White Paper on Human Rights in North Korea 2005

책 소개

Executive Summary North Korea took some positive institutional steps in 2004, for example, it revised its penal code in response to the growing human rights concerns of the international community. Despite the positive responses, however, the human rights situation in North Korea remains very poor and unimproved. The North Korea Human Rights Resolution adopted at the 60th UN Human Rights Commission meeting has pointed out that serious and wide- ranging human rights violations are taking place in North Korea. Professor Vitit Muntarbhorn, who was appointed by UNCHR as Special Rapporteur on human rights in North Korea, said in his report to the 61st UNCHR meeting that although some steps designed to improve human rights have been taken in the past 10 years, he doubted if the steps had been implemented. Various human rights reports on North Korea, including those of Amnesty International, generally agreed that the human rights situation in North Korea was very deficient. North Korean human rights violations appeared to stem from a variety of causes, including the imperative of regime maintenance and its need to reinforce the power base, the idolatry of its leader, the inherent malfunctioning of its socialist economy, repeated natural disasters, and the self-imposed isolation exacerbated by its nuclear ambition. In the wake of repeated calls by the UNCHR and the international community, to improve human rights, North Korea has apparently begun to realize the importance of human rights. But North Korea has chosen to react to the calls by emphasizing the sovereignty principle and creating a cultural relativism called “our-style human rights.” However, as North Korea has needed international assistance they have found it unwise to completely ignore the human rights concerns of the international community, if only to avoid complete isolation. So, they have been pursuing a two-track policy, taking some positive steps, such as revising relevant laws, without really improving the human rights situation inside North Korea. On April 29th and May 6th, 2004, North Korea extensively revised its Penal Code and its Criminal Procedure Law, respectively. The revisions seemed to show an attempt to make a transition from a legal system designed to protect the regime to a system designed to control crimes. It was especially noteworthy that North Korea had finally deleted the provision that had been widely criticized by the international community; specifically, the provision that allowed arbitrary applications of the law while ignoring the principle of nullen crimen sine lege (no criminality unless prescribed by law). Furthermore, it has also adopted the “no criminality” principle by stipulating, “the State shall prosecute criminal responsibilities only for those violations prescribed as crime in the penal code.” And the penal code has strictly defined the elements constituting criminal behaviors. Thus all criminal procedures will comply with the prescribed laws. In the wake of the penal code revision in 2004, North Korea has also recognized that ordinary people had difficulties in accessing the laws, and published a compendium containing 112 laws for public access and use. Nevertheless, North Korea still has not given up the essence of a class-based society and its missions. That it has not completely divorced itself from that political orientation is clear when we look at the mandatory death sentences prescribed for such crimes as sedition, terrorism, treason, and traitors. The North Korean penal code recognizes the concept of a statute of limitation, but there is no statute of limitation on seditious and treasonous crimes. According to the revised criminal procedure law, death sentences would fall within the purview of provincial (major city) courts. But many new settlers have testified that in the cases of public execution the sentences were handed down on site. The penal code identifies only five crimes that are subject to death sentence but ad…

리뷰 남기기

로그인하면 리뷰를 남길 수 있어요.

리뷰 0개