대통령의 법률안 통제방안 -미국의 경험을 중심으로-

Generally, the Presidents in the presidential system must choose to either sign or veto an entire bill even if they have different views about various provisions. But because a lot of legislative bills in the modern states are intricately entwined and have a variety of legislative purposes, the Presidents often have trouble choosing between the two. In this case, the Presidents of the United States have issued written pronouncements relating to constitutional matters that direct executive agencies to apply the law according to the president's interpretation of the Constitution upon the signing of a bill into law. In rare cases, they also issued non-signing statement expressing concerns about certain provisions in a bill without vetoing it. With the non-signing statement, presidents announce their reasons for declining to sign, while allowing the bill to become law unsigned. I think that non-signing statement superior to signing statement in various institutional aspects. For example, presidents would be unlikely to use non-signing statement to assert excessive executive powers. They can also improve parliamentary political system. In conclusion, it is necessary for Presidents of Korea to consider non-signing statement as a one of options that they can choose in the legislative process.