being collected, and if 12,016 signatures are obtained by Feb. 25, 2023, it will be presented as an agenda for the regional council. Chungcheongnam-do has experienced human rights ordinances being abolished and re-enacted once in 2018. Regarding this situation, on Oct. 18, the National Council of Human Rights Committees of Metropolitan Governments issued a statement criticizing the abolition of the Daegu Regional Human Rights Committee and urging the enactment of the ‘Framework Act on Human Rights Policy’ containing regulations related to the establishment of human rights organizations in local governments. The Commissioner of the NHRCK also issued a statement expressing regret over the movement to abolish the ‘Human Rights Protection and Human Rights Promotion Committee’ in some metropolitan and local governments and hope that local governments can play an important role in reviewing the value of human rights in Korean society and strengthening the regional human rights protection system. B) Challenges and Limitations of the Regional Human Rights Systems The regional human rights systems can be seen as consisting of human rights ordinances in the normative aspect and human rights organizations and departments dedicated to human rights in the organizational aspect. The local human rights organizations are composed of the Human Rights Committee, Human Rights Center, and Human Rights Relief Organizations (names vary by local government, such as human rights protection officers, human rights defenders, and human rights investigators) according to their unique functions and roles. In addition, the departments dedicated to human rights in administrative agencies carry out human rights affairs of local government administration and play a role in implementing the recommendations of human rights organizations. Regarding the abolition of the human rights ordinance in Chungcheongnam-do, those who demand the abolition or amendment of the ordinance claim that the current human rights ordinance contains wrong concept of human rights.671) Moreover, in the course of the actual 671) The gist of the petitioner's argument for the abolition of the ordinance is that the "Chungnam Human Rights Ordinance" is a false human rights concept (sexual orientation, gender identity, various family types, ideology, criminal record, guarantee of other religions, etc.) reflected in the education, assessment and policy, etc., and social instability due to the increase in terrorist crimes caused by the increase in Muslims in Europe. Also included is the opinion that it is inappropriate for local governments to enact ordinances without legal grounds, since 274