Human Rights
A. Increasing Pressure on North Korea
International Human Rights Regime and North Korean Human Rights Policies
3
th Korea 2010
2006, has adopted resolutions on “North Korean Human Rights”
every year. In the Resolution on North Korean Human Rights adopted at its 13th session in March 2010, the UNHRC sharply condemned the widespread human rights violations in North Korea and stipulated that all grain assistance must be directly distributed to needy civilians. The UNHRC has further agreed to extend for one more year the office of UN special rapporteur, which was due to expire in June of 2010.
North Korean authorities have reacted sensitively to the international community’s calls for the improvement of human rights, because North Korea believed that these calls were intended to undermine the regime’s stability. Roh Moo Hyun Government (2003-2008) had repeatedly failed to participate in, and abstained from, the process of adopting the North Korean human rights resolutions particularly at UN and UNCHR meetings. Thus the government became the target of sharp domestic and international criticisms.
The Lee Myung-bak government in South Korea took a proactive posture for the improvement of human rights in North Korea when it decided to “help resolve inter-Korean humanitarian problems,” including the North Korean human rights issue, as one of its 100 top priority policies. In addition, the Lee Myung- bak government has adopted the strengthening of human rights diplomacy and cultural diplomacy as part of its overall goals. The Lee Myung-bak administration respects and upholds human rights as universal values and on this basis will continue to urge North Korea to improve its human rights situation.15 In this way, the Lee Myung-bak administration has directly expressed its position on
15_ Cheongwadae (Office of the President), “Security and Foreign Policy Visions and Strategies of the Lee Myung-bak Government: A Mature Global State,” (March 2009), p. 16.
I. Human Rights and the Characteristics of the North Korean System
the North Korean human rights issue, while making diplomatic efforts in concert with the international community for the improvement of North Korea’s human rights situation. In a keynote address delivered in March of 2008, the chief Korean delegate to the 7th UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) meeting urged North Korea “to take appropriate actions in response to the concerns the international community has expressed over the human rights situation in North Korea.”
In addition, the Lee Myung-bak government has been actively promoting its human rights diplomacy on the international stage, co-sponsoring the UN General Assembly resolutions on North Korean human rights (in 2008 and 2009) and the UNHRC resolutions on North Korean human rights in March of 2009 and 2010, respectively. Korea-US cooperation to improve North Korean human rights is also being strengthened. During the Korea-US Summit Meeting held in Seoul (Aug. 6, 2008), the two leaders publicly expressed their desire to improve the human rights situation in North Korea, saying in part, “The two Presidents reaffirmed their commitment to improving the human rights situation in North Korea and shared the view that in the process of normalizing relations, meaningful progress should be made on improving North Korea’s human rights record.”
In an effort to increase pressure on North Korea and to urge North Korea to carry out the terms of UNHRC resolutions on North Korean human rights, the UN General Assembly, led by the EU member states, has been adopting relevant resolutions since 2005. South Korea has participated in the General Assembly resolutions on North Korean human rights since November of 2008 (the 63rd UNGA), along with 51 other UN members, including Japan and the EU member states. In this connection,
th Korea 2010
South Korea’s Foreign Ministry in a press release (Nov. 4, 2008) stated, “Human rights are universal values, and as such this issue should be handled on its own merits and independently of other issues.”
Since his appointment in 2004, Dr. Vitit Muntarbhorn, the UN special rapporteur on North Korean human rights, has submitted a report to the UNGA and UNHRC every year. In his 2009 report to UNGA, he observed, “Overall, the human rights situation in North Korea is still very inferior,” pointing out that the grain shortage there has further deteriorated since the second nuclear test prompted sharp reductions in assistance from the international community. He also called upon the international community to redouble pressure on North Korea to guarantee basic and fundamental human rights to all its inhabitants by adopting a
“people-first” instead of a “military-first” policy. In his final report of March 2010 to the UNHRC, he remarked that during his six years of service he made an unmistakable discovery: namely, that the level of the North Korean authorities’ human rights abuses on their own people was so enormous that the situation had become a permanent feature of the society.16
Meanwhile, the UNHRC held its “Universal Periodic Review” meeting for 11 days, Nov. 30th-December 11, 2009, in Geneva.17 During the sixth session of its working group meeting (on December 7th) the group18 reviewed the human rights situation
16_ OHCHR, “Human Rights Council considers Human Rights situations in Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Myanmar,” 2010.3.16.
17_ Every four years from April 2008, the UNHRC through its UPR review system has been reviewing human rights situations in 192 UN member states. During the 6th UPR working-level group session held from Nov. 30- Dec. 11, 2009, the group reviewed human rights situations in 15 countries, including North Korea, Cambodia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Norway.
18_ The Universal Period Review (UPR) “working-level group” is composed of 47 UNHRC member states presided over by the Chair of UNHRC. All UNHRC members and
I. Human Rights and the Characteristics of the North Korean System
in North Korea, and a working group report was adopted on December 9th. North Korea was the first to face such a review since the UPR system was put in place, and the international community conducted public discussions on North Korea’s human rights situation. During this meeting, delegates from a total of 52 member states, including South Korea, participated in the discussion, and North Korean delegates tried to come up with answers.
The South Korean delegation pointed out various problems and recommended a number of improvement measures concerning such issues as North Korea’s restrictions on the political freedoms of its citizens, the gap between the law and reality in the area of freedom of the press, failure to observe the International Bill of Human Rights to which North Korea is a party, promotion of cooperation with members of the international community, and an early resolution of the inter-Korean “separated families” issue.
Delegations from the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Japan, Brazil, Belgium, and the Netherlands mainly raised their concerns over and made recommendations on the issue of North Korea’s human rights violations in the area of civil and political rights. They further urged North Korea to closely cooperate with the international human rights mechanism. In addition, they expressed deep concerns and extended strong recommendations on a number of important human rights issues such as public executions, political concentration camps, on-the-spot executions, unusually cruel punishments of defector-deportees, freedom of movement across borders, the freedoms of religion, assembly, and association, the crime-by-association system, and the lack
“observers” can participate in discussions. In addition to the government delegates, other observers such as members of parliament and of national human rights commissions are also permitted to attend the sessions, but without taking part in the proceedings.
th Korea 2010
of an independent judiciary. Other recommendations included such items as guaranteeing citizens’ access to food (grains), allowing visits by the UN special rapporteur to North Korea, accommodating technical cooperation proposals from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), allowing access by international humanitarian organizations and other NGOs, signing the International Convention against Torture, and creating an independent National Human Rights Commission.
Delegates from Germany, Switzerland, and India raised questions and made recommendations on the inter-Korean
“separated families” issue, and South Korea, Japan and Brazil raised serious concerns over North Korea’s forcible abduction of foreign nationals.
The “working-group report” adopted at the end of the
“Universal Periodic Review”conference contained a total of 167 recommendations.19 Of the total, North Korean authorities have agreed to examine 117 items, and North Korea’s responses to them have been included in the final report adopted by the 13th UNHRC meeting held in March of 2010. Included among the 117 issues North Korea agreed to reexamine were such items as ratification of major human rights covenants, improved cooperation with the international human rights mechanism, paying more respect to the rights to freedom of expression, assembly and association, guaranteeing fair trials for detainees, creation of a National Human Rights Commission, confirmation of the status of “separated family” members, and guarantees for family reunion meetings.
19_ As for further details, see Korean National Human Rights Commission, ed., “A Collection of Materials concerning the Report of the DPRK National Human Rights Commission to the UNHRC UPR Conferenceand the Reports of South Korean delegation and other NGOs and INGOs,” (Seoul: National Human Rights Commission, March 2009), pp. 129-157 (in Korean), and pp. 297-328 (in English).
I. Human Rights and the Characteristics of the North Korean System
However, North Korea refused to accept some 50 demands and charges, such as visits by the UN Special Rapporteur to North Korea and his mission, arbitrary detentions, crimes-by-association, public executions, torture, military training for under-aged children, unusual punishments for defector-deportees, forced (hard) labor, and arbitrary breaches of the independence of the judiciary.
It also refused to accept items regarding the practice of forcible abduction and kidnapping, a moratorium on death sentences, and the release of political prisoners.
The level of criticism on this issue is also rising in many forums and countries, including the United Nations, the United States, the EU, and Japan. In the United States the North Korean human rights issue has been the subject of annual reports of many organizations, including the State Department’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, the Supporting Human Rights and Democracy Report, the annual Trafficking in Persons Report, and the annual International Religious Freedom Report. The US State Department published its annual “Country Report on Human Rights 2009” in February 2009 and March 2010. In these reports, the State Department maintained its assessment of North Korea as a “dictatorial state under the absolute rule of Kim Jong-il” and said the North Korean regime continued to perpetrate a great number of “serious human rights abuses.” As for the North Korean government’s human rights record, the report has downgraded its assessment from “poor” to “deplorable.” In its annual report on the
“trafficking of human persons” released in June of 2009, the State Department gave the lowest possible grade of “third tier” to North Korea, which meant North Korea failed to meet even the lowest standard required under the TVPA (Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000). Since 2003, when the report was first published,
th Korea 2010
North Korea has consistently been classified in the lowest and worst ranking. In the 2009 Report on Religious Freedom released in October 2009, North Korea was given the status of “Country of Particular Concern,” which means that North Korea is oppressing the freedoms of religion and thought as defined in the International Religious Freedom Act. North Korea has remained at the lowest level for 9 years, since 2001.
International non-governmental organizations continue to monitor and urge the improvement of the human rights situation in North Korea. In its Annual Report 2008, Amnesty International (AI) pointed out that organized human rights abuses continue in North Korea, including executions of political prisoners or economic criminals by hanging or firing squad. It also reported that individuals engaged in religious activities could be detained, tortured, or sometimes executed for their actions. In its Annual Report 2009, AI reported that a total of 15 North Koreans were
“publicly executed” in what were intended as warnings to other citizens about the danger of practicing religion in North Korea.
In recent years, the international community has strengthened mutual cooperation over the human rights situation in North Korea. The international community is deeply worried about the North Korean authorities’ widespread and systematic human rights abuses, which continue to rage in spite of the deteriorating living conditions of the North Korean citizens. The international community is well aware that the human rights situation in North Korea is absolutely horrible. Accordingly, the level of cooperation between international organizations and related international human rights NGOs is rapidly expanding. It has also been pointed out that UN Member States should not stop at simply adopting North Korean human rights resolutions or raising critical voices.
I. Human Rights and the Characteristics of the North Korean System
Indeed, they should go beyond these steps and take concrete improvement measures. In short, the perception is growing that unless concrete measures are taken quickly to improve the worsening human rights situation, it will never be possible to provide the necessary protective measures to the North Korean people.