지방자치단체의 인권구제 실질화 방안에 관한 법적 고찰

It has been fifteen years since local governments in Korea began to develop human rights remedies, during which several significant changes have occurred. In response to the National Human Rights Commission of Korea's recommendations on the enactment and amendment of human rights ordinances, local governments have come to recognize that the duty to address human rights violations is not the exclusive responsibility of the central government. Furthermore, the enactment of the Seoul Metropolitan Govern- ment's Human Rights Ordinance provided a concrete methodological framework for responding to human rights violations. Alongside domestic and international trends em- phasizing the role of local governments as key actors in protecting residents’ human rights, these developments contributed to the nationwide expansion of human rights remedy systems. As a result, a total of 13,381 cases of human rights remedies were handled by 14 metropolitan governments over the six-year period from 2019 to 2024. Despite these developments, however, the actual operation of human rights remedies remains deeply unsatisfactory. While the institutional framework may appear outwardly established, it lacks the minimum substantive conditions necessary for effective remedies. Of the 142 local governments that have enacted human rights ordinances, only 49 provide for human rights remedies, and among them, merely 28 have established dedicated remedy bodies, most of which operate with extremely limited personnel. In practice, these bodies are often required to handle a broad range of human rights–related tasks—such as education programs and human rights forums—without adequate con- sideration of their functional specialization. Moreover, many local governments lack detailed legal provisions governing the authority and procedures of human rights remedy bodies, and both internal and external support for capacity-building remains insufficient. Against this backdrop, this paper argues that the identified problems can no longer be addressed by leaving their resolution to the discretion of individual local govern- ments. Instead, it contends that the enactment of a Basic Act on Human Rights Remedies is indispensable at this stage. Respecting the principles of decentralization and the constitutional guarantee of local autonomy, this study proposes four essential elements to be incorporated into such legislation: (1) the mandatory establishment and institutional independence of human rights remedy bodies; (2) the creation of a stable operational framework for human rights remedies; (3) the establishment of cooperative mechanisms among local governments; and (4) the introduction of a certification system for so-called “human rights cities.” While these measures alone may not resolve all existing shortcomings, this paper argues that they can serve as a foundational frame- work for the substantive realization of human rights remedies by local governments.