| A meeting is being held at the United Nations Security Council in New York. © AFP=News1 © News1 Reporter Dongmyeong Woo |
The UN has adopted a North Korean human rights resolution that condemns human rights abuses in North Korea and calls for improvement. North Korea has expressed its position that it is firmly opposed to this resolution.
UN General Assembly Chairman Volkan Bozkir held a plenary session at the United Nations Headquarters in New York on the 16th (local time) and declared that the North Korean Human Rights Resolution was adopted.
Chairman Bozkir explained that the third committee had previously adopted the resolution as a consensus without voting, and that the plenary session was passed in the same manner.
As a result, the North Korean human rights resolution was adopted at the plenary session of the UN General Assembly for 16 consecutive years from 2005. In particular, from 2016 to this year, it was adopted as a method of consent of all members without voting for 5 consecutive years. It is interpreted that there is a great deal of negative public opinion from the international community on the human rights situation in North Korea.
This year’s North Korean human rights resolution was drawn up by the European Union, and 58 countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, and Sweden participated as joint proposals.
Korea has not been listed as a co-proposer for two consecutive years since last year. However, they joined the consensus. Korea participated as a co-proposer from 2008 to 2018.
The resolution pointed to a wide range of human rights issues in North Korea, including torture and sexual violence, arbitrary detention, political prison camps and organized kidnapping, and restrictions on freedom of religious expression and assembly.
This year, in particular, there were serious concerns about the adverse effects of the novel coronavirus infection (Corona 19) and the resulting deterioration of the human rights situation in North Korea.
The resolution also recommended that the UN Security Council refer the situation of human rights in North Korea to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and consider additional sanctions aimed at the’most responsible’.
The’most responsible person’ mentioned here seems to be aimed at the North Korean State Council Chairman Kim Jong-un. It is known that this content has been included in the resolution for seven consecutive years since 2014.
Another thing that drew attention to this resolution was that it “highlights the importance of dialogue and involvement, including inter-Korean dialogue,” in relation to the situation on the Korean Peninsula. It also encouraged countries that maintain dialogue with North Korea to continue to support the establishment of permanent peace and security on the Korean Peninsula.
The resolution did not specifically mention the attacks of public officials in the West Sea in September, but included the expression “willing to accept the latest report from the Special Rapporteur on human rights in North Korea.” UN Special Rapporteur on North Korean Human Rights, Thomas Ohea Quintana, previously condemned North Korea in connection with the attack by public officials and called for compensation for the bereaved family.
In response to this decision by the United Nations, North Korea began to protest.
North Korean ambassador to the United Nations Kim Seong rebelled against the resolution, arguing that the resolution provokes North Korea with political motives. He argues that the hostile forces are merely exploiting the so-called’regime change’ as an excuse.
Ambassador Kim argued, “All the contents of the resolution are maliciously fabricated information created by wasteful North Korean defectors,” he argued.
“If you think that a political human rights resolution will shake us, it is a serious misjudgment,” he said. He stressed that the EU, which led the resolution, should pay attention to human rights violations.
Meanwhile, some countries, such as China and Iran, criticized politicization, selectivity, and double standards, and announced that they did not participate in adopting the resolution through consensus.
–
