조약체결절차법안에 대한 소고 ― 조약 실무 관점에서의 연구 ―

The 22nd National Assembly of the Republic of Korea has once again proposed a bill to regulate the procedures for the conclusion and ratification of treaties by the Korean government. The bill seeks to establish a unified and comprehensive legal framework for this process, consolidating the fragmented provisions currently dispersed across various legal sources, including the Korean Constitution, the Government Organization Act and the Act on the Appointment and Powers of Government Delegates and Special Envoys, as well as the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, an international agreement governing treaties between states. The rationale for the bill stems from the argument that treaties, as quasi-legislative acts by the executive branch of the government, currently lack adequate parliamentary oversight. To enhance legislative control and democratize the treaty-making process, the bill mandates that the executive branch report to the National Assembly on treaty plans, drafts, and the negotiation progress. Additionally, for treaties not initially submitted for the Assembly's consent, the bill would require the executive branch to submit a conclusion and ratification proposal upon the request of the Assembly. This paper analyzes statistical data on current treaty-making practices within the government, reviews relevant existing procedural regulations, and examines the main features of the proposed bill. It compares the proposed legislation with the existing Act on the Conclusion Procedure and Implementation of Commercial Treaties. Through this analysis, the paper identifies potential conflicts between the proposed bill and the constitutional interpretation of presidential authority in treaty-making, as well as established practices. It argues that imposing a uniform procedural framework could hinder national interests, given the inherent unpredictability of treaty negotiations, and highlights the administrative burden such a law could place on both the executive branch and the legislature. Notably, only about 20 countries globally have adopted a singular law governing treaty-making procedures. While acknowledging the bill's intention to enhance democratic oversight by the National Assembly, the paper underscores the importance of transparency and effective communication between the executive and legislative branches. It proposes alternative policy measures, such as directives issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or the Prime Minister’s Office, to achieve these goals. Furthermore, the paper explores the potential for the proposed bill or related directives to provide a legal basis for administrative or executive agreements that fall outside constitutional treaty ratification requirements. Lastly, the paper emphasizes that treaty-making activities are subject to significant scrutiny within the international community. It highlights the existence of diverse legislative models worldwide, such as in the form of model laws, and the collaborative efforts of states to establish robust norms, ensuring that treaty-making processes are substantively regulated internationally.