In Korean domestic courts, particularly the Constitutional Court,4 there has been a noticeable increase in legal challenges against the President’s conduct of diplomacy. Petitions or applications have been filed in the Court, for example, against the Government’s conclusion of treaties, announcements of joint statement with foreign governments, dispatch of troops overseas, and failure to provide diplomatic protection. Faced with these rather unfamiliar challenges, the Government, as a defendant or respondent, has had to come up with a ‘legal’ defense for what it has so far believed to be ‘political’ matters. The Constitutional Court, for its part, has found itself in the awkward position of addressing foreign affairs issues with potential international implications with less than adequate expertise and knowledge.
The question of how each nation in the Asian region is coping with the above-mentioned issues of diplomacy in its domestic courts deserves attention from both practitioners and academics. Comparative studies will enable us to share insights and wisdom into this subject of growing momentum and importance. Mindful of this, this paper discusses the trend of increasing constitutional litigation in Korea against the Government’s conduct of diplomacy and treaty-conclusion, looks into a few relevant legal issues, and analyzes the reasons behind such an increase in litigation. |