[시사] [이행법안 차이가 성문법, 불문법 문제?! 조까라 그래!] ★ 1층 한국법 ＜ 2층 FTA 협정문 ＜ 3층 미국 법 ★ 의 증거!!

[붕붕~]

서론

본 떡밥은 미 의회에 제출, 통과된 한미 FTA 이행법안과 그 제반조치에 관한 부분으로만 잘려 있습니다. 한미 FTA는 통상협정이므로 떡밥은 경제분야도 다루어야 한다는 견해가 있으나, 경제학의 기본 속성 상 그 어떤 전망치도 - 한미 FTA를 하면 국민소득이 4만 불이 된다는 전망치를 포함하여 - 100% 신뢰할 수 없는 예측에 지나지 않는다는 점은 자명합니다. 따라서 본 떡밥에서는 경제분야가 아닌, 한미 FTA 중 가장 큰 문제가 되는 이행법안 및 동시에 처리된 제반조치와 그의 수정헌법 상, 또는 국제법 상의 근거에 대해서만 다루기로 하겠습니다.


참고

본 떡밥에서는 불필요한 오해의 소지를 차단하기 위하여 법조문의 경우에는 조문 전체, 법조문의 서론의 경우는 문단 전체를 한꺼번에 발췌하고 있습니다.


본론

1. 미 의회에 제출, 통과된 한미 FTA 이행법안에 대하여

가장 큰 문제가 되는 102조의 원문은 다음과 같습니다.

Section 102: Relationship of the Agreement to United States and State Law

Section 102(a) provides that U.S. law prevails in the case of a conflict with the Agreement.
Section 102(b) provides that only the United States is entitled to bring a court action challenging a
state law as being invalid on grounds of inconsistency with the Agreement. Section 102(c) states
that there is no private cause of action or defense under the Agreement and no person other than the
United States may challenge a federal or state law in court as being inconsistent with the
Agreement.

그리고 실제 통과된 부분은 다음과 같습니다.

SEC. 102. RELATIONSHIP OF THE AGREEMENT TO UNITED STATES AND STATE LAW.

(a) Relationship of Agreement to United States Law-

(1) UNITED STATES LAW TO PREVAIL IN CONFLICT- No provision of the Agreement, nor the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance, which is inconsistent with any law of the United States shall have effect.

(2) CONSTRUCTION- Nothing in this Act shall be construed--

(A) to amend or modify any law of the United States, or

(B) to limit any authority conferred under any law of the United States,

unless specifically provided for in this Act.

(b) Relationship of Agreement to State Law-

(1) LEGAL CHALLENGE- No State law, or the application thereof, may be declared invalid as to any person or circumstance on the ground that the provision or application is inconsistent with the Agreement, except in an action brought by the United States for the purpose of declaring such law or application invalid.

(2) DEFINITION OF STATE LAW- For purposes of this subsection, the term `State law' includes--

(A) any law of a political subdivision of a State; and

(B) any State law regulating or taxing the business of insurance.

(c) Effect of Agreement With Respect to Private Remedies- No person other than the United States--

(1) shall have any cause of action or defense under the Agreement or by virtue of congressional approval thereof; or

(2) may challenge, in any action brought under any provision of law, any action or inaction by any department, agency, or other instrumentality of the United States, any State, or any political subdivision of a State, on the ground that such action or inaction is inconsistent with the Agreement.


길게길게 쓰여있습니다만, 한 마디로 요약하면 연방법에 어긋나면 조까 ^^

네. 그렇습니다. 이행법안만 읽으면, 아니 다 읽을 필요도 없이 이행법안 102조만 읽어도 이행법안이 말하고자 하는 바는 분명합니다.

첫째 "본 이행법안에 특별히 명시되지 않은 한, 연방법과의 충돌의 경우 연방법을 우선한다"

둘째 "어떠한 주법도 본 협정에 어긋난다는 이유로 개정되지 않는다"



예상그림

김종훈은(는) 매국노(이)가 되었다!

적의 이명박은(는) 간파당했다!





그리고 이행법안에 동봉되어 제출된 행정조치계획에는 다음과 같은 글이 있습니다.

서문에서 발췌

This Statement describes significant administrative actions proposed to implement U.S. obligations under the Agreement. The Statement also describes the pertinent provisions of the implementing bill, explaining how the bill changes or affects existing law, and stating why those provisions are necessary or appropriate to implement the Agreement.

In addition, incorporated into this Statement are two other statements required under section 2105(a) of the TPA Act: (1) an explanation of how the implementing bill and proposed administrative action will change or affect existing law; and (2) a statement setting forth the reasons why the implementing bill and proposed administrative action are necessary or appropriate to carry out the Agreement. The Agreement does not change the provisions of any agreement the United States has previously negotiated with Korea.

요지 - FTA 보충하는 법안입니다.



1. Implementing Bill

c. Relationship to Federal Law

Section 102(a) of the bill establishes the relationship between the Agreement and U.S. law. The implementing bill, including the authority granted to federal agencies to promulgate implementing regulations, is intended to bring U.S. law fully into compliance with U.S. obligations under the Agreement, and to make other changes that are necessary or appropriate to implement the Agreement. The bill accomplishes those objectives with respect to federal legislation by amending existing federal statutes that would otherwise be inconsistent with the Agreement, amending existing federal laws that are necessary or appropriate to implement the Agreement, and, in certain instances, by creating entirely new provisions of law.

Section 102(a) clarifies that no provision of the Agreement will be given effect under domestic law if it is inconsistent with federal law, including provisions of federal law enacted or amended by the bill. Section 102(a) will not prevent implementation of federal statutes consistent with the Agreement, where permissible under the terms of such statutes. Rather, the section reflects the Congressional view that necessary changes in federal statutes should be specifically enacted rather than provided for in a blanket preemption of federal statutes by the Agreement.

The Administration has made every effort to include all laws in the implementing bill and to identify all administrative actions in this Statement that must be changed in order to conform with the new U.S. rights and obligations arising from the Agreement. Those include both regulations resulting from statutory changes in the bill itself and changes in laws, regulations, rules, and orders that can be implemented without a change in the underlying U.S. statute.

Accordingly, at this time it is the expectation of the Administration that no changes in existing federal law, rules, regulations, or orders other than those specifically indicated in the implementing bill and this Statement will be required to implement the new international obligations that the United States will assume under the Agreement. This is without prejudice to the President’s continuing responsibility and authority to carry out U.S. law and agreements. As experience under the Agreement is gained over time, other or different administrative actions may be taken in accordance with applicable law to implement the Agreement. If additional action is called for, the Administration will seek legislation from Congress or, if a change in regulation is required, follow normal agency procedures for amending regulations.

요지 - 네, 연방법에 어긋나는 FTA조항은 효력 없는 거 맞아요. 그래서 연방법을 개정합니다.






결론

1. 이행법안만 읽으면 이명박 매국노입니다.

2. 함께 제출된 행정조치계획에서 FTA에 저촉되는 연방법을 모두 개정했습니다. 따라서 이행법안에서 언급한 [연방법에 어긋나는 FTA 규정은]... 이하 부분은 해당사항이 없게 됩니다.

3. 그러니까 이행법안을 가지고는 까지 맙시다. 안 그래도 날치기다 내곡동 사저다 하며 욕 먹을 일 많은 가카찡인데 이런 걸로 또 욕 먹으면 얼마나 장수하실 지 두렵습니다.