초록 열기/닫기 버튼
The recent disclosure of the names of teachers affiliated with the five teachers unions by a Congressman has created a huge controversy in Korean society. Grand National Party Representative Cho Jeon-hyeok recently revealed the names of 220,000 teachers with their schools, fields and affiliations through his homepage on April 19, 2010. The names included 60,000 members of the progressive Korean Teachers and Education Workers' Union. Lawmaker Cho's action went against a court judgment. The Seoul Southern District Court on April 15 ruled in favor of the teachers union and ordered Cho not to disclose the identities of the teachers. Still, Cho snubbed the injunction and went on to release identities of the unionized members. He also submitted this case to the Constitutional Court on April 23, arguing that the court ruling infringed the legislative authority of Congressman. Meanwhile, the Seoul Southern District Court on April 29 ruled in favor of the teachers union once again and held that Cho will be fined 30 million won for each day he continues to post the names on his Web site. The court said: “With this decision regarding the injunction filed on the 15th, lawmaker Cho must not reveal the identities of the teachers union members through the Internet or the media. If he breaks this rule, he will have to pay 30 million won for each day, to the Korean Teachers and Education Workers’ Union.”The legal controversies around this case, I think, are very significant questions through which we can weigh up whether Korean society is an open one which has diversity and broad-mindedness. I think that the clue to these questions can be found in the constitutional spirit and principle of the freedom of association. The freedom of association protects the diversity of thoughts and associations and the competitiveness between many different thoughts and associations. The protection of associational privacy is very important element for the diversity and competitiveness. In this case, there is a conflict between parents' right to know whether or not their children’s teachers are union members and the teachers' right of associational privacy. This paper chiefly consists of 5 Parts. The First Part gives an outline of the events and cases. The Second introduces my perspectives and analytical approaches. The Third Part analyses the legality and constitutionality of Cho's disclosure of teachers' identities. The Fourth evaluates whether or not Cho's action may constitute the parliamentary immunity. The Fifth, finally, analyses whether or not Cho's constitutional suit may meet the prerequisite requirements for the litigation.
키워드열기/닫기 버튼
Disclosure of Teachers' Union Membership, Freedom of Association, ciational Privacy, School Parent's Right to Know, Parliamentary Privilege
