Implementation Strategies For Policies On North Korean Human Rights

The issue of North Korean human rights has emerged as an international agenda after the publication of the COI Report in 2014. The international community’s emphasis on ensuring accountability of North Korea’s leadership indicates that previous approach of "monitoring" and "expressing concern" has had limited effects in changing North Korea. Despite the international community’s consistent and swift approach to make human rights in North Korea an international agenda, South Korea has been unable to present a united position in terms of its approach, perception, as well as policy direction and means. It is necessary to formulate and implement a more systematic and consistent policy towards human right in North Korea. Furthermore, it should reflect specific means and roadmap to substantially improve North Korean human rights. 1. Introduction 2. Environment Surrounding Policy on North Korean Human Rights A. Trend of the International Community B. Domestic Trend C. North Korea’s Response D. Assessment and Prospects 3. Objective and Direction of North Korean Human Rights Policy A. Objectives and Means B. Principles and Directions for Implementation 4. Strategies to Implement Policies on Human Rights in North Korea and Tasks Ahead A. Implementation Strategy B. Tasks Ahead 5. Conclusion

North Korea is consistently identified as one of the world’s worst human rights abusers. However, the issue of human rights in North Korea is a complex one, intertwined with issues like life in the North Korean police state, inter-Korean relations, denuclearization, access to information in the North, and international cooperation, to name a few. There are likewise multiple actors involved, including the two Korean governments, the United States, the United Nations, South Korea NGOs, and global human rights organizations. While North Korea’s nuclear weapons and the security threat it poses have occupied the center stage and eclipsed other issues in recent years, human rights remain important to U.S. policy. The contributors to The North Korean Conundrum explore how dealing with the issue of human rights is shaped and affected by the political issues with which it is so entwined. Sections discuss the role of the United Nations; how North Koreans’ limited access to information is part of the problem, and how this is changing; the relationship between human rights and denuclearization; and North Korean human rights in comparative perspective.

The Institute for Unification Education, which constitutes the Ministry of Unification of the Republic of Korea, has published annual editions of Understanding North Korea since 1972, as an endeavor to promote greater understanding of North Korea for South Korean readers. Understanding North Korea depicts the reality faced by the Northern regime in areas of politics, diplomacy, military, economy, society, culture, and many more. The May 2012 publication has been translated into English, with the aim to help the international community better understand the northern half of the Korean peninsula. English translations of the referred editions will be published on an biennial basis. We hope that this book enables readers around the world to better grasp the reality of North Korea. The regime in North Korea exhibits three characteristics: it is a totalitarian dictatorship governed by the sole leadership of the suryǒng , who stands above the Workers’Party of Korea (WPK) and the state; the regime, as one of the world’s most highly centralized and planned economies, has advocated self-reliance and the monopoly of all means of production by the state and cooperative organizations; and the state uses the concept of Grand Socialist Family which requires absolute obedience of people to the suryǒng , who is considered the father of a family. These traits engendered a peculiar form of social structure unprecedented in any other socialist country. As it had to do under Kim Jong-il, North Korea under Kim Jong-un must engage in some degree of reform and opening to improve its economy and ensure the regime’s survival. Such a path, however, also brings with it the risk of regime collapse. The regime thus faces the difficult task of maintaining stability while at the same time reforming and opening up. CONTENTS I. How should we view North Korea? Section 1. Nature of the Northern Regime 11 Section 2. North Korea’s Dilemma 18 Ⅱ. Political System and Governing Principles Section 1. History of the North Korean Regime and Establishment of its Political System 25 1. Soviet Occupation and Establishment of the North Korean Regime 25 2. Establishment of North Korea’s Political System and its Characteristics 28 Section 2. Formation of Governing Ideology and its Changing Nature 36 1. Juche Ideology 37 2. Songun Ideology 42 3. Kimilsungism-Kimjongilism 46 Section 3. Power Structure and Form of Government 49 1. Power structure 49 2. Workers’Party of Korea 55 3. Central Institutions 71 Section 4. Hereditary Succession of Power and the Kim Jong-un Regime 80 1. History of Hereditary Power Succession 80 2. Establishment and Stabilization of the Kim Jong-un Regime 86 Ⅲ. External Policies and Relations Section 1. Goals and Directions of Foreign Policies 97 1. Basic Ideas and Goals of Foreign Policy 97 2. Policy Directions 99 3. North Korea’s Foreign Policy-making Structure 102 Section 2. Changes in Foreign Policy 105 1. Foreign Policy during the Cold War Era 105 2. Foreign Policy after the Cold War Era 111 Section 3. Foreign Relations 117 1. US-North Korea Relations 117 2. China-North Korea Relations 127 3. Japan-North Korea Relations 132 4. Russia-North Korea Relations 137 5. Relations with the EU and Other Nations 141 Ⅳ. Military Strategy and Capacity Section 1. Characteristics and Functions 153 1. Establishment of the KPA 153 2. Nature and Status 155 3. Functions and Characteristics 156 Section 2. Military Policy and Strategy 160 1. Basic Objective 160 2. Military Strategy 163 Section 3. Structure and Institutions 168 1. Military Structure 168 2. Military Institutions 173 Section 4. Military Capacity 179 1. Standing Forces and Equipment 179 2. Reserve Forces 185 3. Development of Nuclear and Other Strategic Weapons 187 Section 5. Military Relations and Provocations against the South 194 1. External Military Relationship 194 2. North Korea’s Provocations against the South 199 Ⅴ. Economic Structure and Policy Section 1. Characteristics of Economic System and Basic Economic Policy 217 1. Basic Characteristics of Economic System 217 2. Basic Economic Policy 225 3. Establishment and Implementation of Economic Plans 234 Section 2. Economic Status by Sector 238 1. Macroeconomic Status and Tasks 238 2. Economic Status and Tasks by Sector 244 Section 3. Changes in Economic Policy and Outlook for Reform and Opening 259 1. Utilization and Control of Markets 259 2. Limited Opening 268 3. Prospects and Tasks for Reform and Opening 274 Ⅵ. Education and Culture Section 1. Education System and School Life 281 1. Education Policy and School System 281 2. Educational Curriculum and Methods 299 3. School Life 308 Section 2. Literary Art Policy and Current Status 314 1. Literary Art Policy 314 2. Current Status of Literature and Art 321 Section 3. The Media and its Functions 334 1. Newspapers 335 2. Broadcasting 340 VII Society and Life Section 1. Class Structure 349 1. Social Classes 349 2. Social Mobility and Class Structure 353 Section 2. Value System and Everyday Life 356 1. North Korean Citizens’Values 356 2. Daily Life and Life Cycle 362 3. Organizational Life 366 4. Clothing, Food, and Housing 373 5. Leisure and Holidays 380 Section 3. Religion in North Korea 386 1. View on Religion 386 2. Actual Conditions of Religious Beliefs 388 Section 4. Deviations and Social Control 391 1. Social Deviation and Crime committed by North Koreans 391 2. Social Control 398 Section 5. Human Rights in North Korea 404 1. Violation of Civic and Political Rights 405 2. Violation of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights 410 3. Response to Criticism on Human Rights 413

In 1991 South Korea, along with North Korea, was made an official member of the UN. Using international relations theory, this book begins by looking at the struggle and eventual impact of the membership on the two countries post division in 1948. It investigates the predicted outcomes prior to joining, and whether these outcomes have come to fruition nationally and on a global scale. Following this, there is focus on South Korea's ability to exert an influence on international decision making in world-politics, and how this affected inter-Korean relations. Importantly, analysis looks at how participation in the Security Council (1996–1997 and 2013–2014) further extended the country's capabilities to adopt resolutions, including those affecting North Korea's missile and nuclear programmes and human rights record. South Korea's participation in peacekeeping operations, Koreans appointed to high positions within the UN system and payments of the UN budget are also investigated. The study concludes with discussion of the role of the UN as a forum for international contacts and for providing knowledge otherwise unavailable to non-members. South Korea in the United Nations is unique in its analysis of South Korea's relations with the UN prior to and, above all, after 1991, thereby enhancing understanding of the significance of its UN membership as well as the importance of being a UN member. Suitable for scholars in Korean studies, international relations and East Asian politics, it can also be used as a reference work by policy-makers in the region, and for students and professionals working within the UN system.

The 2015 edition of the White Paper on Human Rights in North Korea marks the 20th year of the series since its first publication in 1996. This White Paper is based on in-depth interviews with 221 of the 1,396 North Koreans who escaped to South Korea in 2014. These samples were selected with their demographic characteristics and social backgrounds taken into account. Below are the key highlights of the survey: In its national report for the Universal Periodic Review submitted to the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council on January 30, 2014, North Korea explained that death penalty is applied to extremely restricted cases. In reality, however, North Korea has an extensive list of crimes punishable by the death penalty, defined not just by the Criminal Law but also by its Addendum; the death penalty may also be imposed by promulgations, instructions and other alternative formats. North Korean defectors, who have witnessed the death penalty carried out in public, have provided testimony that it has actually been given for a wide range of crimes. Of special note is that over the last few years, the number of people put to death for watching/distributing South Korean video recordings or smuggling/trafficking narcotics is on a remarkable rise. This was widely observed in our 2014 survey, too. Human rights violations in ordinary prison camps (kyohwaso), labor training camps (rodongdanryundae), holding centers (jipkyulso), detention centers, political prison camps (kwanliso), and other detention facilities are still known to be serious. Inhumane treatment including torture and beatings are part of the daily routine; nutrition, medical care, and hygiene are also very poor. In our 2014 survey, however, some interviewees suggested that the human rights conditions in ordinary prison camps (kyohwaso) were improving somewhat. North Korean defector XXX, who was held for a long time at the Jongori kyohwaso, where a massive number of violent incidents and human rights violations reportedly took place, explained that beatings at the kyohwaso was on the decrease. North Korean defector XXX, who had been detained at the Jongori kyohwaso until recently, said that strenuous effort was being made to bring fatal incidents under control as the reality of the human rights infringements at the kyohwaso were known to the outside world through former inmates. Meanwhile, the 2014 survey results include testimonies on those released from political prison camps (kwanliso) in 2012 and 2013 —after Kim Jong-un took over as the new leader of North Korea. Witnesses explained that their release was “based on Kim Jong-un’s policy that those who have one percent of a conscience are given a second chance despite 99 percent of their faults”; and that “these people were released as Kim Jong-un, upon taking office, told those whose crimes were motivated by personal grievance, as opposed to criticism of the state, should be freed, which is within the context of his politics of law.” Similar cases can be found in North Korea’s On-site Open Trials System, too. Testimonies from North Korean defectors show that, when On-site Open Trials were conducted for a large number of people held for the same charge, some of them are executed immediately in public as “examples” while others are found innocent and released, allegedly due to Kim Jong-un’s consideration or policy. While unleashing a reign of terror against the power elites, the young leader seems to be seeking to present himself to ordinary citizens as a leader who loves the people. Nonetheless, the very fact that these measures are possible shows his policies and instructions have supra-legal authority in North Korea. A typical infringement on freedom of residence, the practice of forced deportation is still found to be widespread. North Korean defector XXX testified that in 2013, during his on-site instructions in Musan, Kim Jong-un ordered transformation of the city boundaries into an exemplary area. This led to the forced deportation of more than 600 households living within 300 meters of the city boundaries. Such massive involuntary relocation was enforced primarily upon family members of illegal border crossers or those with criminal records (such as illegal use of a mobile phone). A number of testimonies also suggested that forced deportation has been on the increase since mid-2013 in Samjiyon County, within which is the hometown of Kim Jong-il. In particular, those whose parents are from rural areas, former detainees at ordinary prison camps (kyohwaso) and their family members, and illegal border crossers are first to be relocated. According to the 2014 survey results, little progress has been made in improving North Koreans’ rights to food and health. When it comes to the right to food, the total volume of food available has increased since 2010, but North Korea’s discriminatory distribution policies has led to continued discrepancy among ordinary citizens in their access to food. Collection of excessive amounts of produce from farm workers, in particular, has undermined their right to food on a continuous basis. This seems partly attributable to the assignment of unrealistically high production quota and the falsification of distribution documents. Excluded from the Public Distribution System (PDS), marginalized members of North Korean society tap into money offered by loan sharks to deal with the scarcity, ending up suffering even more. In the 2014 survey, however, a large number of interviewees said the public distribution supply has temporarily improved since 2012 as North Korean authorities released military provisions. As for the right to health, the uneven distribution of resources as a result of economic hardship and military-first politics has destroyed the medical system as a whole. The absolute lack of medicine and basic medical equipment has continued, while some interviewees pointed out in the 2014 survey that an increasing amount of medicine was being provided by Jungsung Pharmaceuticals. Meanwhile, as the North’s free treatment system is not working properly, patients in need of surgery often end up paying for the related costs for themselves. The military ranks are also seeing their right to health deteriorating: Some interviewees stated that the military was also short on medicine, and not just civil society. The community doctor system and other mechanisms of preventive medicine propagandized by the North Korean authorities are not functioning properly. Community doctors are currently incapable of treating patients and can only issue medical certificates; they are known to work primarily on vaccinations (such as preventive injections against epidemics). A large number of interviewees in the 2014 survey said that vaccination was being offered. Vaccination seems to be improving efforts to prevent disease. Areas receiving aid from the UN and other international actors also enjoy relatively better medical treatment. Despite many constraints and the resulting shortcomings, we hope that this White Paper will draw more attention at home and abroad to the issue of human rights in North Korean while contributing to domestic and international discussion and action on improving the situation.

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) has a reputation as one of the worst human rights situations in the world. This book utilizes a unique international law perspective to examine the actions and inactions of North Korea with regard to international security and human rights. Adopting political, military, historical and legal perspectives, the book explores how the two issues of nuclear weapons and the human rights abuses in North Korea are interconnected, and why the international community should apply the same international law framework to find a solution for both. Drawing on eyewitness accounts, such as refugee and defector testimony, Morse Tan offers a real-life story of North Korea that covers the pertinent law, and constructive approaches of its regime. Tan examines the specific objectives and actions of the North Korean government, and measures these according to international legal obligations such as applicable treaty law, jus cogens norms, and customary international law. The book concludes by offering solutions for dealing with international security surrounding the Korean Peninsula, and forwards a proposal for the creation of a tribunal to prosecute those at the top of the regime for international crimes and human rights abuses. As a project exploring the extremes of international law violation, this book will be of great interest and use to readers interested in the history, and political and legal implications of the strategies employed by the North Korea government.