메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
국제법평론회 국제법평론 국제법평론 제60호
발행연도
2021.10
수록면
67 - 94 (28page)
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25197/kilr.2021.60.67

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
In times of public emergency, states take emergency measures to control the national crisis and restore public order. These emergency measures often restrict individuals’ freedom and rights that are protected under international human rights treaties. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in its article 4, allows states to derogate from their obligations under the Covenant in time of public emergency. This is to adopt emergency measures to control crisis and, more importantly, to prevent the abuse of emergency power at the same time. This article examines the requirements and limits of emergency measures under article 4 of the Covenant, based on the guidelines and practices of the Human Rights Committee and other states. This article then reviews South Korean practice on emergency measures taken to respond to national emergencies. South Korea has a dark history of emergency power abused to silence dissidents under the authoritative regimes. Since the ratification of the Covenant in 1990, the emergency power under the current Constitution has never been invoked, reflecting the democratization progress. To respond to the global crisis of the COVID-19, South Korea has taken a wide range of derogatory measures without declaring a state of emergency. To meet the requirements of article 4, the South Korean government should enact the legal basis of the social distancing policy. The preventive measures for the COVID-19 should be proportional and must not include discrimination.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0