Testimonies Testifier ID Inminban chiefs knock on the doors frequently to check the
number of people inside. In a People’s Unit, monitoring becomes a routine not only for the informants from Ministry of People’s Security and Ministry of State Security but also for the neighbors living next to each other.
NKHR2018000124 2018-10-27
The testifier’s father went missing in 2014 after leaving the house for China for work. Since then a watchman started to monitor the house. MPS officers visited the house about once a month and questioned the tesifier if he/she did not go to work.
NKHR2018000003 2018-03-12
B. Violation of Privacy through Unlawful House
permanent/non-permanent investigation organizations (geuruppa), etc., have long been common practice.
Many North Korean defectors have testified that unlawful house searches are common. In North Korea, house searches are supposedly only possible when a search warrant is issued by the Director of Prosecutors of the prosecutor’s office, and approved by the regional Safety Committee. However, in most cases, the people’s unit chief and MPS officers enter into and search a house without a warrant, stating that it is for the purpose of censoring
“impure” recordings, etc.177 As an example, there was a case where the Group 109 ambushed a house at 5am for a search and blatantly demanded a bribe.178 In particular, in the border region known as the Yeonseon area, illegal house search and arbitrary interference on communications have been frequently conducted, allegedly to prevent defection. There was a case in which a defector was sentenced to one month at a labor training camp (rodongdanryundae) because the testifier was caught receiving a phone call from China, from the mother of a friend, during a random house search without warrant.179 In August 2015, there were house searches by the Inminban chiefs and MPS officers every five to seven days to search for fugitives in the Rimyongsugu Workers’
District, Samjiyeon County, Yanggang Province.180Those residing
NKHR2017000081 2017-09-25.
NKHR2018000069 2018-07-14.
NKHR2015000085 2015-04-21.
in the border regions are more directly affected by the reinforced surveillance system and are questioned randomly almost every month.181
Beginning around 2015, there have been consistent cases where people raised objections or protested against illegal house search.
In the 2018 survey, there were, albeit limited, testimonies that showed North Koreans’ improved awareness of human rights. Objections and protests are especially stronger and more frequent among the younger generations than the older generations. In some cases, the search squad gave up the search and retreated due to the harsh protest.
TableⅡ-33 Cases of Objecting to an Illegal House Search
Testimonies Testifier ID
The testifier demanded to see a warrant when faced with a house search.
NKHR2017000099 2017-10-23 In 2015, the testifier demanded a warrant to the squad team
conducting a house search in Onsong County, North Hamgyeong Province and protested that a house search without a warrant was a human rights violation.
NKHR2017000042 2017-07-03 In 2016, Group 109 searched the testifier’s house for holding
rebellious recordings. The testifier protested, saying they did not have a warrant and that the Inminban chief was not present. The younger generation is particularly active in such protests. When the testifier argued that this was an abuse of power, the squad returned, without carrying out the search.
NKHR2018000001 2018-03-12
NKHR2016000063 2016-05-03.
NKHR2016000052 2016-04-19.
C. Evaluation
Although the right to privacy is stated in the Constitution, North Korean people’s private lives are rarely respected. In particular, it seems that surveillance along the border regions and social control have been reinforced since Kim Jong Un came to power. In relation to this, house searches to crack down fugitives are being conducted, and arbitrary communication interference has increased.
Moreover, the extensive and organized surveillance and control over the people’s private lives by the State has been in place for a long time, demonstrating the seriousness of the situation. Privacy surveillance systems still exist at an institutional level as seen in
“five household surveillance system,” the “people’s unit system,”
and the system of holding a “Life Review Session.” In addition, testimonies from numerous individuals regarding unlawful house searches of residential space show that the inviolability of residential space is seriously infringed upon in the everyday lives of the people.
9
Right to Freedom of
Thought, Conscience, and Religion
The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion is related to the liberty of one’s inner world and constitutes one of the most basic human rights. The basic rights of citizens in a democracy including free expression of belief and freedom to make decisions based on one’s conscience are closely related to the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Article 18 of the UDHR stipulates that “everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion” while Article 18 of the ICCPR mentions the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.
TableⅡ-34 Article 18 of the ICCPR
Paragraph 1
Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.
Paragraph 2 No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.
Paragraph 3
Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
Paragraph 4
The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.
This chapter will now examine the situation regarding the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion by major issues.