지방자치단체 인권조례 연구

Abstract

본 논문은 지역별 특성에 맞는 인권행정의 실현은 지역의 특색을 반영한 인권조례 입법을 통해 확보될 수 있다는 전제 아래, 인권기본법이나 차별금지법이 제정되지 않은 현시점에서 자치조례로써 인권기본조례가 실질적인 인권행정을 보장할 수 있을만한 형식과 내용을 갖추고 있는지를 살펴보기 위해 경기도 내 기초 지방자치단체의 인권조례를 비교․분석하였다. 지역에서 인권제도가 확립되고 인권문화가 확산되기 위해서는 우선 인권기본 조례로 대표되는 법규의 정비가 필요하다. 그러나 현재 시행중인 경기도 내 기초 지방자치단체의 인권조례는 지역적 특색을 반영하지 못한 경우가 많고, 절차와 구성상 비민주적인 내용을 포함하고 있으며, 전담부서의 미구성으로 인권행정을 책임지고 수행할 조직이 없는 등의 문제점을 가지고 있다. 이에 대해서는 다음과 같은 개선방안을 제시하고자 한다. 첫 번째, 아직 인권기본조례가 제정되지 않은 시군은 실태조사를 통해 지역 특성상 인권침해에 취약한 보호대상을 설정하고, 이를 해결하기 위해 필요한 정책을 선정하여 조례 제정에 반영할 필요가 있다. 두 번째, 인권기본법 및 인권교육법 등 상위법의 제정 필요성을 제기하는 견해도 일견 타당하나 현실적으로 상위법이 제정되기 전까지는 인권기본조례와 부문별 인권 조례의 관계를 합리적․효율적으로 설정하여 행정의 중복을 방지하고 인권행정이 행정 전반에 일관성 있게 반영될 수 있도록 체계화하는 것이 필요하다. 세 번째, 인권기본조례 내용 면에서는 절차 및 구성 상 비민주적인 규정을 정비하고, 인권침해의 기준이나 조사권의 범위에 모호한 부분은 명확하게 개정할 필요가 있다. 또한 지속적인 관심을 가지고 지역에서 인권보장에 취약한 부분을 찾아내고, 그 해결책에 대한 고민을 통해 조례의 내용을 풍부하게 발전시켜야 한다. 네 번째, 이미 제정된 조례의 이행확보를 위해서 인권 전담부서를 구성하고, 시행규칙을 제정하여 현실적인 조례의 시행을 확보하며, 의회와 시민사회에 감시 기능을 부여하고 각종 교부금 배분 시 혜택을 부여하는 방안 마련 등 행정청이 지속적․안정적․발전적으로 인권행정을 수행하도록 강력히 권고할 필요가 있다.|This study conducted a comparative analysis of the human rights ordinances of the basic local governments in Gyeonggi–do Province in order to examine their forms and contents that can guarantee substantive human rights administration by the basic human rights ordinance of a local government at this present time when the basic human rights act and discrimination prohibition act have not been enacted on the premise that human rights administration appropriate for the characteristic of each region can be secured by legislation of human rights ordinance reflecting the characteristic of the region. It is necessary to improve the regulations including the basic human rights ordinance in order to establish the human rights system in the region and spread the culture of human rights expansion. However, many of the human rights ordinances being implemented in the basic local governments in Gyeonggi–do Province do not reflect the regional characteristics and they contain undemocratic elements in their procedure and structure. In addition, there is no exclusive department that can take responsibility for performance of human rights administration. In this regard, this study suggests the following improvement plans. First, in the cities and counties which have not enacted basic human rights ordinances, it is necessary to identify the persons vulnerable to human rights abuse due to the characteristics of the region through investigation of the actual conditions, prepare the policies necessary for solution of the problem, and reflect them to the enactment of ordinances. Second, while it seems reasonable at first sight to emphasize the need to enact higher laws such as basic human rights act and human rights education act, realistically it is necessary to prevent overlapping of public administration by establishing the relationship between basic human rights ordinance and the human rights ordinance in each part and make a good system for consistent reflection of human rights administration to the general public administration until upper laws are established. Third, in the aspect of the contents of basic human rights ordinance, it is necessary to improve the regulations undemocratic in their procedure and structure and clearly revise the vague parts in the criteria or scope of investigation of human rights violations. In addition, it is necessary to find out what is vulnerable to human rights protection with continuous interest in the situation of human rights in the region and enrich the contents of the ordinances through in-depth researches on practical solutions. Fourth, it is necessary for each local government to make active efforts by organizing an exclusive department for human rights, securing the implementation of a practical ordinance by establishing the enforcement rules, and investing the local council and the civic society with a monitoring function. Moreover, it is necessary that each local government establishes the foundation for the performance of human rights administration in a continuous, stable and progressive way by giving benefits when allotting the grant from the national government to local governments in order to facilitate realization of such human rights administration at the state level.; This study conducted a comparative analysis of the human rights ordinances of the basic local governments in Gyeonggi–do Province in order to examine their forms and contents that can guarantee substantive human rights administration by the basic human rights ordinance of a local government at this present time when the basic human rights act and discrimination prohibition act have not been enacted on the premise that human rights administration appropriate for the characteristic of each region can be secured by legislation of human rights ordinance reflecting the characteristic of the region. It is necessary to improve the regulations including the basic human rights ordinance in order to establish the human rights system in the region and spread the culture of human rights expansion. However, many of the human rights ordinances being implemented in the basic local governments in Gyeonggi–do Province do not reflect the regional characteristics and they contain undemocratic elements in their procedure and structure. In addition, there is no exclusive department that can take responsibility for performance of human rights administration. In this regard, this study suggests the following improvement plans. First, in the cities and counties which have not enacted basic human rights ordinances, it is necessary to identify the persons vulnerable to human rights abuse due to the characteristics of the region through investigation of the actual conditions, prepare the policies necessary for solution of the problem, and reflect them to the enactment of ordinances. Second, while it seems reasonable at first sight to emphasize the need to enact higher laws such as basic human rights act and human rights education act, realistically it is necessary to prevent overlapping of public administration by establishing the relationship between basic human rights ordinance and the human rights ordinance in each part and make a good system for consistent reflection of human rights administration to the general public administration until upper laws are established. Third, in the aspect of the contents of basic human rights ordinance, it is necessary to improve the regulations undemocratic in their procedure and structure and clearly revise the vague parts in the criteria or scope of investigation of human rights violations. In addition, it is necessary to find out what is vulnerable to human rights protection with continuous interest in the situation of human rights in the region and enrich the contents of the ordinances through in-depth researches on practical solutions. Fourth, it is necessary for each local government to make active efforts by organizing an exclusive department for human rights, securing the implementation of a practical ordinance by establishing the enforcement rules, and investing the local council and the civic society with a monitoring function. Moreover, it is necessary that each local government establishes the foundation for the performance of human rights administration in a continuous, stable and progressive way by giving benefits when allotting the grant from the national government to local governments in order to facilitate realization of such human rights administration at the state level.