UN push against North Korea on human rights moves forward

The mere possibility that its leader could be targeted by prosecutors has put North Korean officials, once dismissive of human rights issues, on edge.

Bebeto Matthews/AP
Choe Myong Nam, left, a North Korean official in charge of UN affairs and human rights, confers with his delegation during a meeting of the United Nations General Assembly human rights committee, Tuesday, Nov. 18, 2014.

The world's boldest effort yet to hold North Korea and leader Kim Jong-un accountable for alleged crimes against humanity moved forward Tuesday at the United Nations, where a Pyongyang envoy threatened further nuclear tests.

The UN General Assembly's human rights committee approved a resolution that urges the Security Council to refer the country's harsh human rights situation to the International Criminal Court. The non-binding resolution now goes to the General Assembly for a vote in the coming weeks. China and Russia, which hold veto power on the council, voted against it.

The resolution was inspired by a groundbreaking UN commission of inquiry report early this year that declared North Korea's human rights situation "exceeds all others in duration, intensity and horror."

The idea that their young leader could be targeted by prosecutors sent North Korean officials on a furious effort to derail the effort.

North Korea sent a sharp warning in comments before the vote. Trying to punish it over human rights "is compelling us not to refrain any further from conducting nuclear tests," said Choe Myong Nam, a foreign ministry adviser for UN and human rights issues. His colleagues gave no details on that threat.

Choe also accused the European Union and Japan, the resolution's co-sponsors, of "subservience and sycophancy" to the United States, and he promised "unpredictable and serious consequences" if the resolution went forward.

The European Union quickly issued a statement welcoming the support of 111 countries in the vote. Nineteen countries voted against, and 55 abstained.

Human rights groups quickly turned their attention to China and Russia, which could block any Security Council move. "No Security Council country, including China, can deny the horror endured by so many North Koreans," Kenneth Roth, director of Human Rights Watch, said in a statement just after the vote. "The time has come for justice."

North Korea and its allies have argued that a resolution that targets a single country would set a dangerous precedent and that other developing countries could be singled out, too.

The resolution says the commission of inquiry report found grounds to believe that crimes against humanity have been committed under policies "established at the highest level of the State for decades." It calls for targeted sanctions against the people who appear to be most responsible. The commission of inquiry earlier warned Kim Jong-un that could include him.

Cuba proposed an amendment that would have stripped out the tough language on the ICC, but the committee's member countries voted that down earlier Tuesday.

The mere possibility that its leader could be targeted by prosecutors has put North Korean officials, once dismissive of human rights issues, on edge. In recent weeks, it dangled the possibility of a visit by the UN human rights chief, among other attempts at outreach.

But in the chamber Tuesday, the tone shifted. A North Korean foreign ministry adviser, Kim Ju Song, was witnessed trying to get a UN official to eject Shin Dong-Hyuk, a young man who fled North Korea and has since spoken out against the Pyongyang regime.

The commission of inquiry report was based on interviews with dozens of people like Shin who had fled and detailed abuses including starvation and a system of harsh prison camps containing up to 120,000 people.

North Korea has accused people who cooperated with the commission of inquiry of lying, and it produced a video showing Shin's father in North Korea condemning him.

But Shin, who bowed to Japan's ambassador in thanks after the vote, said North Korea's attempt to intimidate him and others backfired. "This was an overwhelming defeat," he said.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.