주민소환제도 개선을 위한 헌법정책적 연구

In order to democratically control the heads of local governments or local councilors elected by residents, the recall system should be activated. Therefore, it is not reasonable to limit the reason for recall of residents, and it is necessary to ease the signature ratio and counting requirements. First of all, it is appropriate to adjust the number of signatures according to the population of local governments, and to define the number of votes cast in the previous election as 15% of the votes cast in the previous election, 20% of the votes cast in the previous election in the case of mayors, county heads, and local council members in the metropolitan and provincial governments, and 25% of the votes cast in the previous election. In addition, the requirement for confirmation of voting shall be maintained by a decision of more than one-third of the total number of residents who have the right to recall votes and a majority of the valid votes, but when the number of voters falls short of one-third of the number of votes cast in the previous election, it is proposed to improve the requirement for counting by not counting the votes. In addition, it is reasonable to limit the suspension of the exercise of authority by the heads of local governments to cases where they violated the Constitution or laws in the course of performing their duties. On the other hand, it is necessary to improve the exercise of authority in a way that does not suspend the exercise of authority for other reasons, such as incompetence, immorality and policy failure of the representative. Finally, it is reasonable for the local government to compensate for the expenses spent by the petitioner for the recall of residents in case the recall of residents is approved so that the cost burden does not become an obstacle to the recall of residents. On the contrary, if it is rejected, it should compensate for expenses incurred by the person subject to recall.