교육감 직선제 위헌확인 심판청구의 쟁점 고찰

Constitutional judicial decision on Article 43(Election of the Superintendent of Offices of Education) of the Local Education Autonomy Act is being tried on the Constitutional Court. Claimant for adjudgment asserts that the direct election system for superintendent violates a guarantee of independence, professionalism and political impartiality of education, goes against the constitutional value of democracy, the local education autonomy and independence of education, and also limits the right to hold public office of teaching staff working in kindergartens, the elementary school, and secondary school. The Constitutional Court has made that the local education autonomy is the system to guarantee independence, professionalism and political impartiality of education, and a system that educationalists can be elected as the superintendent of offices of education accords with professionalism and independence of education. The Constitutional Court inhibits that the party engages in the election, as representative action to guarantee political impartiality in the election of the superintendent of offices of education. Also, the Constitutional Court has made that the election is the way to exercise sovereignty in representative democracy, and the direct superintendent election by residence is reasonable in aspect of a principle of citizen autonomy. The election of the superintendent of offices of education following appointment system and indirect election system has a problem on operating, but it is within the discretion of the legislative power as it involves the constitutional value of ‘democracy, the local education autonomy and independence of education’.