North Korean Human Rights:
10 Years After the COI Report on North Korea Human Rights
Jeong Jun-hee
Former Director of North Korean Policy Analysis Division at the Ministry of Unification
It’s been a decade since the United Nations Commission of Inquiry (COI) presented its report on human rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Despite the report drawing significant global attention and yearly calls for North Korea to enhance its human rights, evaluations suggest the situation is worsening rather than improving. North Korea’s tightening of internal control and ongoing external military provocations post-COVID-19 are exacerbating the human rights crisis. Amid the weakened authority of the UN due to conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, and the neglect of North Korean human rights by concerned nations, it’s imperative to reassess our human rights policies and directions to address the situation in North Korea.
International efforts to improve North Korean human rights have been ongoing since 2003, including the adoption of resolutions by the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and the General Assembly, and the appointment of a Special Rapporteur on North Korean Human Rights. The establishment of the UN COI in 2013, following a unanimous resolution by the UNHRC's 47 member states, marked a significant turning point in addressing North Korean human rights.
The report published by the COI in 2014 after a year-long investigation categorized the findings of the North Korean human rights situation into six areas, including: ① Violations of the freedoms of thought, expression, and religion, ② Discrimination, ③ Violations of the freedom of movement and residence. It concluded that crimes against humanity had been committed in North Korea, primarily due to policies established by its leadership and a culture of impunity, leading to continued violations. Therefore, the COI suggested holding accountable the main perpetrators of these crimes, proposing measures such as referring the North Korean situation to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and establishing a UN special tribunal.
However, ten years after the COI report, its recommendations for North Korea remain largely unimplemented. The assessment in the report that North Korea's human rights situation is exceptionally severe still holds true. Instead, the situation has worsened, especially following the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020. Changes in the criminal code, notably in 2022, have expanded provisions significantly, including imposing the death penalty for eleven offenses, up from eight in 2015. Additionally, laws like the "Reactionary Ideology and Culture Rejection Law" (2020), "Drug Crime Prevention Law" (2021), "Emergency Quarantine Law" (2022), and "Pyongyang Cultural Language Protection Law" (2023) stipulate the death penalty, enhancing control over external information. On the COI report's 10th anniversary in 2024, Kim Jong-un designated South Korea as the 'primary hostile state' and 'unchanging enemy' in his Supreme People's Assembly speech.
North Korea has made changes to some of its laws and policies related to human rights, despite its lack of compliance with most of the COI recommendations. Internationally, the country has selectively participated in UN human rights mechanisms by submitting reports and ratifying agreements concerning vulnerable groups such as women, children, and persons with disabilities. In June 2021, North Korea also submitted a Voluntary National Review (VNR). Domestically, it enacted the "Prevention of Torture Act" in 2021 and subsequently established the "Law on the Protection of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities" in 2023.
Testimonies and reports on the dire human rights situation in North Korea continue, but the momentum for international efforts to improve North Korean human rights has weakened. Amidst North Korea's intensified oppression, both South Korea and the international community need to consider what actions should be taken to address the human rights violations. The issue of North Korean human rights stems from the nature of its closed authoritarian regime, making it a political problem obstructing the universal basic rights of humanity. Therefore, there are practically no effective remedies to compel North Korea to improve its human rights situation. Despite these limitations, it's imperative to identify what actions can be taken both domestically and internationally.
Firstly, there is a need to strengthen the international network to prevent North Korean human rights issues from being overlooked. Enhancing bilateral consultations with the EU and the United States, who appointed a special rapporteur on North Korean human rights after six years, should be prioritized. Building on this, trilateral dialogues among South Korea, the United States, and the EU should be regularly convened to discuss joint responses. Utilizing such a network, annual UN resolutions on North Korean human rights should go beyond expressing intentions for improvement and adopt a "transitional justice" approach aimed at addressing past atrocities and laying the foundation for reconciliation under the old regime. This approach should focus on investigating and documenting widespread human rights abuses occurring or ongoing within North Korea.
Efforts should be directed towards empowering North Korean residents to raise their awareness of human rights. This is crucial for fostering long-term change from within North Korea, rather than expecting immediate results. Considering the widespread use of mobile phones in North Korea, methods such as utilizing a satellite network like "Starlink" that the regime cannot control should be employed to introduce external information. Furthermore, to improve socio-economic rights alongside civil liberties, international cooperation with North Korea is essential. Efforts should be made to resume human rights dialogues with the EU and actively utilize occasions such as VNR discussions to ensure improvements in the lives of North Korean residents.
Internally, a critical reevaluation of human rights policies is imperative, necessitating the redefinition of standards and values. South Korea's involvement in proposing UN resolutions on North Korean human rights needs regularity, alongside active advocacy in international human rights forums. Establishing the North Korean Human Rights Foundation and normalizing the North Korean Human Rights Records Center's functions are crucial steps toward transitional justice preparation. Moreover, clear role division between the government and civil society is essential. While the government should uphold universal standards internationally, civil society organizations must spearhead pressure activities, including exposing North Korean human rights abuses, often challenging for the government to address openly