have to consider whether the characteristics of the government is pro-conservatives or pro-progressive. Even though the direction and principle of human rights can' accord to those of the current government, the government has to respect the stance of the NHRCK and its independence. On the basis of such view points, this article suggests several tasks to strengthen the independence of the NHRCK. First, the legal status of the NHRCK should be changed to the constitutional status, in turn the constitution of Korea needs to be amended as soon as possible. Second, the commissioners including the chairperson should be selected among the professionals with good qualification and those experts should be the representatives who come from the various areas of the society. Third, the NHRCK has to keep a trustworthy institution in view of peoples, in terms of the capable task-holder to promote and protect human rights. Fourth, the NHRCK needs to choose and concentrate its own tasks which are characterized on the basis of human rights. Fifth, the NHRCK has to keep strong solidarity and continuous assistance from civil society including non-governmental organizations. And finally, the NHRCK also has to keep strong cooperation with the international human rights organizations,because international society can help the NHRCK threatened by the authoritarian government under the unstable political situation. 출범 후 지난 10년간 인권위는 우리사회의 인권의식 성장과 국민의 인권보호에 상당한 기여를 해왔다. 인권위는 그 동안 실질적인 민주주의를 앞당기는 견인차로서, 인권관련 법령·정책 등에 대한 개선을 권고하고, 각종 인권 침해와 차별행위로부터 국민을 보호하며, 교육과 홍보를 통해 인권에 대한 의식과 문화를 확산시키는 막중한 역할을 수행하는 새로운 형태의 국가기구의 위상을 견지해 왔다. 인권위의 기능 중 핵심 중의 핵심은 독립성을 갖춘 국가기관으로서의 위상이다. 독립성을 유지하지 못할 경우, 인권위의 기본적 기능인 정부권력 견제와 감시를제대로 할 수 없기 때문이다. 창립과정부터 우여곡절을 겪었지만 인권위 출범 후국민의 정부와 참여 정부를 거치는 동안 인권위는 나름대로의 독립성을 유지하면서 제 기능을 수행하였다. 그러나 이명박 정부 이후 인권위의 존재 이유라고 할수 있는 독립성이 훼손되면서 인권위가 본연의 임무를 다하지 못하고 있다. 인권위의 독립성을 인정하지 않는 이명박 정부의 인권위 흔들기와 무자격자 인권위원인선으로 인해서 인권위는 권력기관을 감시하는 인권옹호기구가 아니라 권력기관에 면죄부를 주는 권력옹호기구로 변절해 버렸기 때문이다. 인권위는 종합적 인권전담기구로서 국가권력의 인권침해를 감시·견제하고, 사회적 약자와 소수자의 인권을 옹호하고 누구나 차별 없이 평등하게 인권을 향유할수 있도록 성역 없이 인권침해 현장을 조사하고, 바람직한 인권정책을 생산하고견실한 의견을 낼 수 있는 독립기구여야 한다. 인권위는 태생적으로 권력을 감시하고 견제하는 국가기관이기 때문에 정치체제의 변화에 따라서 좌고우면하는 자세를 유지해서는 안 되는 것이다. 인권위는 보수와 진보를 막론하고 기본적으로 국가의 정책에 대해 ‘인권적인’ 원칙과 방향을 제시하는 국가기구이다. 그 인권적인 원칙이 설령 정부의 정책 방향과 일치하지 않는다 하더라도 정부는 인권위의 입장을 존중해야 하고 독립성을 보장해야 하는 것이다. 본 논문에서는 인권위가 독립성을 유지·강화하기 위한 과제로, 헌법기구로 전환 등을 통한 법적·제도적 보완, 전문성과 다양성을 갖춘 인권위원 인선, 인권위업무에 대한 대국민 신뢰성 제고, 인권위 업무의 전문성 분야에 대한 선택과 집중,시민사회와의 유대, 국제사회와의 철저한 공조 등을 제안하고 있다.