A constitutional complaint filed on the grounds that regulations on the Paldang water source protection zone infringe residents' basic rights was dismissed by the Constitutional Court on the 27th. The court said the petition for adjudication was inadmissible. The proceedings ended without a hearing.
The Constitutional Court on this day unanimously dismissed, with all nine justices concurring, the constitutional complaint seeking review of Article 7, Paragraph 6, of the Water Supply and Waterworks Installation Act and related provisions. It is a conclusion reached 5 years and 1 month after Gyeonggi Namyangju city and residents of Joan-myeon in Namyangju filed a constitutional complaint in Oct. 2020.
On July 9, 1975, the government designated 158.8 square kilometers across four cities and counties—Namyangju, Gwangju, Yangpyeong, and Hanam in Gyeonggi Province, which border the North Han River in the upper reaches of the Han River—as the Paldang water source protection zone to supply clean drinking water to residents of the Seoul metropolitan area. As a result, the installation of buildings or structures is strictly restricted in this area. Operating restaurants or pensions is also not allowed.
Joan-myeon, where residents filed this constitutional complaint for adjudication, has 84% of its total area falling within the Paldang water source regulated area. Residents there argued that excessive regulations infringed the constitutionally guaranteed freedom to choose an occupation, property rights, and the right to equality.
However, the Constitutional Court found that this constitutional complaint failed to meet legal requirements. First, it viewed Namyangju city's petition for adjudication as inadmissible. This is because a local government cannot be a bearer of basic rights under the Constitution. A constitutional complaint may be filed by a person whose constitutional basic rights have been infringed, and the city has no such rights to be infringed.
The court also found that the residents' constitutional complaint did not comply with the filing period. According to the Constitutional Court, a constitutional complaint must be filed within 90 days from the date the petitioner becomes aware that a law or regulation has infringed basic rights, and within one year from the date the law or regulation took effect. The court determined that the claimants failed to meet the deadline because more than one year had passed since the point at which their basic rights were allegedly infringed.