Earticle

This paper aims for a consideration of some legal issues for statutory interpretation concluded by Korean Statutory Interpretation Deliberation Committee(hereinafter called SIDC) under the Ministry of Government Legislation(hereinafter called MOLEG). There are some legal characteristics of SIDC in Korea. First, it's not an governmental organization to do a orthodox judicial interpretation but a kind of administrational interpretation. Therefore, SIDC pursuits uniformity and consistency of statutory interpretation in administrational process in the Executive of Korea. But, it has to be abided by the principle of due process of law because of its quasi-judicial characteristic. In Korea, MOLEG should have a right of statutory interpretation in the government. Its right is delegated to SIDC which is an independent organization consisting of law specialists. Another feature of SIDC statutory interpretation is that it has not judicial binding effect but administrational force. Also, SIDC statutory interpretation should not restrict the judiciary power, so statutory interpretation could be reversed by a court. However, confidence of people in SIDC statutory interpretation should be legally protected. Some could be pointed out to reform activities of SIDC. It has to prepare special regulations for the committee's composition, process or decision to improve independency of SIDC under the principle of due process of law. Also, SIDC should keep a specific provision like 'SIDC decision should restrict the minister of MOLEG , but he could request reconsideration of the decisions concluded by the committee if he has an objection to them. The committee has found lots of legislational defects of statutes through its interpretation, and helps to revise and improve these statutes. SIDC has made contribution not only to promote law-suitability of administration but to develop constitutionalism of Korea.

In Korea, President can make decrees or ordinances concerning matters delegated to him by Acts with the scope specially defined and also matters necessary to enforce Acts. When any presidential decree or ordinance does not belong to any Act, its validity becomes controversial in terms of constitutionality. However, ordinance-making power should be considered as means, not as objects. If Constitution vests some duties to a position, it should be interpreted that it also gives the power, including ordinance-making power, sufficient to implement those duties.(Most constitutional theorists seem to disagree with this idea. If not, there is no way to do constitutional duties without the help of other institutions with competence of making ordinances. With respect to the Korean President, since Korea adopts the doctrine of Separation of Powers as one of its constitutional principles, he has to rely on congressional legislation to do his duties. On the other hand, American President enjoys much wider ordinance-making power. Executive Order is the most significant one among them. However, the Constitution of the United States does not explicitly give President the ordinance-making power. Nevertheless every one has admitted that President has ordinance-making power. In this study, the sources of Executive Orders are enumerated as follows : constitutional powers vested to President, the delegation by the Congress, and the inherent powers of President, which is still controversial. Through this study, we can assure that ordinance-making power is a tool to implement duties. If you give someone a duty, it means that you also give him to issue orders to carry out the duty. As this idea seems rather unfamiliar in Korea, we need to have close attention to this matter.

In 1999, the Korea Congress was determined to introduce a special prosecutor (now called ‘Independent Counsel’ in USA) Act. It began to check governmental abuses of power and restore public confidence. The special prosecutor can investigate allegations of any misconduct independently. Seven special prosecutor Acts were enacted and eight special prosecutors have been appointed under the special prosecutor Acts in Korea since 1999. The recently enacted special prosecutor Act was the special prosecutor Act concerning investigation of President-elect Lee Myung-bak over his alleged involvement in a financial fraud case in 2007. But a petitioners claimed the special prosecutor Act to the Constitutional Court, which targets a specific individual, was unconstitutional because it was beyond the legislative power banning the establishment of a law dealing with a specific individual. And the petitioners claimed that the supreme court head's nomination of a special prosecutor violated the principle of the separation of power. The Constitutional Court decided that most clauses of the Special Prosecutor Act were in accordance with the constitution. The Constitutional Court said it was the president who appointed the special prosecutor, although the chief justice recommended the candidates.

This paper examine the china's law-making institutions, legislative process to verify the development of rule of law in china after the enactment of the new Legislation Law in 2000. After the review, This paper will evaluate the result which china has made after the enactment of the Legislation Law in the viewpoint of rule of law. There are three national organs with intrinsic legislative power. NPC(National People's Congress) is the supreme legislative organ in the Republic of China. The NPC has the power to enact and amend all basic laws. The NPC standing Committee has also authority to enact and amend all other laws except for those enacted by the NPC itself. Lastly, the State Council exercises legislative power in five different ways. Under the Constitution, the State Council has intrinsic power to enact administrative regulations for subject matters within its sphere of authority. Secondly, the State Council has the power to enact administrative regulations when such regulations are required to facilitate the enforcement or implementation of laws enacted by the NPC and its standing committee. Also the State Council may be authorized by the NPC or the NPC Standing Committee directly or thorough a law to enact administrative regulations before the formal enactment. The Saste Council also has the right to draft and to submit the legislation. The process of legislation in China is difficult to understand perfectly. First, Whether the Communist Party has played a important role in enactment of law has been in dispute. Some scholars in recent argue that the Communist Party rarely exert an influence on the specific legislation. Others until now have maintained Party Policy has some binding force in modern China. It is generally admitted that the Party have loosen the influence over the society gradually as the growing the private sector have grown especially after the economic open policy have rooted in every area of China. Newly enacted Legislation Law enabled the citizen to participate in the legislative process through a lot of channels. But notwithstanding the Legislation Law, private sectors in China has not until grown to be ready for the task. In addition, there are too many legislative institutions to clearly explain. For the more, the State Council has the intrinsic legislative power without any relation to the Congress. Also it is necessary to point out that some China's laws are not clear and certain. China had to enact a lot of laws to regulate the situation which China had not experenced before in a short term. This have caused China's legislative institutions to make laws in a very short time. Also China intentionally enacted the laws short and abstract for the local government to be able to come up with the local circumstance. Therefore, some law in China is inconsistent. To overcome these defect is urgent in the long road toward the rule of law. It is imperative to set up the new judicial review system in the outside of legislative institutions. To achieve the aim, it is necessary for private secters including interest groups to grow as in liberal-democracy countries.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze on the legislative organs and proceedings in the 1998 Constitution of North Korea, and to give a academic materials for understanding of North Korean legislations. There is the constitution (a.k.a., the "1998 amended constitution" or "Kim Il Sung's constitution"), which amended the socialist constitution to the 2nd in the First Conference of the Supreme People’s Council's(Sept. 5, 1998). The 1998 constitution made five-and-a-half years after the revision in 1992, was designed to put the finishing touches on the decades-long dynastic succession programs of Kim Jong-il. According to constitution of North Korea, we can find the enactment of legislations and legislative organs as follows; first of all, Legislative power is exercised exclusively by the Supreme People's Assembly(SPA). And there are constitution be amended and supplemented, departmental laws was adopted, and amended and supplemented (or major departmental laws be adopted by the SPA Presidium in the intervals between the sessions of the SPA approved) by the Supreme People’s Assembly(Article 91), decisions and orders be issued by the National Defence Commission (Article 104), decrees, decisions and directions be issued by the SPA Presidium (Article 114), regulations concerning state management based on the Constitution and departmental laws be instituted, amended, and supplemented by the Cabinet (Article 119), decisions and directions be adopted by the Cabinet(Article 123), the Local People's Assembly's decisions(Article 138), the Local People's Committee's decisions and directions(Article 144). As to the legislative proceeding of North Korea, the constitution provide for in as follows: the SPA has authority to amend and supplement the Constitution, adopt, amend and supplement departmental laws, approve major departmental laws adopted by the SPA Presidium in the intervals between the sessions of the SPA. In addition, the SPA Presidium has authority to examine and adopt new departmental bills and regulations, raised when the SPA is in recess, and examine and adopt drafts of amendment and supplement to departmental bills and regulations in force, and receive approval from the next SPA session on important departmental bills which will be adopted and implemented, interpret the Constitution, departmental laws and regulations in force, supervise the observance of laws of State organs, and adopt measures, and abolish State organs’ decisions which violate the Constitution, SPA’s laws and decisions, National Defence Commission’s decisions and orders and the SPA Presidium’s decrees, decisions and directions, and suspend the implementation of unwarranted decisions by a Local People’s Assembly. But it was estimated that North Korean legislations is non-systematic framework, unclear legislative proceedings. Despite the fact that the legislative framework of North Korea is very non-systematical process compare to our legislative system, recent maintenance of legislation of Kim Jong-il's regime working formal and qualitative change. It can be seen its change through the legislations related to foreign investment and economic opendoor policy and administlative affairs in front of internal and external circumstances. In the study, moreover, it explains to the function of the legislative organs and the relationship between its organs in the course of the legislative process, comparative analysis to our legislative system. Studying legislative organs and proceedings of North Korea will not only contribute to an accurate understanding of legislative formation and organs, but also provide a starting point for reaching a consensus in unifying the different legal system, exchange and cooperation of legal aspects of the inter-Korea.

During the process of vitalizing civic movements in Korean society, there are several distinguished characteristics such as the revitalization of social reform movements using legal methods and the generalization that leads to social changes or prevents retrogression by intervening in a law making process. The movements include legislative movements to enact new laws as well as the movements that try to amend or abolish part of articles or laws that are insufficient or have some problems and movements that prevent undesirable amendment or introduce of wrong systems are also considered as the movement of legislation. Citizens` organizations participate in activities including; first, presenting petition bills, second, request for assemblyman's motion, third, persuasion (lobby) for each assemblyman or party officials, fourth, presenting a written opinion, fifth, activities including making a statement at a public hearing conducted by the National Assembly or the government and etc. It is natural that each activity brings more influences if supported by a variety of activities such as presentation of research papers, on-line and off-line campaigns, a signature-seeking campaign and issuing a statement, holding a forum or a symposium, a contribution to the press. In addition, since only one is chosen among them, they are applied to the process of whole legislative movements simultaneously or gradually. The representative examples are the legislative movements for a business building lease protection law and the legislative movements for the class action law relating to security. In order to enact a business building lease protection law, civil society organizations established an intensive 'legislation alliance.' They extended participants by joining hands with the interested parties who feel keenly the necessity of institution, deviating from the legislative movements by expert groups or civil organizations. They also highlighted the serious problems related to business building lease and the necessity of system reform through a forum and damage reports, campaigns and signature-seeking campaign, selecting monitor projects for a regular session of the National Assembly. Although on-line and off-line signature-seeking campaigns were conducted or campaigns at a securities were held, distributing promotional materials in order to enact class action law relating to security, the movements failed to have public participation and draw interests and supports from public opinion. However, the movement achieved the expected results and there are successful factors including active struggle with a powerful opposite groups, efforts to make 'noisy issues' and 'live issues' by responding to remarks and behaviors made by the persons who had an acrimonious dispute. Furthermore, enacting the securities-related class action law successfully as a symbol of 'chaebol reform' has become the background for the legislation movements.