해사노동협약의 선원권리와 관할권이 갖는 국제법적 함의 고찰

Abstract

This thesis compares and surveys the jurisdiction of UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which stipulates the jurisdiction of the sea, as well as International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which are representative international conventions related to human rights. Through this, the limits of the protection of seafarer' human rights possessed in International Human Rights Covenants and UNCLOS were presented, and the legal significance of the jurisdiction of Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 at the point of protecting the seafarers’ rights was re-examined.Since the International Human Rights Covenants stipulates universal human rights, it does not reflect the specificity of seafarer or prescribe jurisdiction. Therefore, the international community shall implement international human rights Covenants by taking into account customary international law and UNCLOS. The exclusive jurisdiction of the flag State over seafarers' human rights is recognized through the interpretation of UNCLOS and the International Human Rights Covenants. However, there is a default in UNCLOS, not explicitly stipulating the State's obligations for seafarers' human rights, and there is a limit to the protection of seafarers' human rights when the jurisdiction of the flag State, coastal State, and port State is applied to seafarer according to UNCLOS jurisdiction. MLC improved the limits of state enforcement jurisdiction by supplementing the default in UNCLOS. It clearly defined the social rights of seafarers and established the duty and jurisdiction of the flag State as a subject to guarantee them. In addition, by introducing the port State control of the IMO Maritime Conventions into MLC, it became possible to protect seafarer of ships that do not enforce effective flag State’ jurisdiction. In addition, MLC protects seafarers from before the conclusion of seafarers’ employment contract by stipulating jurisdiction of the seafarer supplying State to a seafarer recruitment service located in the State party and the scope of application was expanded by applying domestic legal requirements to a seafarer recruitment service in a non-State party even when a shipowner in a State party uses a seafarer recruitment service in a non-State party.