生育自主權與司法政治化：以南韓憲法判決為例

Abstract

本研究以南韓司法機關「憲法裁判所」2012年與2019年兩次針對《刑法》人工流產罪的違憲審查為案例，探討司法在高度爭議性的議題中所展現的「司法政治化」現象。相較於以往學界多強調「政治司法化」的研究取向，本文著重分析憲法裁判所在裁決形式與政治意涵上的策略性選擇，透過判決文、大法官組成、國會修法紀錄、媒體報導等比較，研究發現2012年宗教團體發揮保守制衡作用，憲法裁判所以合憲決定回應保守社會主流與宗教團體壓力，展現出司法的自制與對社會保守氛圍的回應；2019年則是在進步政權的協作，及婦女團體透過「生殖正義」的論述、及策略性社會動員影響下，憲法裁判所以「憲法不合致」決定作為政治考量下的妥協策略，回應政權意志與社會變遷的「司法政治化」實踐。 研究進一步發現，國會立法怠惰下未如期完成修法，使人工流產罪於2021年失效，反映立法者選擇「被動廢止」達到罪刑失效之目的，缺乏立法動能下使法律上懸而未決，而衍生許多社會問題，可說是「司法政治化下的結果」。而司法未必能直接帶動制度改革，反而在政黨對立與社會分歧中，使司法淪為替代政治場域的權力競逐平台。2025年尹錫悅遭彈劾、李在明政府將「生育自主與再生產健康」納入國政課題，顯示新一輪立法契機正在形成，但其能否突破法律上懸而未決的狀態，仍取決於政權資本與治理能力。本文結論認為，南韓經驗展現司法、立法與社會力量間的動態互動，體現司法政治化的制度效應。

This study investigates the politicization of the judiciary through two constitutional review cases by the Constitutional Court of Korea in 2012 and 2019 concerning the criminalization of abortion under the Criminal Act. Moving beyond the prevailing focus on the judicialization of politics, this research examines the Court’s strategic choices in decision form and political implications. Through comparative analysis of judicial opinions, judicial composition, legislative records, and media reports, the study finds that in 2012, religious groups exerted conservative pressure, prompting the Court to uphold the abortion law’s constitutionality as a gesture of judicial restraint and alignment with mainstream conservative values. In contrast, the 2019 Decision of Nonconformity with the Constitution was shaped by a progressive administration and feminist advocacy, including the discourse of reproductive justice and social mobilization, signaling a politically calibrated compromise that embodied judicial activism in response to changing societal and governmental expectations. The study further reveals that legislative inaction following the 2019 decision led to the abortion law’s expiration in 2021, resulting in a legal limbo and underscoring how judicial politicization may not produce direct legal reform. Instead, in a polarized political environment, the judiciary may become a surrogate battleground for unresolved political conflict. The 2025 impeachment of South Korea's ex-president Yoon Suk Yeol and the President Lee Jae Myung administration’s incorporation of reproductive rights and reproductive health into national policy suggest a renewed legislative opportunity, though its success hinges on political capital and governance capacity. This study concludes that the South Korean experience illustrates the institutional consequences of the politicization of the judiciary, shaped through the dynamic interplay of judicial, legislative, and societal forces.