청와대 국민청원 제도가 개설된 지 3년이 지났다. 새로운 국민소통 플랫폼이라는 평가와 함께 비판도 쇄도하고 있으나 청원권의 부흥으로 이어졌다는 점에서는 공감대가 형성되어 있다. 청와대 국민청원은 그 내용에 비추어 보았을 때, 헌법과 청원법에서 규정하고 있는 청원에 해당된다. 하지만, 청와대는 국민청원이 국민과의 ‘직접 소통’ 차원에서 운영하고 있는 참여게시판 성격으로 헌법이나 청원법상 청원과 다른 의미를 지니고 있다고 주장하고 있다.
청와대 국민청원이 명확한 법적 근거가 없이 운영되면서 법제도적 과제와 개선 방안들이 거론되고 있다. 구체적으로, 법적근거 결여로 인한 폐쇄적 운영, 권력집중 및 권력남용의 통로로 악용, 일부 세력의 다중 투표 등을 통한 여론 왜곡 가능성, 부실한 답변이 문제점으로 지적되고 있다. 이를 개선하기 위해, 법적 근거와 명확한 가이드라인 마련을 통한 권력분립에 부합한 제도 개선, 여론의 객관적 반영을 위한 중복 동의 차단 및 토론 공간 확보, 답변 충실화 및 응답 구조의 체계화, 선거기간 동안 국민청원제도의 악용 방지 위한 실명제 채택 등을 검토할 필요가 있다.
국회는 2020년부터 국회판 온라인청원 제도인 국민동의청원을 자체적으로 운영하기 시작했으며, 60년 만에 청원법을 전면개정하여 국민의 청원권을 대폭 강화했다. 이에, 청와대 국민청원제도의 도입과 운영현황, 법제도적 과제를 검토하고, 최종적으로 집단적 갈등을 동반하는 여러 사회적 의제들을 넓고 깊게 담아낼 수 있는 지속가능한 공론장을 구성할 수 있는 개선방안들을 살펴보고자 한다.
특히, 청와대 국민청원제도가 신설될 때 기대했던 기능이 무력화되지 않기 위해서는 청와대의 역할이 근본적으로 재구성되어야 한다. 청와대가 만기친람형 해결자로 나서는 것이 아닌, 정부 부처 및 기관들이 나서 해당 현안들을 적극적으로 대응할 수 있도록 독려 하는 조율자로서의 역할에 충실해야 한다. 청와대를 매개로 대통령이 국민 여론과 직접 연결되는 단선 구조만으로는 내각과 정당, 국회의 자율적인 기능이 훼손되며 대통령 권력을 뒷받침하는 제도적 기반이 약화됨을 유의해야 한다.
The Blue House of the Republic of Korea launched an online petition system in August 2017. While some criticize the system of deepening political divisions, the online petition system has served as a new communication platform. The system has led to the rejuvenation of the constitutional right to petition. The contents of the online petition system can be constructed as an exercise of the right to petition protected by the Constitution and the Petition Act. However, the Blue House has argued that the online petition system is merely a participatory mechanism that should be interpreted differently from the Constitution and the Petition Act. Consequently, related provisions of the Constitution and the Petition Act does not apply to the online petition system. As the Blue House online petition system is being managed under no concrete legislative basis, numerous legal institutional improvements have been suggested. Specifically, many have pointed to the arbitrary operations without any legal constraints, abuse of the system to concentrate power to the Blue House, possibility of distorting public opinion by a select minority, insufficient feedback as the system's shortcomings. As improvements, there is the need to legislate clear requirements and limits of the system, fix loopholes that allow repetitive petitioning, allow debate on the issues, form a system that makes sure proper authorities provide substantial responses, and adopt a temporary real-name system during elections. The National Assembly started its own online petition system in January 2020. The Petition Act was amended entirely for the first time in 60 years in order to fully protect the constitutional right to petition. In light of such events, there is the need to reflect the history of the Blue House online petition system and seek legal institutional improvements. Ultimately, the improved Blue House online petition system can contribute in forming a public sphere where political and social agendas can be resolved.
The Blue House of the Republic of Korea launched an online petition system in August 2017. While some criticize the system of deepening political divisions, the online petition system has served as a new communication platform. The system has led to the rejuvenation of the constitutional right to petition. The contents of the online petition system can be constructed as an exercise of the right to petition protected by the Constitution and the Petition Act. However, the Blue House has argued that the online petition system is merely a participatory mechanism that should be interpreted differently from the Constitution and the Petition Act. Consequently, related provisions of the Constitution and the Petition Act does not apply to the online petition system. As the Blue House online petition system is being managed under no concrete legislative basis, numerous legal institutional improvements have been suggested. Specifically, many have pointed to the arbitrary operations without any legal constraints, abuse of the system to concentrate power to the Blue House, possibility of distorting public opinion by a select minority, insufficient feedback as the system's shortcomings. As improvements, there is the need to legislate clear requirements and limits of the system, fix loopholes that allow repetitive petitioning, allow debate on the issues, form a system that makes sure proper authorities provide substantial responses, and adopt a temporary real-name system during elections. The National Assembly started its own online petition system in January 2020. The Petition Act was amended entirely for the first time in 60 years in order to fully protect the constitutional right to petition. In light of such events, there is the need to reflect the history of the Blue House online petition system and seek legal institutional improvements. Ultimately, the improved Blue House online petition system can contribute in forming a public sphere where political and social agendas can be resolved.
