헌법 및 인권규범이 교정(矯正) 분야에 끼친 영향*

For a long time, the prison and correctional sector has been considered a human rights blind space. The light of the Constitution and human rights could not penetrate the prison walls, and prisoners were unable to seek redress through judicial review of their bad treatment. This was the situation in South Korea's correctional and prison systems until the 1980s. Since the 1990s, however, the dark situations has been significantly challenged. First and foremost, the Constitutional Court of Korea has responded positively to constitutional petitions by prisoners. It declared unconstitutional the surveillance of prison guards during defense lawyers' meetings with detainees, and recognized the right of detainees to wear plain clothes when on trial. In the 2010s, it partially recognized the right to vote for prisoners. In particular, it has actively decided that excessive overcrowding is unconstitutional because it violates human dignity. These decisions of the Constitutional Court have led to improvements in dehumanizing prison conditions and amendments to the Correctional Relations Act. There is no longer an iron curtain between the Constitution and prisons. Prisoners now have access to the Constitutional Court, the judiciary, and the National Human Rights Commission. The judiciary is no longer issuing mere memorandum decisions in these cases, but is issuing substantive rulings and making unconstitutional or unconstitutional decisions. The National Human Rights Commission of Korea is particularly concerned about human rights violations in prisons, and makes decisions after receiving complaints from prisoners, sometimes visiting them, and counseling them about the situation. This has become a routine part of its work. Its decisions and recommendations have a long-term impact on correctional authorities. The Constitutional Court and the judiciary also rely on its decisions as a key reference point. While the NHRC’s decisions are not binding in practice because they are advisory, they can provide more advanced human rights guidance. By analogy, in the field of corrections, the NHRC acts as an icebreaker to guide the decisions of the Constitutional Court and courts. The development of judicial decisions over the past 30 years also clarifies the legal and policy challenges. Treatment in the correctional sector needs to be codified through legislation. The constitutional position of the undertrials and the sentenced prisoners is clearly different, and a distinction should be made between the undertrial and prison laws. In order to institutionalize constitutional and human rights values in the correctional sector, a comprehensive correctional facility/operation policy should be formulated with a long-term perspective.