Showing posts with label DPRK. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DPRK. Show all posts

3/23/2016

The Inaugural Fred Iklé Lecture Featuring Justice Michael Kirby and Roberta Cohen





CENTER FOR STRATEGIC & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

WASHINGTON D.C.

FEBRUARY 19, 2016

NORTH KOREA: THE HUMAN RIGHTS AND SECURITY NEXUS






INTRODUCTION TO THE INAUGURAL FRED IKLÉ LECTURE
By Roberta Cohen, Co-Chair Emeritus, HRNK

It gives me great pleasure to introduce the first Fred Iklé Lecture sponsored by the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea (HRNK). This lecture is to become an annual HRNK event to honor Fred Iklé as principal founder and intellectual architect of our organization and its first chair. When HRNK was established in 2001, Dr. Iklé was well known as a defense and foreign policy specialist and a nuclear strategist. But what was not so well known was his passionate interest in promoting democracy and human rights in countries where people were closed off from their basic freedoms–in particular North Korea. He was one of the first to recognize that because North Korea was so isolated, a research and advocacy organization was needed to document the human rights situation and draw international attention to it. As Chair, he kept HRNK focused and steered a tight ship. HRNK went on to produce groundbreaking reports on North Korea’s prison camps, the plight of refugees, and the devastating famine. He saw the linkage between human rights deprivation and peace and security, which was recalled in a eulogy by NED President Carl Gershman, another distinguished co-founder of HRNK. 

Further, Dr. Iklé recognized the importance of broad based bi-partisan support to strengthen undertakings on human rights in North Korea. In founding HRNK, he initially joined hands with Stephen Solarz, a well-known former Democratic Congressman who had visited North Korea and later became Co-chair of our committee. The cultivation of a broad spectrum of political support has contributed immensely to HRNK’s effectiveness. 

3/18/2016

The Special Rapporteur on DPRK Ends his Term with Calls for Group of Experts on Accountability


By Christine Chung

Christine Chung is a Senior Advisor to the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea and the former Political Advisor to the Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. As a human rights officer for the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, she managed the Office's technical cooperation program with China, supported the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, and served desk functions for Northeast and Southeast Asia. Before joining the UN, Ms. Chung established and headed the China field office for the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs. She is currently advising the Leiden Asia Centre on its investigation of forced labor practices involving North Koreans in the European Union.


On Monday, Marzuki Darusman, the current Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), participated in his final interactive dialogue with the Human Rights Council in Geneva. Approaching the limit of two terms, the former Indonesian Attorney General looked back on achievements during his incumbency of the mandate in a 10-minute opening statement. At the start of his first term six years ago, he noted, there was skepticism that the international community could go any further than passing annual resolutions on the human rights situation in North Korea. However, the previous mandate-holder, Thai law professor Vitit Muntarbhorn, had suggested at the end of his term that there was a need for a commission of inquiry for a deeper investigation into the subject. While it took four more years for its establishment through the consensus of the Human Rights Council, the Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in the DPRK (COI) in 2014 delivered definitive findings to focus “unprecedented concern” on the dire situation of human rights. Mr. Darusman argued that the COI, by establishing that crimes against humanity had taken place and were currently being committed, had helped to “re-profile” North Korea within the United Nations system raising its human rights problems to the highest political level and aligning them with concerns about peace and security.

The Special Rapporteur emphasized that the human rights situation in North Korea has not changed at all in the past two years: political prison camps still operate; authorities still carry out torture with impunity; religious believers are still subject to persecution; food insecurity remains rife despite the emergence of markets; slave-like organizing of labor continues while workers are sent abroad to have their earnings confiscated by the state; and victims of kidnapping have not yet been accounted for.

Alluding to recent North Korean ballistic and nuclear provocations, he characterized the country’s external aggression as the flip side of the same coin that expresses itself internally in brutal suppression of human rights. He also noted that workers sent abroad to earn foreign exchange for the regime were subject to “severe labor conditions.” While there has been increasing talk of the need for a peace treaty to resolve the situation on the peninsula, the Special Rapporteur emphasized that accountability must be part of any discussion on unification. The question is not whether there should be accountability, he said, but when and how this will be done. And it is both a Korean and international challenge.

Given North Korea’s highly hierarchical structure, the principle of command and superior responsibility under international criminal law points to the individual culpability of Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un. The Special Rapporteur explicitly named the North Korean leader twice in this context. Mr. Darusman said Kim Jong-un should be tried in a court of law while recalling that the COI had made the recommendation that the Security Council refer the North Korean situation to the International Criminal Court (ICC). He also noted the possibility for universal jurisdiction whereby a third country could undertake judicial proceedings regardless of the nationality of the perpetrators or victims or whether the alleged crimes occurred within its territory. The Special Rapporteur concluded his statement by repeating his recommendation that a three-member group of experts be established to investigate plausible measures to ensure accountability in North Korea.

Following procedure, Vice-President of the Human Rights Council H.E. Mr. Ramón Alberto Morales Quijano (from the Republic of Panama), who was chairing the session, gave the floor to the delegation of the concerned state. As the North Korean delegation was not present, he proceeded to call on the representatives of member states in order of their inscription—activated electronically for one minute at the start of the session. The first to speak was Deputy Head of the European Union (EU) Delegation to the UN in Geneva Dominic Porter who, noting that the COI had presented a major turning point, supported Security Council referral of the North Korean human rights situation to the ICC, encouraged the DPRK to engage with the Special Rapporteur and the field-based structure of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in Seoul, and explained that the DPRK resolution would call for extending the mandate of the Special Rapporteur. Other EU states aligned themselves with the EU statement, including the Republic of Estonia, Ireland, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Portuguese Republic, the Czech Republic, the United Kingdom, the Slovak Republic, the Republic of Lithuania, the Kingdom of Spain, and the French Republic.

The Russian Federation condemned the Special Rapporteur in a particularly harsh statement. Russian representative Dmitry Vorobyev said the usual thanks to the mandate holder are not warranted as he had politicized the process in a non-professional way instead of seeking a normal respectful dialogue. He accused the Special Rapporteur of flagrantly violating the code of conduct for Special Procedures mandate holders by openly calling for regime change. Vorobyev questioned the Special Rapporteur’s suitability for holding the post alleging that he had undermined the whole system. Nevertheless, the representative conceded that Pyongyang has problems with its human rights, but “whipping up confrontation” would not help. In contrast, the United States of America, represented by Special Envoy for North Korean Human Rights Issues Ambassador Robert King, commended the Special Rapporteur’s outstanding accomplishments, expressed disappointment over North Korea’s lack of cooperation with the Special Rapporteur, and noted that the United States is committed to working closely with the international community on improving human rights in North Korea. Other supportive states included the Commonwealth of Australia, the Kingdom of Norway, the Republic of Botswana, New Zealand, and the Republic of Albania.

Given its own history with country-specific mandates, the Republic of Cuba (Cuba) objected to what it described as the “selective and politically motivated” mandate of the Special Rapporteur. Cuba’s representative noted there was no genuine intent to contribute to dialogue and disparaged the establishment of new monitoring mechanisms outside the work of the Human Rights Council. Highlighting the punishment and sanctions imposed on North Korea which deny it the right to peace and development, Cuba’s representative said her country would never support actions to bring about regime change. She said that the best support could be provided through mechanisms of cooperation such as the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) that provide a venue for non-politicized debate. The Islamic Republic of Iran’s representative echoed Cuba’s position calling for dialogue and cooperation while noting that human rights should not be used for political ends and that unilateral coercive measures have negative effects on the civilian population. The Republic of Sudan’s representative emphasized that cooperation with the country was essential, recalling that the DPRK’s second UPR was encouraging as the country had accepted a number of recommendations. The Republic of Belarus’s representative expressed doubts about the establishment of another group of experts above other mechanisms without the consent of the DPRK. The Lao People's Democratic Republic’s representative stated his firm belief in the UPR as the most constructive dialogue forum for any country and took note of the DPRK’s participation in the UPR and high-level segments. The Syrian Arab Republic’s representative claimed that dual standards are in play and that the selective approach to North Korea undermines the Human Rights Council. He said that calling for the dismantling of the power structure violates the principles of the UN and that those who wish to see a change in government are dictating the extension of the mandate. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela called for reconsideration of country-specific mandates.

Of the three states most directly impacted by North Korea, Japan, represented by Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Permanent Representative to the International Organizations in Geneva Junichi Ihara, noting the escalation of provocative actions by North Korea, said that Security Council Resolution 2270 reflects strong international concerns about human rights and the humanitarian situation in the DPRK. He expressed support for the group of three experts idea proposed by the Special Rapporteur and noted its inclusion in the draft resolution co-sponsored by Japan and the EU. The People’s Republic of China’s representative Wang Yi reiterated that equality and mutual respect should be the grounds for engagement with the DPRK. She said that the root cause of the problems was the lack of political trust, a lingering effect of the Cold War, which necessitated negotiating a pathway away from the armistice through dialogue and cooperation. Furthermore, she regretted what she called “inaccuracies” about China in the Special Rapporteur’s report noting that China’s goal has been denuclearization of the peninsula and safeguarding its legitimate security concerns. Representative Wang Yi repeated the Chinese official position that North Koreans in China are not refugees but illegal aliens. She further stated that China has always adhered to Chinese, international, and refugee laws. The Republic of Korea (ROK) expressed full support for the Special Rapporteur and the OHCHR field office in Seoul. ROK Ambassador for Human Rights Jung-Hoon Lee regretted that the DPRK is boycotting Human Rights Council sessions and remarked that if conditions in North Korea are what the government claims, there would be no reason not to unconditionally invite the Special Rapporteur to visit. He also called on all states to respect the principle of non-refoulement.

After interventions by member states, national human rights institutions and nongovernmental organizations got their turn to speak. Human Rights Watch noted the importance of pursuing justice not just for past human rights violations (or “atrocities”) but for sending a message to officials that further abuses now would subject them to prosecution in the future. UN Watch was represented by Gayoung Kim of NK Watch, who detailed ongoing human rights violations of women, including sexual harassment by agents, particularly targeting victims in their 20s. Amnesty International focused on violations of freedom of expression, tightening of border security, and an increase in surveillance. People for Successful Corean Reunification highlighted the situation of North Korean workers overseas whose earnings get confiscated, thus forcing them to engage in illegal activities to survive.

Vice-President Quijano noted the country concerned had the right of reply. However, as its representative was not in the room, he proceeded to give the floor to the Special Rapporteur for his closing remarks. Mr. Darusman noted that the work of the past six years was a collective effort and that it was conducted on behalf of the 30,000 citizens of North Korea who have escaped and for those who remain. We are at the tail end of 15 years of work started by the international community, he said. The COI merely compiled available information, while it was entirely up to the DPRK government to present its side of the story. The Special Rapporteur argued that the international community has always adopted a two-track approach to engage and pursue accountability at the same time. Two years since the COI presented its report nothing has happened in the DPRK, he repeated. As the international community cannot allow an open-ended process, he urged that an accountability mechanism be put in place. A group of experts should not duplicate the work of the COI or the OHCHR field office in Seoul but would be a fundamental next step for accountability. He closed by saying he trusted the Human Rights Council to “see this matter through.”

Discussions on the North Korea resolution are currently going forward. According to Ambassador Ihara, Japan and the EU intend to include support for the Special Rapporteur’s recommendation for a group of experts on accountability in the draft resolution. A new human rights investigation body, coupled with the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the DPRK, would keep up institutional pressure on Pyongyang.

Side events that followed the interactive dialogue focused on forced labor by North Koreans both inside and outside the country and human rights violations against women and persons with disabilities. These two informal panels reflected increasing interest in these specific areas of concern. Certainly, North Korean women experience many additional levels of vulnerability and abuse ranging from pervasive discrimination to severe gender-based violence. In many respects, there has not been sufficient attention to the gender dimensions of the human rights situation in North Korea. It is symptomatic that trafficking of North Korean women in China, given its likely scale and scope, has not received the level of scrutiny the situation warrants. On persons with disabilities, the COI desperately sought to find one glimmer of hope in an otherwise grim portrait of human rights inside North Korea and found it in the DPRK’s signing of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Nevertheless, regardless of whether Pyongyang takes the next step of ratifying the treaty, North Korea’s lack of compliance with the other four human rights treaties that it is already a state party to indicates that this may not be real progress in the intentions of North Korean authorities. After all, Pyongyang is unlikely to suddenly respect and promote the rights of persons with disabilities. Meanwhile, several organizations have started examining North Korea’s practice of dispatching labor abroad under what appears to be conditions of forced labor. This approach has the advantage of overcoming some barriers of accessibility and of dealing with states that are more serious about implementing applicable labor and human rights laws. In these and various other ways, civil society promises to continue to do its part in advocating for improving the lives of North Koreans.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Draft resolution

A/HRC/31/L.25
Received from (main sponsors): Japan and EU
Date and Time: 16/03/2016 1259-1

Human Rights Council
Thirty-first session
Agenda item 4
Human rights situations that require the Council's attention


Situation of human rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea

The Human Rights Council,

Guided by the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenants on Human Rights and other human rights instruments,

Recalling all previous resolutions adopted by the Commission on Human Rights, the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, including Council resolution 28/22 of 27 March 2015 and Assembly resolution 70/172 of 17 December 2015, and urging the implementation of those resolutions,

Bearingin mind paragraph 3 of General Assembly resolution 60/251 of 15 March 2006,
Recalling its resolutions 5/1, on institution-building of the Human Rights Council, and 5/2, on the Code of Conduct for Special Procedures Mandate Holders of the Council, of 18 June 2007, and stressing that the mandate holder shall discharge his/her duties in accordance with those resolutions and annexes thereto,

Stressing the importance of following up on the recommendations contained in the report of the commission of inquiry on human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,[1] which was welcomed by both the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly, and transmitted to the relevant bodies of the United Nations, including the Security Council,

Deeply concerned at the systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea that, in many instances, constitute crimes against humanity, as well as at the impunity of perpetrators, as described in the report of the commission of inquiry,

Concerned that the precarious humanitarian situation in the country is exacerbated by the failure of the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to provide humanitarian agencies with free and unimpeded access to all populations in need and by its national policy priorities that, among others, prioritize military spending over citizens’ access to food,

Reaffirming that it is the responsibility of the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to ensure the full enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms of its entire population, including by ensuring equal access to adequate food, as well as, among others, freedom of religion or belief, freedom of expression and freedom of association and assembly,

Recognizing that particular risk factors affect women, children, persons with disabilities and the elderly, and the need to ensure the full enjoyment of all their human rights and fundamental freedoms by them against neglect, abuse, exploitation and violence,

Acknowledging the participation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in the second universal periodic review process, noting the acceptance by the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea of 113 out of the 268 recommendations contained in the outcome of the review and its stated commitment to implement them and to look into the possibility of implementing a further 58 recommendations, and emphasizing the importance that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea accept and implement the recommendations in order to address the grave human rights violations in the country,

Recognizing the important work of the treaty bodies in monitoring the implementation of international human rights obligations, and emphasizing the need for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to comply with its human rights obligations and to ensure regular and timely reporting to the treaty bodies,

Noting the importance of the issue of international abductions and of the immediate return of all abductees, taking note of the outcome of the government-level consultation between the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Japan in May 2014, on the basis of which the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea commenced investigations on all the Japanese nationals, and expecting the resolution of all issues related to the Japanese, in particular the return of all abductees, to be achieved at the earliest possible date,

         Welcoming the panel discussion on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, including the issue of international abductions, enforced disappearances and related matters, held during the thirtieth session of the Human Right Council,

Noting the importance of inter-Korean dialogue, which could contribute to the improvement of the human rights and humanitarian situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,

Welcoming the resumption  of the reunions of separated families across the border in October 2015, and, given that this is an urgent humanitarian concern of the entire Korean people, owing, in particular, to the advanced age of many members of the separated families, hoping that necessary arrangements for confirming the fate of family members, exchanging letters, visiting their hometowns and holding  further reunions on a larger scale and a regular basis will be made by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea and members of the Korean diaspora,

Reaffirming the importance of States engaging fully and constructively with the Human Rights Council, including with the universal periodic review process and other mechanisms of the Council, for the improvement of their situation of human rights,

1. Condemnsin the strongest terms the long-standing and ongoing systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations and other human rights abuses committed in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and expresses its grave concern at the detailed findings made by the commission of inquiry in its report, including:

(a) The denial of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, as well as of the rights to freedom of opinion, expression and association, which is enforced through an absolute monopoly on information and total control over organized social life, and arbitrary and unlawful State surveillance that permeates the private lives of all citizens;
(b) Discrimination based on the songbun system, which classifies people on the basis of State-assigned social class and birth, and also includes consideration of political opinions and religion, discrimination against women, including unequal access to employment, discriminatory laws and regulations, and violence against women;
(c) Violations of all aspects of the right to freedom of movement, including forced assignment to State-designated places of residence and employment, often based on the songbun system, and denial of the right to leave one’s own country;
(d) Systematic, widespread and grave violations of the right to food and related aspects of the right to life, exacerbated by widespread hunger and malnutrition;
(e) Violations of the right to life and acts of extermination, murder, enslavement, torture, imprisonment, rape and other grave forms of sexual violence and persecution on political, religious and gender grounds in political prison camps and ordinary prisons, and the widespread practice of collective punishment with harsh sentences imposed on innocent individuals;
(f) Systematic abduction, denial of repatriation and subsequent enforced disappearance of persons, including those from other countries, on a large scale and as a matter of State policy;

2. Urgesthe Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to acknowledge the human rights violations in the country and to take immediate steps to end all such violations and abuses through, inter alia, the implementation of relevant recommendations in the report of the commission of inquiry, including, but not limited to, the following steps:

(a) To ensure the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, as well as the rights to freedom of opinion, expression and association, including by permitting the establishment of independent newspapers and other media;
(b) To end discrimination against citizens, including State-sponsored discrimination based on the songbun system, and to take immediate steps to ensure gender equality and to protect women from gender-based violence;
(c) To ensure the right to freedom of movement, including the freedom to choose one’s place of residence and employment;
(d) To promote equal access to food, including through full transparency regarding the provision of humanitarian assistance so that such assistance is genuinely provided to vulnerable persons;
(e) To immediately halt all human right violations relating to prison camps, including the practice of forced labour, to dismantle all political prison camps and to release all political prisoners, to immediately cease the practice of the arbitrary execution of persons in custody, and to ensure that justice sector reforms provide protections for a fair trial and due process;
(f) To resolve the issue of all persons who have been abducted or otherwise forcibly disappeared, as well as their descendants, in a transparent manner, including by ensuring their immediate return;

3. Reiterates its deep concern at the commission’s findings concerning the situation of refugees and asylum seekers returned to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and other citizens of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea who have been repatriated from abroad and made subject to sanctions, including internment, torture, cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment, sexual violence, enforced disappearance or the death penalty, and in this regard strongly urges all States to respect the fundamental principle of non-refoulement, to treat humanely those who seek refuge and to ensure unhindered access to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the Office of the High Commissioner, with a view to protecting the human rights of those who seek refuge, and once again urges State parties to comply with their obligations under international human rights law as well as the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the Protocol thereto in relation to persons from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea who are covered by those instruments;

4. Stresses and restates its grave concernabout the commission’s finding that the body of testimony gathered and the information received provided reasonable grounds to believe that crimes against humanity have been committed in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, pursuant to policies established at the highest level of the State for decades; these crimes against humanity entail extermination, murder, enslavement, torture, imprisonment, rape, forced abortions and other sexual violence, persecution on political, religious, racial and gender grounds, the forcible transfer of populations, the enforced disappearance of persons and the inhumane act of knowingly causing prolonged starvation;

5. Stresses that the authorities of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea have failed to prosecute those responsible for crimes against humanity and other human rights violations, and encourages the members of the international community to cooperate with accountability efforts and to ensure that these crimes do not remain unpunished;

6. Welcomes General Assembly resolution 70/172, in which the Assembly  encouraged the Security Council to continue its consideration of the relevant conclusions and recommendations of the commission of inquiry and  take appropriate action to ensure accountability, including through consideration of referral of the situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to the International Criminal Court and consideration of the scope for effective targeted sanctions against those who appear to be most responsible for acts that the commission has said may constitute crimes against humanity;

7. Also welcomes the decision of the Security Council to hold a second  Council meeting on 10 December 2015, following the one in December 2014 during which the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was discussed, and looks forward to the continued and active engagement of the Council on this matter;

8. Commends the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea for the activities undertaken to date and his continued efforts in the conduct of his mandate despite the lack of access to the country;

9. Welcomes the report of the Special Rapporteur submitted to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-first session, in which the Special Rapporteur calls upon the Human Rights Council to establish a group of independent experts on accountability;

10. Recalling the findings and recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry on human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, requests the High Commissioner for Human Rights to designate for a period of six months, a maximum of two existing independent experts in support of the work of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to focus on issues of accountability for human rights violations in the country, in particular where such violations amount to crimes against humanity as found by the commission of inquiry;

11. Also requests this group of independent experts on accountability, taking into account existing international law and prevailing State practices with regard to accountability to

a) explore appropriate approaches to seek accountability for human rights violations in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, in particular where such violations amount to crimes against humanity as found by the commission of inquiry;
b) recommend practical mechanisms of accountability to secure truth and justice for the victims of possible crimes against humanity in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, including the International Criminal Court ;

12. Further decidesto extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur of the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 28/22 for a period of one year;

13. Calls again upon all parties concerned, including United Nations bodies, to consider implementation of the recommendations made by the commission of inquiry in its report in order to address the dire situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea;

14. Welcomes the establishment by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights of a field-based structure in Seoul to strengthen the monitoring and documentation of the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, to ensure accountability, to provide the Special Rapporteur with increased support, to enhance the engagement and capacity-building of the Governments of all States concerned, civil society and other stakeholders and to maintain the visibility of the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, including through sustained communications, advocacy and outreach initiatives;

15.  Welcomes the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the role and achievements of the Office with regard to the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, submitted to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-first session, and invites the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to provide regular updates on the topic to the Human Rights Council ;

16. Calls upon all States to undertake to ensure that the field-based structure of the Office of the High Commissioner can function with independence, that it has sufficient resources and that it is not subjected to any reprisals or threats;

17. Requests the Office of the High Commissioner to report on its follow-up efforts in the regular annual report of the Secretary-General submitted to the General Assembly on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea;

18. Requests the Special Rapporteur to submit regular reports to the Human Rights Council and to the General Assembly on the implementation of his mandate, including on the follow-up efforts made in the implementation of the recommendations of the commission of inquiry;

19. Request the Special Rapporteur to include the report of the group of independent experts on accountability as an annex to his/her report to the Council at its thirty-forth session;

20. Acknowledgesthat the Special Rapporteur held a dialogue with the representatives of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in New York on 27 October 2014, and urges the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, through continuous dialogues, to invite and to cooperate fully with the Special Rapporteur, to give the Special Rapporteur and supporting staff unrestricted access to visit the country, and to provide them with all information necessary to enable them to fulfil such a mandate, and also to promote technical cooperation with the Office of the High Commissioner;

21. Encourages the United Nations system, including its specialized agencies, States, regional intergovernmental organizations, interested institutions, independent experts and non-governmental organizations to develop constructive dialogue and cooperation with special procedures mandate holders, including the Special Rapporteur, and the field-based structure of the Office of the High Commissioner;

22. Encourages all States, the United Nations Secretariat, including relevant specialized agencies, regional intergovernmental organizations and fora, civil society organizations, foundations and engaged  business enterprises and other stakeholders towards which the commission of inquiry has directed recommendations to take forward those recommendations;

23. Encourages all States that have relations with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to use their influence to encourage it to take immediate steps to end all human rights violations, including by closing political prison camps and undertaking profound institutional reforms;

24. Requests the Secretary-General to provide the Special Rapporteur and the Office of the High Commissioner with regard to the field-based structure with all the assistance and adequate staffing necessary to carry out the mandate effectively, and to ensure that the mandate holder receives the support of the Office of the High Commissioner;

25. Decides to transmit all reports of the Special Rapporteur to all relevant bodies of the United Nations and to the Secretary-General for appropriate action.



[1] A/HRC/25/63.

3/10/2016

An HRNK Interview with Justice Michael Kirby, Former Chair of the UN Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in the DPRK

Please click here to view the video.

Q1: In regards to an improvement in North Korean human rights, what was your original expectation of the impact of the Commission of Inquiry and how has it either been met or fallen short?

Justice Kirby: The situation in North Korea has been going on, as the Commission of Inquiry found, for a very longtime—decades. Therefore, we didn’t expect things would change overnight. We did not expect that the Commission of Inquiry would be permitted to come into North Korea and we, therefore, prepared our methodology on the assumption that we would not be given access to the country, but that didn’t stop us doing our job because there were 26,000 people from North Korea who had fled from that country, living in South Korea and many others living in other countries. So we had plenty of testimony. To what extent were things different from what we expected? Well, I think the value of the inquiry was that it connected a great deal of information from people, who in many cases quite recently, had recently been in North Korea and they could give their testimony and indicate what they went through, what their experiences as human beings were. And they demonstrated that very serious offenses to human rights had occurred and some of those were crimes again humanity, which the international community has promised to react to and respond to. So, that is where the Commission of Inquiry led us. It led us to fact-finding and to reaching conclusions on a high level of standard of proof and making recommendations for the improvement of the human rights situation in North Korea.

Q2: What role does China play as a member of the P5 (US, UK, France, Russia, and China) in the UN Security Council in regards to North Korean human rights?

Justice Kirby: Well, the Commission of Inquiry understood right from the start that the cooperation of the People’s Republic of China was really a key to getting progress in respect of human rights in North Korea. That is because, in part, of the economic links between the DPRK and China, also the historical and fraternal party links between the two countries, the geographical contiguity—China has a border with the DPRK—and the large Korean minority, many of them themselves descended from, or in person, refugees from North Korea who live on the border on China.

Q3: The Commission met with roughly 300 witnesses during its investigation. What struck you as the most compelling and significant issue that victims of the Kim regime face today?

Justice Kirby: The situation in respect to their testimony was graphic. I think the aspect of the testimony that I will never forget was the sheer necessity of food in the human being. Human beings can last for so long without literature, without art, and without the accoutrements of ordinary life, but food is absolutely essential. In our report, there is a very important chapter—very well written if I can say so—explaining how the daily grind of getting food is, for most people in North Korea or outside of the elite, a continuing grave burden on the people. We heard testimony, which was extremely graphic, of the situation of the lack of food in the detention centers. One person, who gave testimony, had the job of leading a wheelbarrow around the encampment to pick up the emaciated bodies of the people who had died overnight and put them in a vat, where they were burned. Their ashes and the body parts were then scattered on the nearby fields in order to help grow the rudimentary needs of food for the detention centers. I am of such an age that I remember seeing vivid images of emaciated bodies at the end of the Second World War, when the Allied soldiers opened up parts of the Nazi-occupied Germany. Sitting there, listening to this testimony, brought home to me that here was I, decades later, listening to testimony of a somewhat similar kind. Therefore, that was the most vivid testimony that I heard. The testimony of women and the suffering they had undergone; the testimony of disadvantaged groups; of disabled people; the testimony of people who could not practice their religion without very grave punishments—all of this was horrific in this day and age that this goes on, and in a country that is a member of the United Nations and has signed up to the United Nations treaties. So there is a job to be done here and it is the obligation of the whole world to make sure that those who are responsible for the crimes against humanity are rendered accountable before the bar of humanity for their crimes.

Q4: What were some of the findings of the Commission of Inquiry regarding North Korean detention camps?

Justice Kirby: The forms of torture that were inflicted on people in the detention camps in North Korea were all horrible: the motorbike torture, the airline torture, but the most horrible of all was the pigeon torture—when people were manacled and held above the floor so they couldn’t stand; they couldn’t rest; they couldn’t sleep; they vomited; they defecated; and they didn’t want to continue to live.

Q5: Do you foresee the public release of the names of the alleged perpetrators as part of an accountability or transitional justice measure?

Justice Kirby: We recommended that the matter should be referred by the Security Council to the International Criminal Court, where there is a prosecutor, who could have access to the material of the Commission of Inquiry and that prosecutor’s own investigations. That was the correct way to go about it. This is yet another instance of the fact that the Commission of Inquiry on North Korea acted with great propriety and care. We were prudent and we were careful. We thought that the step of launching a prosecution was a step that should be taken by a prosecutor, not by the Commission of Inquiry. Our job was to find facts, and that is what we did and all that we did.

Q6: What do you believe HRNK and other NGOs can do to ensure accountability for crimes against humanity in North Korea as an international goal?

Justice Kirby: Make sure that the world hears your voices. The voices of the people of North Korea cannot be heard. They cannot have access to the Internet. They cannot speak to us, but we can speak out for them and to them. It’s important that the United Nations should make our voices heard in North Korea and that is an important message that we should bring. Civil society should bring it and they should remember the motto: never give up; never give up; never give up. That is the motto they should accept for the voices of North Korea and they should become the voice of North Korea today, tomorrow, and until the human rights situation in North Korea is radically changed for the better.

Q7: What message would you like to send to HRNK’s board of directors, staff members, interns, volunteers, and supporters?

Justice Kirby: I have completed by duties in respect to North Korea, but your duties continue. Your duties involve lifting your voices, not being satisfied with inaction on the report. Getting a report is a good thing. It has put this matter on the agenda of the international community, but a report of itself does not change things in North Korea. It’s important that the change agents should be you. The change agents within North Korea are difficult to organize because of the totalitarian regime that exists there. Therefore, they need friends. They need friends outside North Korea. They need people who will lift their voices and pursue their actions peacefully in order to promote the changes that the Commission of Inquiry recommended. My recommendations and my words to those in HRNK would be to:

Stay the course, continue your efforts, and never give up in your efforts to bring human rights to North Korea. Be absolutely sure that in the end, human rights will come to North Korea. We humans are genetically programmed to search for rationality and to love one another and because of that fact, we will ultimately see an end to the oppression of human rights in North Korea. When that happens, HRNK will have an honored place in those who have worked for human rights for the people of North Korea.


Edited by Rosa Park, HRNK Director of Programs and Editor

Original transcription by Caitlin Lenzner-White, HRNK Research Intern

3/08/2016

An HRNK Interview with Robert Collins, Author of "Pyongyang Republic: North Korea's Capital of Human Rights Denial"


Q1: What was your motivation to be a leader on North Korean human rights?

Robert Collins: When I decided to retire from the army six years ago, I felt that my knowledge could be useful in writing materials that would contribute to an overall understanding of how North Korea makes its decision and to how they carry out their policies. And so, since retirement, I’ve just continued with what the army taught me to do over those decades at the end of the 20th century and doing it unilaterally. And now I’m doing it in support of HRNK.

Q2: What do you think is the relationship between human rights issues and security concerns for the U.S. – R.O.K. relationship regarding North Korea?

Robert Collins: The deplorable human rights condition of North Korea has a direct impact on their military. They have a million man army that can’t be composed of everybody in the country that is on the positive side of the political classification system—songbun. Many, if not close to half, are recruits—those that receive a denial of human rights through their entire life because they have been classified, socially and politically, as enemies of the state. Therefore, they have grown up with inadequate food, poor education, poor housing, and the opportunities that they receive in the military are very, very limited. Those in the lower songbun classifications can’t become officers. The few that do can’t go past the company grade. And even up until a few years ago, many of the individuals in the North Korean military that were regarded as low songbun—low trust on the political scale—weren’t even allowed to carry weapons because they didn’t trust them.

Q3: What is most striking to you about the structure of the Kim Regime?

Robert Collins: The Organization Guidance Department (OGD) of the Korean Workers Party is the party within the party. It is the center of power, the center of regime governing administration that compels everybody in North Korea to follow supreme leaderism and to follow supreme leader guidance. Every leader is evaluated for their ability to do that and that evaluation comes from the Organization Guidance Department or the OGD. So, it is this organization that compels the regime and the population to carry out all regime orders. For NGOs, when and if they ever have an opportunity to enter North Korea and try to help the North Korean population, they must understand that the front people they are talking to are controlled by the OGD.

Q4: How difficult is it for North Korean defectors to resettle in South Korea?

Robert Collins: The problem is that the two countries have developed a different understanding of societal norms. And so, when North Koreans come to the South, they have a problem adjusting. It’s a severe problem and the South Korean leadership is well aware of it.

Q5: Do you believe that the closure of the Kaesong Industrial Complex will impact human rights policy for North Koreans?

Robert Collins: The closure of the Kaesong Industrial Complex leaves a lot people without a job in North Korea. Tens of thousands of people were employed in that complex so quality of living is going to be severely decreased for those individuals. At the time, that’s not President Pak’s responsibility. Her population is her responsibility. So the issue would be not so much human rights, but overall quality of life is going to deteriorate and there will be no improvement of human rights to try and make that improvement in their quality of life happen in the Kim regime.

Q6: What do you believe is the most compelling human rights issue elucidated from your interviews with North Korean defectors?

Robert Collins: Well, when you do a number of these interviews, you quickly learn that life in North Korea is very, very difficult and much of it is based in sorrow. And during these interviews, it’s compelling to watch the sorrow come out of their life story about how they got from what kind of lives they led in North Korea, how they escaped, and how they came to South Korea. These are very compelling and a lot of sorrow and unhappiness that is related to malnourishment, starving to death of family members, basic denial of human rights, and not even understanding that some of those human rights are denied. And so, over the years, one can see that these stories become even more and more sorrowful or even more and more compelling and sad. That drives one to believe that situations are just getting worse in North Korea for individuals—for populations in North Korea. The quality of life continues to deteriorate in North Korea for those that live in the provinces, particularly those in the northeast.

Q7: Do you see a time when the Kim Regime’s policy of human rights denial is no longer sustainable?

Robert Collins: Yes, as a matter of fact I do. That time would be the fall of the Kim regime. Until that time, the Kim regime will continue to carry out its aggressive policies towards the United States and the Republic of Korea, and at the same time, carry out the human rights denial for the North Korean population. Those go hand in hand. He’s got to—in his mind with the concept of Suryong-jui or supreme leaderism—compel the population to support him personally in not only the survival of the regime, but also in policies that are relevant to peninsula security issues, R.O.K.-U.S. relations, North Korea-U.S. relations, and North-South relations.


Edited by Rosa Park, Director of Programs and Editor

Original transcription by Liz Cheek, HRNK Research Intern

12/09/2015

Committee against Torture Calls on China to “Immediately Cease Forcible Repatriation” of North Koreans


*This is a follow-up to Christine Chung’s post, “China Responds to the Committee against Torture,” December 4, 2015.

Today, the Committee against Torture released its “Concluding observations of the fifth periodic report of China.” In particular, paragraph 46 of the report highlights the Committee’s critique of China’s practice of forcibly repatriating North Koreans as economic migrants, despite the certain torture and ill-treatment that awaits them upon refoulement (the return of an alleged refugee to his or her state of origin) to North Korea. The report states:

46. While welcoming the adoption in 2012 of the Exit-Entry Administration Law (see para. 4 (b)), the Committee remains concerned that in the absence of national asylum legislation and administrative procedures the refugee determination process has to be carried out by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The Committee is also concerned over the State party’ rigorous policy of forcibly repatriating all nationals of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), on the grounds that they have illegally crossed the border solely on economic reasons. In this regard, the Committee takes note of over 100 testimonies from North Koreans received by UN sources (A/HRC/25/63, paras. 42–45), indicating that persons forcibly repatriated to DPRK are systematically subjected to torture and ill-treatment. In light of this information, the Committee regrets the State party’s failure to clarify, in spite of the questions raised during the dialogue, whether or not DPRK nationals are denied access to refugee determination procedures in China via UNHCR, as reported to the Committee by various sources (art. 3). 

The Committee against Torture then made recommendations to China.

47. The State party should: 
(a) Adopt the necessary legislative measures to fully incorporate into domestic legislation the principle of non-refoulement set out in article 3 of the Convention, and promptly establish a national asylum procedure, in cooperation with UNHCR; 

(b) Immediately cease forcible repatriation of undocumented migrants and trafficking victims to the DPRK and allow UNHCR personnel unimpeded access to DPRK nationals who have crossed the border to determine if they were qualified for refugee status. 

48. The Committee reminds the State party that under no circumstance should the State party expel, return or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger of being subjected to torture. In order to determine the applicability of the obligations that it has assumed under article 3 of the Convention, the State party should thoroughly examine the merits of each individual case, including the overall situation with regard to torture in the country of destination. It should also support effective post-return monitoring arrangements in cases of refoulement, including any conducted by UNHCR.

Source: Committee against Torture, "Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of China,” ADVANCE UNEDITED VERSION, December 9, 2015, http://www.hrichina.org/sites/default/files/cat-chn-co-5_china_advanced_english_version.pdf.


10/09/2015

Muddying the Waters: North Korea’s Deceptive Media Offensive


By Greg Scarlatoiu

Greg Scarlatoiu is executive director of the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea (HRNK) in Washington, D.C. At HRNK, he supervises, manages, and coordinates the drafting, publication, and dissemination of reports investigating the North Korean human rights situation. In close coordination with HRNK’s board of directors, Scarlatoiu shares HRNK’s findings and recommendations with UN agencies and international NGO networks. A seasoned lecturer on North Korean human rights, political security, and economic issues on the Korean peninsula, he has appeared as an expert witness at several Congressional hearings on North Korean human rights. An experienced social audit consultant, he is currently finalizing a report on North Korean workers officially dispatched overseas. For twelve years, Scarlatoiu has been authoring and broadcasting the weekly Scarlatoiu Column to North Korea for Radio Free Asia (RFA). A visiting professor at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies (HUFS) in Seoul, he holds a Master of Arts in Law and Diplomacy (MALD) from the Fletcher School at Tufts University, and an MA and BA from Seoul National University, Department of International Relations. Scarlatoiu was awarded the title of Citizen of Honor, City of Seoul, in January 1999. He is fluent in Korean, French, and Romanian.


On Monday, September 21, 2015, the 30th session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva featured a panel discussion on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), including the issue of international abductions, enforced disappearances, and related matters, moderated by Michael Kirby, former chair of the Commission of Inquiry on human rights in the DPRK (UN COI). The panelists included Mr. Koichiro Iizuka, vice secretary-general of the Association of Victims Kidnapped by North Korea.

The main panel was followed by a side event featuring the tragic accounts of South Korean, Japanese, Romanian, Thai, and other nationals abducted by North Korea. The panelists included Mr. Hwang In-chul, whose father was a passenger on Korean Air Lines YS-11, hijacked by North Korean agents on December 11, 1969. Mr. Hwang's father was one of 11 passengers and crew members who were never returned to South Korea.

On the same day, CNN’s Will Ripley and Tim Schwarz published a story based on sources inside North Korea, claiming that Ms. Mun Su Gyong, a North Korean national, was allegedly abducted by South Korean agents while working as a waitress at a North Korean state-owned restaurant in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. One of the sources quoted is the former manager of the respective restaurant, who reportedly believes that South Korean spies posing as North Korean businessmen “frequented the restaurant for two years,” befriended Ms. Mun, and then abducted her, forcing her into a car and driving away. At the time of the alleged “abduction” four years ago, Ms. Mun was twenty years old. The report included an interview with Ms. Mun’s parents.

Source: CNN

By offering this story to a prominent U.S. media organization, the North Korean authorities likely attempted to counter efforts by the UN and the international community to focus attention on South Korean nationals and citizens of other countries abducted by North Korea. As we learned from an excellent David Hawk piece published by US-Korea Institute’s 38 North about a year ago, the North Korean government reacted to the highly critical report of the UN COI through: a “counter-report” by the North Korean Association of Human Rights Studies; a significantly revised approach to the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism; and a diplomatic “counter-offensive,” which involved the North Korean foreign minister appearing before the UN General Assembly for the first time in 15 years, and so-called “press briefings” focused on denial of the appalling North Korean human rights record.

By offering this story to a prominent U.S. media organization, the North Korean authorities likely attempted to counter efforts by the UN and the international community to focus attention on South Korean nationals and citizens of other countries abducted by North Korea. 


As part of the same strategy, the North Korean regime’s propaganda website, Uriminzokkiri, launched ferocious attacks against UN COI witnesses, including former political prisoners Jung Gwang-il and Shin Dong-hyuk, and also North Korean defector and scholar Cho Myung-chul, the first North Korean escapee to become a South Korean National Assembly member.

On the upside, the North Korean regime’s approach to human rights has surely changed post-UN COI. Its fundamental strategic stance on human rights used to be utter neglect. Always overshadowed by nukes and missiles, human rights would easily disappear off the radar screen of the international community, so the Kim regime knew there wasn’t much to worry about. Post-UN COI, even the North Korean regime has come to the realization that human rights is here to stay, and it can no longer just ignore attempts by UN agencies, foreign government agencies, and international NGOs to shed light on its abysmal human rights situation. Pursuant to the findings of the UN COI, North Korea is no longer seen as a bizarre relic of the Cold War, but as a post-communist, post-industrial, dynastic kleptocracy that is subjecting its own people to crimes against humanity in order to maintain its grip on power.

Post-UN COI, even the North Korean regime has come to the realization that human rights is here to stay, and it can no longer just ignore attempts by UN agencies, foreign government agencies, and international NGOs to shed light on its abysmal human rights situation.


On the downside, North Korean attempts to compromise witnesses and muddy the waters by misleading foreign media organizations will continue. Since the release of the UN COI report in February 2014, CNN has done excellent reporting on the North Korean human rights situation, and perhaps that is why it was the media organization targeted by North Korea’s deception in this case. 

In the particular case of the young North Korean woman allegedly “abducted” by South Korean agents, the story, published undoubtedly with the approval of the North Korean authorities, presents the following problems:


  • The former manager of the respective restaurant claims that Mun Su Gyong had been befriended by "South Korean spies" posing as North Korean businessmen. I have interviewed former restaurant workers who escaped and found their way to South Korea. The waitresses' "befriending" customers is reportedly a big red flag for the managers running these restaurants. The girls who get too close to customers are quickly disciplined, and in extreme cases sent back to North Korea. Sustaining such "friendship" with customers, well known to other waitresses and the manager, would be impossible. One has to remember this is a tightly confined space. The waitresses work and live together under strict surveillance. They are only seldom allowed to go shopping or sightseeing, and even then only in groups, never alone. 
  • With 28,000 former North Koreans already living in South Korea, including some former senior officials, there is absolutely no conceivable need for South Korean intelligence agents to kidnap North Koreans. 
  • There are former restaurant workers already living in South Korea. There would be no practical need for South Korean intelligence agents to kidnap additional restaurant workers. 
  • South Korea is a liberal democracy that has discarded the dark legacy of its authoritarian past. The UN Secretary-General is a South Korean national, the president of the World Bank is a Korean American born in South Korea, and South Korea contributes in many meaningful ways to international humanitarian and development assistance as well as peacekeeping operations. South Korea is not a rogue state conducting abductions of its own nationals or other countries' nationals overseas. It is North Korea that has kidnapped nationals of South Korea, Japan, China, France, Guinea, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon, Macau, Netherlands, Romania, Malaysia, and Singapore.

It is North Korea that has kidnapped nationals of South Korea, Japan, China, France, Guinea, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon, Macau, Netherlands, Romania, Malaysia, and Singapore.

To the reader interested in learning more about North Korea’s abduction of citizens of South Korea and other countries, I highly recommend HRNK’s report “Taken,” by Yoshi Yamamoto, published in the spring of 2011. While I do hope that, if she is indeed alive and separated from her family, Mun Su Gyong will be reunited with her loved ones, one has to remember: 82,959 South Koreans were abducted by North Korea during the Korean War; 3,824 South Koreans, most of them fishermen, have been abducted since the July 27, 1953 Korean War Armistice; 93,000 ethnic Koreans residing in Japan were lured back to North Korea and never allowed to leave, many of them trapped together with Japanese spouses; hundreds of Japanese and Chinese nationals have been abducted to North Korea; and at least 25 nationals of countries other than South Korea, Japan, and China have been reportedly taken against their will. With 180,108 nationals of South Korea and other countries taken by North Korea, that regime must provide a full accounting of those abducted and detained, facilitate the reunification of abductees’ families, return the remains of deceased abductees, and observe the right of freedom of movement by allowing the surviving abductees to return to their families. With abductions by North Korea featured prominently in UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the DPRK Marzuki Darusman’s most recent September 8, 2015 report to the General Assembly, this issue is here to stay. The North Korean regime should rest assured that its attempts to muddy the waters and run anti-human rights media campaigns will, once again, be doomed to failure.

With 180,108 nationals of South Korea and other countries taken by North Korea, that regime must provide a full accounting of those abducted and detained, facilitate the reunification of abductees’ families, return the remains of deceased abductees, and observe the right of freedom of movement by allowing the surviving abductees to return to their families. 

To download a free PDF copy of “Taken,” go to: http://hrnk.org/uploads/pdfs/Taken_LQ.pdf.