Annual Report on Human Rights 2008 - Democratic People's Republic of Korea

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), also known as North Korea, is widely considered to have one of the worst human rights records in the world. As the DPRK refuses to accept any independent human rights monitoring, much evidence of this comes from North Koreans who have left the country as defectors, or have been able to establish links, often illegally, with the outside world. They provide consistently shocking reports of serious and widespread violations of basic human rights in the country. The alleged abuses include: abductions and disappearances; arbitrary detention and imprisonment for up to three generations of the same family; regular use of the death penalty (including political and extra-judicial and public executions); routine use of torture and inhumane treatment; forced abortions; political prison camps and labour rehabilitation camps; and religious persecution. Foreign observers in Pyongyang have been able to confirm that there are harsh restraints on freedom of information.

The DPRK has repeatedly invoked sovereignty, noninterference and cultural differences to avoid its human rights responsibilities. Humanitarian aid workers and diplomats in Pyongyang are subject to severe internal travel restrictions, and some regions remain inaccessible 'for reasons of national security'. The government denies foreign diplomats access to judicial institutions, saying that it amounts to interference in the country's internal affairs. These restrictions, coupled with the government's selfimposed isolation and unwillingness to co-operate with the international community on human rights, make it difficult to compile evidence regarding human rights abuses or confirm any reported improvements.

The DPRK is party to four key UN human rights treaties: the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). The DPRK has submitted three late reports on the ICESCR (in 1984, 1989 and 2002), two late reports on the ICCPR (in 1984 and 2000), three delayed reports on the CRC (in 1996, 2002 and 2007) and a late report on the CEDAW (in 2002). The Committee on the Rights of the Child will examine the latest CRC report (combined 3rd and 4th reports) in January 2009. We continue to urge the government to fulfil its obligations under the human rights instruments to which it is party and to allow the UN special procedures to visit the country.

We have made it clear to the DPRK government that we cannot extend the benefits of a full and normal bilateral relationship until we have evidence that it is addressing our concerns on human rights and other issues. We will continue to raise human rights issues directly with the government and voice our concern in international fora. Until the DPRK responds to international concerns, the UK will work with EU partners and others to maintain and increase pressure in the appropriate international bodies.

Since July 2008, co-operation between the DPRK and international humanitarian organisations has improved. This has resulted in food aid being distributed, for the most part, to the right people, and has made it more difficult for the government to divert aid to the military, as it has done previously. The organisations involved in its monitoring have been allowed access to the same number of counties as during the peak period of assistance after the 1990s famine. Despite a relatively good harvest this year, the food situation remains poor and international organisations are again having to arrange a feeding programme for 6.5 million vulnerable people, approximately a quarter of the population.

The DPRK constitution nominally provides for freedoms and liberties for its citizens but the reality is different. We have a number of concerns about human rights.

There is no freedom of expression, assembly, association, movement or information. There are no free and fair elections. The state tightly controls all media. No foreign books or magazines are available for purchase; televisions and radios are pre-tuned so that they can only pick up approved domestic broadcasts; and access to the internet is only allowed to a select few. Increasing efforts have been made during the last year to stop the use of mobile phones in the Chinese border area and use of ordinary phones has also been restricted. There is no independent human rights monitoring organisation. Foreign observers in the DPRK confirm that these claims are broadly accurate.

The use of the death penalty, including public executions and extra-judicial killings, and the lack of transparency around this also gives grave cause for concern. During the last year, the number of public executions seems to have risen markedly. Some of these are related to a clampdown on corruption among officials and trafficking of drugs and women. In February, however, it was reported that a large group of people who had returned after having crossed the border were executed near the Chinese border.

North Koreans are subject to arrest and detention without trial. Depending on the offence, authorities can detain or punish entire families for the crimes of one member. The judiciary is not independent and the legal system is not transparent.

Women do not enjoy equal rights. Concern continues about the organised trafficking of women across the border into China for marriage or prostitution. Women have taken on an increasingly important role as providers for their families by engaging in market activities, but the authorities have introduced rules by which women under 40 years of age cannot trade. They are forced to rely on an inadequate public distribution system, and must seek other methods to supplement their food supply

The government does not provide adequate nutrition and health services for all children. The rights of children depend on the government's political classification of the family into which they are born. Access to educational opportunities depends not only on the family's class but also on its ability to pay fees, both in money and in kind, that schools and teachers increasingly demand to supplement their own irregularly paid wages.

The government divides North Koreans into three political groups: a loyal core class; a suspect wavering class; and a politically unreliable class. The three groups are then sub divided into 51 categories, based on the social origins of each citizen. On the basis of this classification, the government determines where people may live and work, what job they may do and what benefits (if any) they may receive. Only those citizens classified as politically loyal can hope to obtain responsible positions in North Korean society or to live in Pyongyang. The class system has a major effect on whether Koreans have direct access to food and the opportunities available to them for making money.

Large numbers of North Koreans cross the northern border with China for economic and political reasons. Many transit China into third countries, including Thailand and Vietnam, but most remain in China. South Korean analysts estimate that there are currently between 20,000 and 40,000 migrants in China's border provinces. The Chinese consider them illegal economic migrants, and they risk detention and forcible repatriation to North Korea if caught by the Chinese authorities. Since it is illegal for citizens to leave the DPRK without permission, they are then subject to harsh penalties, including imprisonment, torture and execution. We often urge China to allow the UN High Commissioner for Refugees access to the border region and to observe its obligations under the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. South Korea's constitution provides for it to give citizenship to the vast majority of North Korean refugees who seek it. Some 12,000 have resettled there, and numbers are growing at a rate of around 2,000 a year. North Koreans also find their way to other countries in the region, such as Thailand.

The UK strongly opposed any move by the Non-Aligned Movement countries to abolish the mandate of Vitit Muntarbhorn, the Special Rapporteur on DPRK, at the UN Human Rights Council. In March, we worked closely with partners to ensure that it was not weakened or abolished. Every year since 2005, the EU has sponsored a resolution on DPRK human rights at the UN General Assembly. In 2008, this was co-sponsored by Japan and, for the first time, the Republic of Korea.

In our dealings with the DPRK, we frequently raise the issue of human rights at ministerial and official level. We have urged the DPRK to allow a visit by the UN special rapporteur, but the government has consistently denied access. We have told the North Koreans that we stand ready to help, including by giving educational and technical assistance, in return for further bilateral or multilateral progress on human rights. There has been no change in the stance of the DPRK government, and unless its members are willing to engage with us, it will be difficult to make any progress.

Bilaterally and with the EU we will continue to urge the authorities in the DPRK to adopt responsible policies. The DPRK's refusal to discuss human rights issues makes it difficult to engage directly, but our Embassy in Pyongyang funds in-country projects on humanitarian and related issues through NGOs such as Save the Children. We continue to look for ways of gathering evidence of the problems faced in North Korea by ordinary citizens. For example, our Embassy in Seoul sponsored a South Korean NGO working on North Korean human rights to produce a report on children's rights in the DPRK, based on refugee testimony. We will continue to work with the international community to draw attention to the issues and bring pressure to bear on the DPRK government to take steps to address international concerns.