As in the negotiations for the 「Convention on the Biological Diversity」 adopted in 1992, the need of regulating biotechnology was claimed and the provision of examining the need of the protocol was included (the Article 19, paragraph 3 of the Convention), the 「Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the convention on Biological Diversity」(hereinafter referred to as Biosafety Protocol)was adopted in 2000 through various working groups, etc. This Protocol was made mainly for the purpose of preparing the international frameworks such as the procedures, etc. for the import country to determine the import of the Living Modified Organism (LMO) by assessing the impacts of LMO modified by modern bio-technologies on the preservation of the biological diversity and the sustainable utilization prior to their movement which transcends the international boundaries. And, the supplementary protocol has been adopted in 2010 over 6 years ever since the international negotiation started on the Article 27「Liability and Redress」 of the Biosafety Protocol, particularly related to the liability and the redress from the damages caused by LMO, which is so called Nagoya-Kualalupur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (hereinafter referred to as Supplementary Protocol). While the Biosafety Protocol has a nature of regulating and controling the international movement of LMO, the Supplementary Protocol is deemed to establish the international normative system to compensate the damages caused by international movement of LMO. Considering such international circumstances, our country also enacted recently the 「Act on International Movement of LMO」, and currently is conducting the examination to reflect the contents of the Supplementary Protocol in the domestic legislations. Therefore, in this article, the implications and the problems in our laws shall be examined by reviewing the discussions related to the Japanese laws in the aspect of comparative law. As the discussion order, first, the Cartagena Law in Japan, which is considered as enforcement law of the Biosafety Protocol in Japan, shall be examined, secondly, the domestic discussions related to the liability and redress from the damages caused by LMO in Japan according to the contents of Supplementary Protocol shall be examined, and finally, based on them, the implications provided to our laws and problems in interpreting our laws shall be examined. Since Japan rectified the Biosafety Protocol in November, 2003, and the Biosafety Protocol has been effective domestically at the same time as the implementation of Cartagena Law in February, 2004, the Cartagena Law is deemed to be the enforcement law of the Biosafety Protocol in Japan. However, since the Cartagena Law has natures of administrative legislation in the procedural aspects related to the import and export of LMO, currently, there is no law or regulation available in the civil aspects of 「Liability and Redress」, which are the main focus of the Supplementary Protocol agreed in 2010. It is still in discussion whether this problem will be handled by interpreting the existing laws or by enacting new legislation, that is, by enacting the damage compensation law as a special law. In this article, considering the current situation in Japan, the matters related to the interpretation of the existing Japanese laws shall be examined, and based on such examinations, the implications in our laws and the interpretation problems of our laws shall be discussed.
KCI 후보
일본의 카르타헤나법과 유전자변형생물체로 인한 손해배상
The Cartagena Law in Japan and the Damage Compensation Caused by Living Modified Organism(LMO)
과학기술법연구
약어 : Hannam Journal of Law&Technology
2011 vol.17, no.2, pp.113 - 155
DOI : 10.32430/ilst.2011.17.2.113
발행기관 : 한남대학교 과학기술법연구원
연구분야 : 법학
Copyright © 한남대학교 과학기술법연구원
약어 : Hannam Journal of Law&Technology
2011 vol.17, no.2, pp.113 - 155
DOI : 10.32430/ilst.2011.17.2.113
발행기관 : 한남대학교 과학기술법연구원
연구분야 : 법학
Copyright © 한남대학교 과학기술법연구원
Living Modified Organism (LMO), Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the convention on Biological Diversity, Nagoya-Kualalupur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, damages, the Cartagena Law in Japan
유전자변형생물체(LMO), 바이오안정성의정서, 나고야・쿠알라룸푸르 추가의정서, 카르타헤나법, 손해배상
유전자변형생물체(LMO), 바이오안정성의정서, 나고야・쿠알라룸푸르 추가의정서, 카르타헤나법, 손해배상
- 1. [단행본] 金曾漢 / 1986 / 註解債權各則(III) / 韓國司法行政學會
- 2. [단행본] 内田貴 / 1997 / 民法II債権各論 / 東京大学出版部
- 3. [단행본] 平井宜雄 / 2006 / 債権各論II不法行為 / 法律講座双書
- 4. [단행본] 平井宜雄 / 1971 / 損害賠償法の理論 / 東京大学出版会
- 5. [단행본] 石田穣 / 1977 / 損害賠償法の再構成 / 東京大学出版会
- 6. [단행본] 前田達明 / 1980 / 民法VI2 / 青林書院新社
- 7. [단행본] 前田達明 / 1978 / 判例不法行為 / 清林書院新社
- 8. [단행본] 前田達明 / 1978 / 不法行為帰責論 / 倉文社
- 9. [학술지] 四宮和夫 / 1983 / 不法行為における後続侵害の帰責基準 / 学協会百周年記念論文集 / 3
- 10. [기타] 法典調査会 / 民事速記録40巻
- 11. [단행본] 末川博 / 1944 / 権利侵害論 / 日本評論社
- 12. [기타] 加藤一郎 / 1984 / 不法行為
- 13. [단행본] 有泉享 / 判民昭和十二年度六事件(判例民事法
- 14. [단행본] 平野裕之 / 2005 / 間接被害者の判例総合解説 / 新山社
타입을 선택하세요
일본의 카르타헤나법과 유전자변형생물체로 인한 손해배상
@article{ART001621297},
author={
곽민희
},
title={
일본의 카르타헤나법과 유전자변형생물체로 인한 손해배상
},
journal={
과학기술법연구
},
issn={1226-4148},
year={2011},
number={2},
pages={113 - 155},
doi={10.32430/ilst.2011.17.2.113},
url={http://dx.doi.org/10.32430/ilst.2011.17.2.113}
TY - JOUR
AU - 곽민희
TI - 일본의 카르타헤나법과 유전자변형생물체로 인한 손해배상
T2 - 과학기술법연구
PY - 2011
VL - 17
IS - 2
PB - 한남대학교 과학기술법연구원
SP - 113 - 155
SN - 1226-4148
AB - As in the negotiations for the 「Convention on the Biological Diversity」 adopted in 1992, the need of regulating biotechnology was claimed and the provision of examining the need of the protocol was included (the Article 19, paragraph 3 of the Convention), the 「Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the convention on Biological Diversity」(hereinafter referred to as Biosafety Protocol)was adopted in 2000 through various working groups, etc. This Protocol was made mainly for the purpose of preparing the international frameworks such as the procedures, etc. for the import country to determine the import of the Living Modified Organism (LMO) by assessing the impacts of LMO modified by modern bio-technologies on the preservation of the biological diversity and the sustainable utilization prior to their movement which transcends the international boundaries. And, the supplementary protocol has been adopted in 2010 over 6 years ever since the international negotiation started on the Article 27「Liability and Redress」 of the Biosafety Protocol, particularly related to the liability and the redress from the damages caused by LMO, which is so called Nagoya-Kualalupur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (hereinafter referred to as Supplementary Protocol). While the Biosafety Protocol has a nature of regulating and controling the international movement of LMO, the Supplementary Protocol is deemed to establish the international normative system to compensate the damages caused by international movement of LMO. Considering such international circumstances, our country also enacted recently the 「Act on International Movement of LMO」, and currently is conducting the examination to reflect the contents of the Supplementary Protocol in the domestic legislations. Therefore, in this article, the implications and the problems in our laws shall be examined by reviewing the discussions related to the Japanese laws in the aspect of comparative law. As the discussion order, first, the Cartagena Law in Japan, which is considered as enforcement law of the Biosafety Protocol in Japan, shall be examined, secondly, the domestic discussions related to the liability and redress from the damages caused by LMO in Japan according to the contents of Supplementary Protocol shall be examined, and finally, based on them, the implications provided to our laws and problems in interpreting our laws shall be examined. Since Japan rectified the Biosafety Protocol in November, 2003, and the Biosafety Protocol has been effective domestically at the same time as the implementation of Cartagena Law in February, 2004, the Cartagena Law is deemed to be the enforcement law of the Biosafety Protocol in Japan. However, since the Cartagena Law has natures of administrative legislation in the procedural aspects related to the import and export of LMO, currently, there is no law or regulation available in the civil aspects of 「Liability and Redress」, which are the main focus of the Supplementary Protocol agreed in 2010. It is still in discussion whether this problem will be handled by interpreting the existing laws or by enacting new legislation, that is, by enacting the damage compensation law as a special law. In this article, considering the current situation in Japan, the matters related to the interpretation of the existing Japanese laws shall be examined, and based on such examinations, the implications in our laws and the interpretation problems of our laws shall be discussed.
KW - Living Modified Organism (LMO), Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the convention on Biological Diversity, Nagoya-Kualalupur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, damages, the Cartagena Law in Japan
DO - 10.32430/ilst.2011.17.2.113
UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.32430/ilst.2011.17.2.113
ER -
곽민희 (2011). 일본의 카르타헤나법과 유전자변형생물체로 인한 손해배상. 과학기술법연구, 17(2), 113 - 155.
곽민희 . 2011, “일본의 카르타헤나법과 유전자변형생물체로 인한 손해배상”, vol.17, no.2, pp. 113 - 155. Available from: doi:10.32430/ilst.2011.17.2.113
곽민희. “일본의 카르타헤나법과 유전자변형생물체로 인한 손해배상“ 과학기술법연구 17.2 pp. 113 - 155. (2011): 113.
곽민희 . 일본의 카르타헤나법과 유전자변형생물체로 인한 손해배상 과학기술법연구 [Internet]. 2011; 17(2), : 113 - 155. Available from: doi:10.32430/ilst.2011.17.2.113
곽민희 . “일본의 카르타헤나법과 유전자변형생물체로 인한 손해배상“ 과학기술법연구 17, no.2, (2011): 113 - 155. doi: :10.32430/ilst.2011.17.2.113