오늘의 출연자

• 진행 : 김희순 간사 (참여연대 사법감시센터)
• 초대손님 : 서기호 변호사 (19대 국회의원, 전직 판사), 한상희 교수 (건국대 법학전문대학원)

참팟 73회 / 법원 특집

참팟 권력감시 특집 3부, 법원 개혁에 대해 이야기 나눴습니다. 

1부에서는 지금 한창 문제가 되고 있는 '법원 블랙리스트'가 말하는 법원 구조의 문제, 사건의 배경와 앞으로의 전망, 2부는 '법'을 바로 세우기 위한 법원 개혁의 과제와 앞으로에 대한 기대에 대한 이야기 입니다.

'판사는 법으로 말한다'는 법원. 이명박근혜 정권 이후의 법원은 어떻게 달라져야 할까요? 참팟과 함께 같이 고민해 보세요.

법원 특집 1부 - 법원 블랙리스트, 왜 문제일까?

* 플레이어가 보이지 않는 경우 : https://goo.gl/DmqtvD (팟빵에서 듣기)

* 아이튠즈로 듣기 : https://goo.gl/kARiVu

법원 특집 2부 - 법원의 법은 무엇인가?

* 플레이어가 보이지 않는 경우 : https://goo.gl/iQ4RfC (팟빵에서 듣기)

* 아이튠즈로 듣기 : https://goo.gl/ix7fak

같이보기

• [판결비평 국정농단특집①-최순실] 국정농단 주범은 엄벌, 재벌엔 관대... 사법부 절반의 심판
• [판결비평 국정농단특집②-이재용] 박근혜 겁박 희생자? 이재용은 국정농단 공범
• [자료] 이재용 판결문 1, 2심 전문
• [성명] 대법관들, 의혹 부인이 아니라 대국민 사과부터 하라
• [자료] '법관사찰' 관련 법원 추가조사위원회 조사보고서 전문 공개
• [논평] 김명수 대법원은 사법개혁 거침없이 나아가길

11 January 2016

United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon
UN Headquarters
405 East 42nd Street
New York, NY 10017
USA    

Cc : Zainab Hawa Bangura, UN Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict
Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
Rashida Manjoo, UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women
Pablo de Greiff, UN Special Rapporteur on the Promotion of Truth, Justice, Reparation, and Guarantees of Non-recurrence
H.E. Choi Kyong-lim, President of the UN Human Rights Council
Members of the UN Committee against Torture
Members of the UN Human Rights Committee 
    

Re: Clarification on the UN Secretary-General’s Position on the Recent Republic of Korea-Japan Agreement on Wartime “Comfort Women”

People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD) is a non-governmental organization based in Seoul, the Republic of Korea (ROK) with United Nations(UN) ECOSOC consultative status. We are writing to you today to seek clarification of the Secretary-General's position on the recent ROK-Japan agreement on wartime “comfort women”. We express our concern on your recent congratulatory remarks on the agreement, because we view that the agreement was not made in a way to implement the values and principles put forth by the UN, which has emphasized a victim-centered approach.

In the official statement regarding the recent agreement between the ROK and Japan on issues related to “comfort women” from the ROK which was released on 28 December 2015, you welcomed “that the Governments of Japan and the Republic of Korea have reached an agreement,” and hoped “that the agreement will contribute to improving the bilateral relationship between the two countries.” Following your statement, the ROK President’s Office (Blue House) released a briefing on 1 January 2016, saying that you congratulated President Park Geun-hye, via telephone, on reaching the agreement with Japan, and stated that “history will laud President Park’s courageous decision based on her vision.”   

Yet, the latest agreement between the ROK and Japan hardly reflects the wishes of the victims themselves, nor did the process involve any participation by the victims. Lee Yong-soo, one of the few surviving victims of Japan’s wartime sexual slavery policy, harshly criticized the agreement, saying “The agreement does not reflect the views of former ’comfort women’. I will ignore it completely.”  Ms. Lee condemned the deal as amounting to “a second death of the victims.” The latest agreement indeed does not incorporate any of the demands which include official apologies, legal reparations, and guarantees of non-recurrence. The victims have consistently put forward these demands since making their past agony public for the first time in 1991. According to the recent agreement, the Japanese government did promise to provide JPY 1 billion (around 8.3 million USD) for a new special fund to be set up for a foundation for the surviving “comfort women”. However, Mr. Fumio Kishida, Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs, made it clear that the money was not legal reparation , and still refuses to recognize Japan’s legal responsibility for wartime sexual slavery. However, the governments of both countries have concluded that the latest agreement will be the “final and irreversible” resolution to the “comfort women” issues, thus inviting mounting criticism from inside and outside the ROK.

We would like to remind you that the latest agreement on “comfort women” does not even satisfy the UN recommendations regarding Japan’s wartime sexual slavery and related issues which were made in the past. Different human rights mechanisms of the UN have condemned the acts of wartime sexual slavery committed by Japan as “crimes against humanity,” and recommended that the Japanese government acknowledge its legal responsibility, make formal reparations to the victims, and prosecute the parties responsible for such crimes. During its review on Japan in July 2014, the UN Human Rights Committee noted that most “comfort women” were recruited by, transported to, and managed at Japanese military bases or agencies working on behalf of the Japanese military through force and coercion, and expressed concerns at the Japanese government’s continued denial that these women were “ever mobilized or migrated by force” (CCPR/C/JPY/CO/6, para 11). In August 2014, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination expressed its concerns that the Japanese government had not recognized nor apologized to “comfort women”, and urged the Japanese government to immediately conclude investigations and bring to justice those responsible for human rights violations (CERD/C/JPN/CO/7-9, para 18).

We would also like to point out that the UN and the international community at large uphold a consistent set of victim-centered principles and standards with respect to the rights of victims of human rights violations.

In February 2005, the UN Commission on Human Rights (now the UN Human Rights Council) adopted “Principles for the protection and promotion of human rights through action to combat impunity” (E/CN.4/2005/102/Add.1), followed by “Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law” (A/60/509/Add.1) adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 2005. These two documents endorse the “victim-centered perspective” in international human rights law, and emphasize the victims’ right to justice, right to reparation, and right to know. These documents also stress as essential principles the need to give victims restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, reparation, and redress.

Since its establishment in 2002, the International Criminal Court has also stressed the need for victim participation in all phases of investigation and judicial procedures. “The Chicago Principles on Post-Conflict Justice 2001-2008”, which provide basic guidelines on the handling of atrocities perpetrated under authoritarian rule and amid armed conflicts, also emphasize: “Policies that seek justice for past violations should be victim-centered and should address victims’ rights to remedies and reparations.”

We note with serious concern that your remarks on "welcoming" the recent agreement between the ROK and Japan, and lauding it as a “courageous decision” by the South Korean President are not in line with the human rights principles and positions the UN and the international community have accumulated so far. 

We would therefore like to request your response to the following questions to further clarify your position. 

1. Do you think that the recent agreement between South Korea and Japan satisfy the UN-emphasized principles of the rights of the victims of human rights violations and properly address war crime legacies and past recommendations made by the UN human rights mechanisms to Japan?

2. According to the briefing issued by the Presidential Blue House of the ROK, you phoned the President of the ROK to discuss the recent agreement. Have you done the same with the Prime Minister of Japan? If so, what exactly was discussed or remarked in the latter conversation? If no such conversation took place with the Prime Minister of Japan, why have you had such a conversation with the President of the ROK and not with the Prime Minister of Japan?

3. The UN Secretary-General is obligated to make efforts to promote human rights in all Member States. Therefore, some argue that the UN Secretary-General should help invalidate the recent agreement between the ROK and Japan that seems to condone war crimes. What do you think of this argument?

4. Is the Secretary-General inclined to urge both the government of the Republic of Korea and Japanese governments to resolve the “comfort women” issues through official apologies, legal reparations, and guarantees of non-recurrence from the Japanese state through processes that are actually based upon victim participation?

We thank you for your reply in advance and look forward to hearing back from you at the earliest possible time. If you have any questions or would like clarification, please do not hesitate to contact us at [email protected] or +82 (0)2 723 4250. 

Yours sincerely,

 
Ms. Hyunback Jung
Co-Representative
People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy 

South Korean Civil Society’s Declaration against the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) between the Government of the Republic of Korea and the Government of Japan 

Immediately cease the GSOMIA negotiation

(16 November 2016, Seoul) We, 225 public figures and 113 civil society organisations, call upon Park Geun-hye administration to stop the signing of dogmatic, undemocratic and unpeaceful General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) between the Government of the Republic of Korea and the Government of Japan. Both governments held the first meeting in Tokyo on 1st of November, the second meeting in Seoul on 9th of November, the third meeting in Tokyo on 14th of November and tentatively initialed the GSOMIA. The Park administration has already requested the legislative office for examination in an aim to ratify the GSOMIA within this month. We strongly condemn the government’s undemocratic decision and warn the Government to immediately stop negotiation on the GSOMIA.

We strongly protest against the way how negotiation process has been carried out in an unfair and non-transparent manner. As we all recall, this Agreement was secretly carried out to the point of initialing by Lee Myung-bak administration in 2012 and was ceased due to the strong opposition from the people. People were outraged by the fact that the government pushed ahead with the agreement without consensus from the general public with the power vested and the national assembly as the representative body of the government.  

This undemocratic behavior is repeated and getting even worse. The Ministry of National Defense, which is mainly responsible for the GSOMIA has vowed until recently that forming general public consensus is crucial and that the “signing the GSOMIA can only be proceeded with conditions established.” Regardless, the Park Geun-hye administration has disregarded such conditions and without any attempt to reach a general public’ s consensus, it has decided to continue signing the GSOMIA like a military operation. 
 
While South Korean people are angered and shocked by the recent Presidential scandal, the GSOMIA is being enforced. As proved by a million protesting on 12th of November, majority of people are calling for the President’s immediate resignation. As the Park administration has failed to carry out the constitutional responsibility bestowed by the people, it is not qualified to proceed the GSOMNIA. Paradoxically speaking, this GSOMIA negotiation clearly proves that the President must not be involved both in domestic and international affairs. 
 

We are extremely concerned about the negative impact of the GSOMIA. The government has granted indulgence through abruptly settling on the Agreement on ‘comfort women’ to Abe Shinzo administration in Japan, which has been right wing-led and distorted its history of aggression. Signing the GSOMIA will rather encourage Japan’s remilitarization and exercise of collective self-defense. As the most affected victims of Japanese imperialism, we will not accept the government to blindly take such actions.  

The GSOMIA will instigate the possible new cold war in Northeast Asia. Republic of Korea is the closest neighboring country to North Korea, an explicit enemy of the US-Japan alliance, and China and Russia, strategic competitor countries of US. The reason for the US-Japan alliance to include South Korea in their military strategy largely lies in geopolitical factor. The Korean Peninsula will be a strategic advantage as battle front and troop as the last resort. The South Korea-US-Japan Military Information Sharing Pact signed in 2014 and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) deployment decision made in this July are in the same context. Such South Korea’s trilateral alliance may raise increasing concern in strengthening the trilateral alliance between North Korea, China and Russia. The result will be a new cold war in Northeast Asia and exacerbation of arms race as well as permanent loss of peace on the Korean Peninsula. As the victim of cold war, we will not allow the re-emergence of a new cold war. 

Some may assert that military cooperation with Japan is necessary in a pragmatic approach against the acceleration of North Korea’s missile and nuclear weapon threats. Nevertheless, the GSOMIA for trilateral missile defense system establishment will not assure South Korea’s safety. According to a report published by the US Congress Research Service (CRS) in June, 2013, it is assured that “South Korea might not benefit as much, because it is so close to North Korea that incoming missiles would likely fly on a lower trajectory and could arrive in a matter of minutes.” Considering our reality that we are still under ceasefire, this is a valid criticism. 

Military approach like the GSOMIA will clearly not stop North Korea’s nuclear development. This is just expansive reproduction of a failed policy. This will only lead to self-harm result in the Korean Peninsula. This will erupt cold war in Northeast Asia in reality and waste valuable resources that should be utilized for welfare and proliferation of humanity not for military competition.

The cooperation between South Korea-Japan and South Korea-US-Japan should not head in such direction. The objective of cooperation should be focused on peace and the means should be through diplomatic channels. Six-party talks should be resumed as it has been discontinued for about past eight years and relations between North and South Korea, North Korea and the US as well as North Korea and Japan should be resolved.

However, the Park administration has clearly proved that it has no will or capability to do so. It is gradually being disclosed that a shadowy advisor who is at the center of the corruption scandal has exerted extensive influence on domestic and international affairs but the government is still attempting to sign the GSOMIA. '

We will never accept such a historical regression. We can no longer trust the government that has lost ability to realize the seriousness of the issue and the President Park Geun-hye has no credibility, qualification or capability as a leader of this country. 

37th Regular Session Human Rights Council

Item 6 : Consideration of the Universal Periodic Review outcome of Republic of Korea 

Oral Statement Delivered by Ms. Rosanna Ocampo on Behalf of
South Korean NGO Coalition for the 3rd Cycle of the UPR

Mr President, FORUM-ASIA delivers this statement together with the South Korean NGO Coalition for the 3rd Cycle of the UPR. We appreciate the government of the Republic of Korea’s efforts to engage with civil society in the UPR process. However, we regret that some of our key concerns have been ignored.

Despite deep concerns expressed by numerous states, the Republic of Korea has merely noted recommendations to abolish the death penalty  and the National Security Law ; to adopt a comprehensive anti-discrimination law, which also addresses discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity ; and to allow civilian alternative service for conscientious objectors to military service.  Furthermore, the government has not accepted recommendations to improve the human rights of migrants and their families. 

We welcome the government’s support for recommendations on freedom of expression, and freedom of assembly and peaceful association, including to ratify four ILO core conventions.  We welcome its commitment to protect human rights defenders, and to investigate excessive use of state force against human rights defenders and trade union representatives. We also look forward to the adoption of a comprehensive strategy to prevent gender-based violence.  However, the government has yet to implement concrete measures on any of these issues.

Civil society in the Republic of Korea calls upon the government to develop a concrete and time-bound implementation plan in consultation with the national human rights institution and civil society organisations.  We look forward to further engagement with the government and the international community in following up on UPR recommendations.

Thank you.

Thursday, 15 March 2018

South Korean NGO Coalition for the 3rd Cycle of the UPR

See the video >> Click

GPPAC Northeast Asia Statement Welcoming the 2018 Inter-Korean Summit

Supporting new hope for peace on the Korean Peninsula,

towards a peaceful, nuclear-weapons free Northeast Asia

April 28, 2018

The Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC) Northeast Asia, a network of civil society organizations working for peace and dialogue in the region, wholeheartedly congratulates the leaders of the DPRK and the ROK, as well as the Korean people, for the historic achievement of the “Panmunjeom Declaration for Peace, Prosperity and Unification of the Korean Peninsula” issued following the Inter-Korean Summit of April 27, 2018 at the Peace House on the southern side of Korea's Demilitarized Zone (DMZ). The Summit contributed to a significant reduction of tensions and indeed avoidance of the catastrophe of a potential nuclear war. Furthermore, it showed the world the true impact of committed leadership and diplomacy, and the direct, personal meeting between the leaders of both Koreas sent a powerful wave of emotion around the world.

The landmark steps of goodwill and promises for action shown on this day mark a historic moment, and the beginning of a “new era of peace” for the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia. A peaceful resolution of the ongoing tensions on the Korean Peninsula, and a shift from the current Armistice regime to a permanent peace regime, is vital for the security not only of both Koreas, but for the Northeast Asia region as a whole. We strongly welcome the declaration to bring a swift end to the war on the Korean Peninsula, and realize a peace treaty, as well as the concrete steps outlined to end hostilities and encourage active cooperation. Concrete steps including the establishment of a joint liaison office, continued high-level dialogue, and active contacts will mark the historic start of this new area.

Reaffirmation of the common goal of attaining a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula through “complete denuclearization” is greatly encouraging. We also share the view that the DPRK's measures to cease nuclear and missile tests are important steps for reducing tensions. We sincerely hope that these developments will be followed by clear commitments for the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and for nuclear disarmament by all related parties. Both Koreas could celebrate complete denuclearization by together signing the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. We call on other parties in the region to also do so, as a step towards the future establishment of a Nuclear-Weapon-Free-Zone in Northeast Asia.

The encouragement of more active cooperation in social, economic and cultural fields is also significant, as are the steps outlined regarding practical implementation of previous agreements. We underline the role played by cultural exchange in creating the positive environment for the Inter-Korean Summit. Having organized regional civil society meetings at joint sites such as Mt Kumgang and the Kaesong Industrial Complex, we can directly testify to their significance as symbolic spaces for interaction between people from both Koreas and internationally, as well as for concrete cooperation and the development of joint inter-Korean institutions – important steps towards eventual unification. We therefore welcome commitments to expand such activities, such as on June 15 and other upcoming events. The clear declaration to restart reunions for tragically separated families, and solve humanitarian issues on the peninsula, are also crucial steps forward.

GPPAC Northeast Asia, with members from throughout the region including both Koreas, pledges to continue to do all we can to support diplomacy and the creation of an environment in which the Panmunjeom Declaration, as well as past agreements and future efforts to build peace, can be realized. In 2018, we will continue to convene the Ulaanbaatar Process, our civil society dialogue for regional peace and stability, to complement official processes towards the development of a peaceful, nuclear-free Northeast Asia.

We call upon the international community to undertake all efforts to support the implementation of the Panmunjeom Declaration, as well as previous joint agreements. The success of this Summit should be carried on to the upcoming US-DPRK discussions, which we sincerely hope will conclude with concrete steps towards denuclearization and a peace treaty for the Korean Peninsula. Space should be ensured for all stakeholders, including GPPAC members, civil society, states and the United Nations, to make utmost efforts to build on this success, and work towards the establishment of regional peacebuilding mechanisms for Northeast Asia.

The Summit is a powerful symbol of a process to overcome conflict and achieve peace through shifting from reaction to prevention. We sincerely believe that the realization of peace on the Korean Peninsula will develop into peace for the Northeast Asian region, and in turn contribute to momentum for building peace and security around the world.

>> Download

To President Trump, the President of the United States

 

My name is Noh Soo-deok, I live in Soseong-ri. I am 76 years old. 

I don' t know what THAAD is for and why you are bringing it to my village. THAAD seems like a bad thing because the military is imposing it on us as if we are in war. My small village was quite and peaceful even during the horrifying events of the Korean War. Why do we have to have such war machines here now?

 

THAAD is a scary thing. I heard that once THAAD is here, I cannot live or farm on my land anymore. I have lived on this land my whole life.

 

Since there is so much discussion of war, for me, THAAD is war.

 

Please accept these Seongju oriental melons and Gimcheon grapes. They were grown in Seongju and Gimcheon village and they are very sweet. Even though I never had the chance to go to school I learned to do farming well to grow delicious fruits like these.

 

Our village is famous for oriental melons and I have been planting them all my life. I feel very happy when I harvest these oriental melons. For me, these oriental melons represent peace.

 

Please enjoy these oriental melons and remember that people and communities are living in Soseong-ri, Seongju.

 

8th, May, 2017

[회원확대 캠페인 ②] 이 정보 모르고 뽑지마오!

국회가 지난 4년간 한 일, 유권자 선택을 위한 정보로 알려드려요.

참여연대의 흔들림 없는 권력감시운동.
이번에는 4.13총선에서 유권자들의 올바른 선택을 돕는 정보 제공활동으로 이어집니다. 

지난 4년간 유권자와의 약속 제대로 지켰는지, 
누가 서민을 울리는 법을 만들려고 했는지
누가 국민들이 원하는 진상규명을 방해했는지 낱낱이 기록했어요.

정치권력에 맞선 참여연대의 감시활동
회원가입으로 참여연대에 힘을 보태주세요! (클릭)

*참여연대 활동보기

- [새누리당 공약이행 평가 프로젝트] 집권여당은 유권자와 한 약속, 얼마나 지켰나
- [이슈리포트] 한국사회 주요 이슈에 대한 19대 국회의원 발언과 태도
- [이슈리포트] 19대 후반기 국회, 디딤돌·걸림돌 법안 표결 보고서
- [이슈리포트] 19대 국회 나쁜 법안, 누가 발의했나
- [3분 총선] 총선 관한 모든 정보를 한 손에 (http://www.vote0413.net)
- [홈페이지] 열려라 국회 - 국회의원들의 성적표를 속속들이 보여드려요! (바로가기 클릭)

  *홈페이지 자료실에서 더 많은 보고서와 정보를 보실 수 있습니다. (바로가기 클릭)

[회원확대 캠페인 ④] 5월은 푸르구나! 우리들은 잘 한다! 

시민여러분의 참여만큼, 참여연대도 자라고 있습니다!

시민들의 자발적 후원으로 권력을 감시하고 민주주의를 더 키우겠습니다!

참여연대는 100여명의 자원활동가와 1만여 개 노란리본 지역 가게들에 배포했습니다. 
앞으로도 세월호를 기억하기 위한 노란리본을 나누겠습니다. 

'권력감시의 대표작' 국회 감시 전문사이트 '열려라 국회'를 새단장했습니다. 
20대 국회의원들의 의정 활동도 꼼꼼히 기록하겠습니다. 

"이젠 안 사요" 옥시 제품 불매운동(#옥시불매) 캠페인도 벌이고 있습니다. 

기업의 불법행위 재발을 막기 위해 집단소송제와 징벌적 손해배상제 도입에 앞장서겠습니다. 
 

* 참여연대 활동보기

- ['서촌길 노랗게 물들이기’ 시즌2] 서촌이 노랗게 물들고 있습니다

- 세월호를 기억하는, '노란 리본 공작소' 자원활동가 모집 

- [열려라 국회 웹사이트] 국회의원들의 성적표 

- [이젠, 안 사요! '옥시' 제품 불매운동 캠페인] 가습기 살균제 피해자들의 손을 잡아주세요! 

- 가습기살균제 사건의 엄정하고 신속한 수사를 촉구한다 

정치 권력에 맞선 참여연대의 꾸준한 감시 활동!

정부지원금 0%

참여연대는 회원들의 회비와 후원으로 쑥쑥 자라납니다!  ( 지금 바로 회원가입 클릭 )