제20대 국회에서 발의된 법원조직법 개정안에 대한 헌법적 분석 - 대법원장의 사법행정권을 중심으로 -

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

The Constitution of the Sixth Republic is evaluated as a democratic constitution whose principle of separation of powers is relatively well reflected in the organization and composition of the governing structure. Since the implementation of the current Constitution, various efforts to embody democratic principles in the legislative and administrative sectors, both political areas, have been steadily developed and have been quite effective. With certain achievements achieved in the political arena, public opinion has risen that yearning for democratic reform in the judiciary. After achieving certain outcome in the political arena, public opinion has risen that yearning for democratic reform in the judiciary. The people's opinion of democratic reform in the judiciary was focused on rationalizing the power of the Chief Justice. It is because the excessive authority is concentrated on the Chief Justice despite his weak democratic legitimacy. Thus, a number of bills were proposed in the 20th National Assembly with the aim of limiting or reducing the Chief Justice's authority over judicial administration. The proposed bill can be divided into one that calls for diversifying the composition of Justice nomination committee and another that calls for the creation of a new judicial administrative body beyond the current judicial administrative system. These bills are intended to limit the judicial administrative authority of the Chief Justice in proportion to democratic legitimacy, which is questionable whether they harmonize with the principle of judicial independence and current constitutional articles. Rational adjustment of the judicial administrative authority of the Chief Justice in proportion to democratic legitimacy is of course a request in light of democratic principles, but constitutional legitimacy is recognized only when it is harmonized with the basic principles and provisions of the Constitution.