No Disabled Vehicles at Driver's License Test Centers... Constitutional Court Rules "No Violation of Equality Rights"

원본보기 아이콘

[Asia Economy Reporter Baek Kyunghwan] The Constitutional Court has ruled that the failure to provide vehicles for people with disabilities at the driver's license test center does not violate the Constitution.

On the 10th, the Constitutional Court announced that it dismissed the constitutional complaint filed by Mr. A, who claimed that "the Road Traffic Authority's failure to provide motorcycles for functional tests for people with disabilities at the license test center infringed on the right to equality," with a 5 (unconstitutional) to 4 (dismissal) vote.

Mr. A, who injured his leg in an accident, went to the Seoul Western Driver's License Test Center in July 2015 to obtain a Class 2 small vehicle driver's license but was unable to take the test because a motorcycle suitable for the functional test for people with disabilities was not provided. Mr. A filed a constitutional complaint in February 2016, arguing that although he is a physically disabled person allowed to obtain a driver's license under the Road Traffic Act Enforcement Rules, not being provided with a motorcycle for the functional test violated his right to equality.

The Constitutional Court's decision was somewhat divided. Justices Lee Seon-ae, Lee Seok-tae, Kim Ki-young, Moon Hyung-bae, and Lee Mi-seon opined that the Road Traffic Authority's failure to provide motorcycles for functional tests for people with disabilities infringed on the basic rights of people with disabilities and was unconstitutional. They pointed out that the state and local governments have an obligation to provide means for physically disabled persons to take the driver's license test on equal terms with non-disabled persons, and that the Road Traffic Authority also bears this obligation.

However, Justices Yoo Nam-seok, Lee Eun-ae, Lee Jong-seok, and Lee Young-jin expressed the opinion of dismissal, stating that "specific affirmative obligations beyond those stipulated in the enforcement decree cannot be directly derived at the legal level." Accordingly, the Constitutional Court dismissed the case, noting that the number of justices voting for unconstitutionality (6) was not met.

© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.