대학 내 인권센터의 역할과 인권침해 심사에 관한 검토

This paper reviews the necessity and role of the human rights center as a university human rights organization, and the criteria for determining human rights violations. The integrity of educational institutions demanded by our society, the implications of the relevant laws on sexual harassment that are not embraced as sexual violence crimes, and the human rights center as a non-judicial soft power organization that can take flexible measures considering the positions of both sides and play the role of a human rights defender. Given this, this paper emphasizes that university human rights centers can take a more positive stance than judicial institutions in interpreting and applying legal principles to cases. As a university human rights organization, the decision of the Human Rights Center only has an advisory effect on the premise that there has been human rights violation, sexual harassment, or sexual violence. Therefore, it is difficult to accept the decision of the Human Rights Center if it has a significant impact on the honor and reputation of the accused person. It won't be easy. In the end, in order to accept it, the persuasiveness of the evidence and argument on which the decision is based, fair and transparent procedures, and support for the human rights center of the school authorities should be supported. In order to confer persuasive power to the Human Rights Center's decision, first, researchers will have to identify the issues of the case during the investigation, ask key questions related to this to the person concerned, and receive an answer. To get an answer is not to get a confession, but to see how the person reacts to it. Therefore, it is necessary to meticulously question the facts of the claim based on the statement or statement of the reporter and provide data for judgment by the committee that deliberates the case, such as the Human Rights Countermeasure Committee. For this, it is necessary to computerize the case processing system so that researchers can conduct efficient investigations. Next, for a fair and transparent process, it is necessary to diversify the personnel composition of the committee, such as the participation of external members with extensive experience and professional knowledge in case deliberation. Attempts to diversify the composition of the committee will prevent school authorities from interfering with the human rights center's decisions and ensure fairness and legitimacy. Lastly, in order for the human rights center's decision to gain the trust of school members, education to improve gender sensitivity and human rights sensitivity is absolutely necessary. Substantial education that considers the conditions and circumstances given by each university will provide the beginning of a virtuous cycle structure that allows the human rights center's decision to be trusted and understood and re-established the status of the human rights center.