식민지 통치원리로서 ‘식민지특수사정론’의 관철과 위임입법 (The Argument of “Special Circumstances for a Colonized State”(植民地特殊事情論) as a Ruling principle during the Japanese Occupation, and Delegated/Entrusted Legislation(委任立法))

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국역사연구회
· 수록지 정보 : 역사와 현실 / 124호 / 405 ~ 444페이지
· 저자명 : 윤민혁

초록

‘식민지특수사정론’은 식민지의 역사적, 문화적, 자연적 이질성을 강조하고, 식민지민의 저항을 의미하는 ‘현지의 정세’를 근거로 식민본국과 구분된 통치 형식, 즉 위임입법을 요구하는 것이었다. 식민지총독(부)의 독자성을 핵심으로 하는 식민지특수사정론은 식민지 통치 기간 내내 부상하고 가라앉기를 반복했다. 본고는 그 첫 국면이라고 할 수 있는 1895년부터 1911년 사이의 논쟁을 검토했다.
이를 통해 두 가지 측면을 강조했다. 하나는 식민지총독의 위임입법권이 개별 총독(부)의 위상에 근거하는 것이 아닌 식민지 통치 경험, 즉 대만에서 조선에 이르는 통치원리의 구축 ‘과정’ 속에서 정립될 수 있었다는 점이다. 다른 하나는 식민지특수사정론과 식민지총독의 위임입법권이 내지연장(식민본국 헌법과 법률의 확장) 가능성을 전제로 하되 이를 유예함으로써 비로소 가능했다는 점이다. 특히 1911년 단계에서 식민지특수사정론은 더욱 정교화되었고, 내지연장의 가능성을 원천적으로 차단하고자 했다.
식민지 통치원리로서 식민지특수사정론이 관철되는 과정을 검토하는 것은 궁극적으로 ‘내지연장주의’의 재검토 요구로 확장된다. 그 계기라고 여겨지는 3.1운동은 그 자체로 식민지 ‘현지의 정세’였기 때문이다. 1919년 3.1운동 직후 식민지특수사정론의 폐기 요구와 내지연장의 도입 시도는 그 자체로 식민지 통치원리의 자기모순을 보여준다.

영어초록

The Argument of “Special Circumstances for a Colonized State”(植民地特殊事情論) was made to emphasize the colony(Korea)’s different history, culture and natural environment from the mainland(Japan). It was also argued because of the ‘Situation on the Ground’ (which usually meant the colony population’s resistance), with the intention of demanding a different type of ruling other than methods used to govern the mainland. In essence, required by the people who supported this argument was a legislation process entrusted to the colony itself. The argument focused on promoting the necessity of autonomous functions of the Joseon Governor General office continued on and off repeatedly during Japan’s occupation of the Korean peninsula. The first phase, which continued since the year 1895 through 1911, is examined in this article.
Two things were revealed by the examination. First, the Governor-General office’s independent legislation, based on rights delegated from the mainland, was never suggested based on any individual Governor-General office’s status, but was actually based on years of experiences of Japan’s colonial ruling of regions -from Taiwan to Joseon- and the rules and principles gathered through that experience. Second, the “Special Circumstances for a Colonized State” argument and the ‘Entrusted Legislation’ of the Governor-General office was made possible only after acknowledging the possibility/necessity of extending the mainland’s law and regulations to the colonized regions, which was then followed by a decision to postpone such extension for a while. As of 1911, however, the “Argument” was more refined, with the intention to ever block the possibility of both the mainland and the colonized regions being ruled with the same law.
It is necessary to examine more of this “Argument” and how it was eventually implemented in Joseon, as it would give us the opportunity to reexamine the previous notion that the mainland Japan’s law was extended to the ruling of the colonized Korean peninsula. The March 1st Movement in 1919, which was indeed a “Situation on the Ground,” served as a catalyst for the launch of such argument. On the other hand, the fact that there were calls for the abolishment of the “Argument,” and even attempts to “extend mainland laws,” right after the March 1st Movement, ironically shows us that the colonial uthorities were operating with no established principles.

참고자료

· 없음