ALSA 2025 meeting

Abstract：
Article 6(1) of South Korea’s Constitution grants treaties and customary international law domestic legal effect, yet constitutional jurisprudence remains reluctant to directly apply international human rights norms, often relegating them to peripheral references. This conservative approach constrains fundamental rights protection and contradicts constitutional commitments. To bridge this gap, this study examines procedural reforms enabling more robust engagement with international human rights standards in constitutional adjudication.

Focusing on standing requirements, procedural frameworks for norm invocation, judicial gatekeeping practices, and evidentiary treatment of international materials, the analysis employs comparative and case analysis methods. Key proposals include broadening locus standi for rights claims, creating dedicated procedural channels for human rights arguments, and developing clear evidentiary standards for international sources. These reforms aim to transform the Korean Constitutional Court into an institution capable of meaningful dialogue between domestic and international law.