[진정서] 인권위원장 인선 관련 국가인권기구간국제조정위원회 긴급진정 제출
인권위원장 밀실 인선 관련 국가인권기구 간 국제조정위원회(ICC)에 긴급 진정 제출
7월 20일, 청와대는 이성호 서울중앙지법원장을 국가인권위원회(이하 인권위) 위원장으로 내정했습니다. 국가인권기구 간 국제조정위원회(약칭 ICC)는 인권위원 인선절차를 마련하고 인권기준에 맞는 인권위원장 및 인권위원을 선출하라고 2008년부터 2015년까지 꾸준히 권고하였습니다. 심지어 이 문제로 등급심사 소위에서 등급심사를 3번이나 보류하기도 했습니다.
국가인권위 인권위원장 인선절차 및 투명성 확보를 위한 시민사회단체 연석회의(준)(약칭 인권위원장 대응 연석회의)는 시민사회가 참여하는 투명한 절차를 통해 자격 있는 사람을 선출할 것을 촉구하는 의견서도 제출하고 1인 시위도 하였으나 청와대는 묵묵부답이었습니다. 그동안 인권위원장 인선절차를 마련하라는 국내외 인권단체의 요구에 전혀 응하지 않다가 갑자기 내정을 발표하는 밀실인선의 관행이 또 한 번 되풀이되었습니다.
이에 인권위원장 대응 연석회의는 7월 22일 ICC 승인소위의 권고를 무시한 청와대의 인권위원장 밀실 인선에 대한 긴급 진정서를 ICC 승인소위에 제출하였습니다.
진정서의 주요 내용은 다음과 같습니다.
- 7월 20일 대통령이 이성호 서울중앙지법원장을 현병철 국가인권위원회 위원장 후임으로 내정했다.
- 민경욱 청와대 대변인은 “이성호 내정자는 약 30년 동안 판사로 재직하면서 인권을 보장하고 법과 정의, 원칙에 충실한 다수의 판결을 선고했고, 합리적 성품과 업무 능력으로 신망이 높다”며 내정 이유를 밝혔다.
- 이성호 판사 내정은 판사 경력을 인권 전문가 경력이라 볼 수 있는지에 대한 우려, 현직 판사 임명이 사법부 독립성을 해칠 수도 있다는 우려, 고등법원 부장판사 시절 사형판결을 내린 바 있다는 우려 외에도 ICC 권고를 하나도 이행하지 않았다는 문제가 있다.
- ICC 승인소위는 2015년 3월 제3차 등급보류 결정에서 후임 인권위원장 선출과 관련 다음과 같은 네 가지 요건을 지킬 것을 권고했다.
1) 공석을 널리 공고할 것
2) 다양한 사회 계층 및 교육 자격을 지닌 지원자의 수를 최대화할 것
3) 지원, 심사 및 선출과정에 있어서의 광범위한 협력 및/혹은 참여를 도모할 것
4) 선결되고 객관적이며 대중에 공개된 조건으로 지원자들을 평가할 것
- 그러나 청와대는 1) 공석을 공고하지도 않았고, 2) 지원자의 규모 등에 대해서도 밝히지 않았으며, 3) 시민사회가 지난 5월에 제출한 의견서에 아무런 답변이 없었을뿐더러 7월 8일과 7월 21일 기자회견 후 의견서를 전달하려 했을 때도 경찰이 막아서 전달조차 할 수 없었고 4) 지원자 평가에 어떤 기준이 적용되었고 어떤 부분에서 이성호 판사가 적임자로 판단되었는지 전혀 밝혀진 바가 없다.
- 결론적으로 한국 시민사회는 이성호 판사 내정이 ICC 권고를 충족하지 못하고 있어 정당성이 결여되어 있다고 보며 ICC에서 이러한 우려를 인지하고 ICC 권고 준수를 한국 정부에 촉구해주기를 바란다.
<ICC-SCA 제출 긴급 진정(Urgent Appeal)>
The President of Republic of Korea Failed to Implement Any of the ICC-SCA Recommendations in Nominating the Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission of Korea.On July 20, 2015, the President of Republic of Korea announced her nominee for the chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission of Korea without any consultation with other stakeholders including civil society and without any clear criteria.
In his morning briefing to the press on July 20, Min Gyeong-wook, presidential spokesperson explained the reason for choosing Lee Seong-ho, incumbent chief judge of the Seoul Central District Court for the nominee for the NHRCK’s new chairperson as follows:
“Nominee Lee Seong-ho has served as a judge for about 30 years including chief judge of the Seoul High Court and chief judge of the Seoul Southern District Court, made a number of decisions guaranteeing human rights and in compatible with the rule of law, justice and principles, and been in high credit for his reasonable personality and high job performance. ….. The presidential office believes he is the right person to lead the Commission with his firm commitment on the protection of human rights and his excellent leadership and expects he can significantly contribute to both the development of the Commission and the enhancement of Korea in the international arena.”
Putting aside other concerns over the nomination including that many people doubt how the career of serving as a judge can simply imply the nominee has “professional knowledge of and experience with human rights matters” (Article 5, the National Human Rights Commission Act), that nominating an incumbent chief judge of a district court for the chairperson of the Commission might undermine the independency of the judiciary, and that nominee Lee confirmed the death sentence in his ruling at the Seoul High Court, the President of Republic of Korea did not implement any of the ICC-SCA recommendations in nominating Lee for the chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission of Korea.
We understand that in the most recent deferral decision and recommendation, the ICC-SCA clearly stated as follows:
“The term of the current Chair will end in August 2015 and the process for the selection of the new Chair will begin in May 2015. The SCA encourages the NHRCK to advocate for the formalization of a clear, transparent and participatory selection and appointment that promotes merit-based selection. Such a process should include requirements to:
a) Publicize vacancies broadly;
b) Maximize the number of potential candidates from a wide range of societal groups and educational qualifications;
c) Promote broad consultation and / or participation in the application, screening and selection process; and
d) Assess applicants on the basis of pre-determined, objective and publicly-available criteria.”
However, neither the Commission nor the Presidential Office implemented any of the above requirements.
Regarding a) publicize vacancies broadly, there was no vacancy announcement made by the Korean government which is the nominating authority of the chairperson except the one posted only on the official website of the Commission.
Regarding b) maximize the number of potential candidates from a wide range of societal groups and educational qualifications, there is no information how many potential candidates were reviewed, in fact, even whether there were multiple candidates reviewed as the Korean government did not reveal any relevant process to public.
Regarding c) promote broad consultation and / or participation in the application, screening and selection process, there was not a single contact from the government to civil society. The President even did not answer the stakeholder opinion submitted to the President by civil society through the National Human Rights Commission of Korea in May. Civil society groups including the Roundtable for the Transparent Selection Process of the Chairperson of the NHRCK, an extended form of the NHRCK Watch network responding to the selection of the new chairperson, tried to submit their opinion letter directly to the public service center of the presidential resident twice: first on July 8 after a press conference demanding the President to nominate and appoint the next chairperson through transparent and participatory process and second on July 21 after a press conference criticizing the nomination of judge Lee as a closed-door appointment. However, the police stopped the submission, insisting only one person should go to deliver the petition and saying more than two persons going together makes it an outdoor demonstration which requires a prior-report which is groundless as there is no legal provision preventing more than two persons from submitting a petition together.
And regarding d) assess applicants on the basis of pre-determined, objective and publicly-available criteria, the Korean government did not reveal what was criteria assessing applicants and in which points the announced nominee Lee was found qualified.
In conclusion, we, civil society organizations believe the President’s nomination of judge Lee for the next chairperson of the Commission does not comply with the ICC-SCA recommendations, thereby lacking legitimacy.
We sincerely expect the ICC-SCA be aware of our concerns and encourage the Korean government to fully implement the ICC-SCA recommendations.
The Roundtable for the Transparent Selection Process of the Chairperson of the NHRCK (Korean civil society groups’ joint network including members of the NHRCK Watch)
![[토론회] 인권위원장의 자격](http://www.peoplepower21.org/files/attach/images/37219/446/235/001/602939392e4a55a7559b5139197b4f6f.png)
시민들의 의견
댓글 달기