BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//HRNK - ECPv6.16.3//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://www.hrnk.org
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for HRNK
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/New_York
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20100314T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20101107T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20110313T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20111106T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20120311T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20121104T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20130310T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20131103T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20140309T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20141102T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20150308T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20151101T060000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20140618
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20140619
DTSTAMP:20260613T172259
CREATED:20140619T013810Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230109T201727Z
UID:700777-1403049600-1403135999@www.hrnk.org
SUMMARY:Subcommittee Briefing and Hearing: Human Rights Abuses and Crimes Against Humanity in North Korea: Testimony of Andrew Natsios
DESCRIPTION:While the Committee asked me to focus my remarks on US government policy on human rights abuses in North Korea\, I should begin with a description of those abuses and the totalitarian nature of the Pyongyang regime. (My views described here are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Texas A&M or of the Bush School or of the Committee on Human Rights in North Korea). North Korea remains one of the few surviving Communist states in the world\, and the only one of these which continues to resist any serious political or economic reform. Cuba\, Vietnam\, China\, and Laos have all taken steps to privatize sectors of their economy and given individual citizens small amounts of choice in their private lives\, even if they remain authoritarian states.  North Korea is thus in a unique category of its own\, a single totalitarian dinosaur remaining of an otherwise virtually extinct species. \nSee more.
URL:https://www.hrnk.org/event/subcommittee-briefing-and-hearing-human-rights-abuses-and-crimes-against-humanity-in-north-korea-testimony-of-andrew-natsios/
LOCATION:House Committee on Foreign Affairs
CATEGORIES:Congressional Hearings
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20140326T140000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20140326T160000
DTSTAMP:20260613T172259
CREATED:20140327T013810Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230109T202036Z
UID:700776-1395842400-1395849600@www.hrnk.org
SUMMARY:The Shocking Truth about North Korean Tyranny
DESCRIPTION:HRNK Executive Director Greg Scarlatoiu testifies on Capitol Hill: “The Shocking Truth about North Korean Tyranny.”
URL:https://www.hrnk.org/event/the-shocking-truth-about-north-korean-tyranny/
LOCATION:2172 Rayburn House Office Building Washington\, DC 20515
CATEGORIES:Congressional Hearings
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20120305T140000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20120305T153000
DTSTAMP:20260613T172259
CREATED:20120306T023810Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230109T202242Z
UID:700768-1330956000-1330961400@www.hrnk.org
SUMMARY:China’s Repatriation of North Korean Refugees
DESCRIPTION:Please see the video gallery for a live recording of this hearing. \nUnable to Attend in Person \nStatement of Roberta Cohen\, Chair\, Committee for Human Rights in North Korea\, and Non-Resident Senior Fellow\, the Brookings Institution\, on China’s Repatriation of North Korean Refugees\, at the Hearing of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China\, March 5\, 2012 \nOn behalf of the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea\, I would like to express great appreciation to Congressman Christopher Smith and Senator Sherrod Brown for holding this hearing today to highlight the case of an estimated 30 to 40 North Koreans who fled into China and now risk being forcibly returned to North Korea where they will most assuredly be severely punished. We consider it essential to defend the fundamental rights of North Koreans to leave their country and seek asylum abroad and to call upon China to stop its forcible repatriation of North Koreans and provide them with the needed human rights and humanitarian protection to which they are entitled. The right to leave a country\, to seek asylum abroad and not to be forcibly returned to conditions of danger are internationally recognized rights which North Korea and China\, like all other countries\, are obliged to respect. \nThis particular case of North Koreans has captured regional and international attention. South Korean President Lee Myung Bak has spoken out publicly against the return of the North Koreans and National Assembly woman Park Sun Young has undertaken a hunger strike in front of the Chinese Embassy in Seoul. The Parliamentary Forum for Democracy encompassing 18 countries has urged its members to raise the matter with their governments. \nThe case\, however\, is situated at the tip of the iceberg. According to the State Department’s Human Rights Report (2010)\, there may be thousands or tens of thousands of North Koreans hiding in China. Although China does allow large numbers of North Koreans to reside illegally in its country\, they have no rights and China has forcibly returned tens of thousands over the past two decades. Most if not all have been punished in North Korea and according to the testimonies and reports received by the Committee for Human Rights\, the punishment has included beatings\, torture\, detention\, forced labor\, sexual violence\, and in the case of women suspected of become pregnant in China\, forced abortions or infanticide. \nStringent punishment in particular has been meted out to North Koreans who have associated abroad with foreigners (i.e.\, missionaries\, aid workers or journalists) or have sought political asylum or tried to obtain entry into South Korea. The North Koreans currently arrested and threatened with return are therefore likely to suffer severe punishment should they be repatriated. Some might even face execution; the North Korean Ministry of Public Security issued a decree in 2010 making the crime of defection a “crime of treachery against the nation.” \nThe Committee for Human Rights in North Korea\, a Washington DC-based non-governmental organization\, established in 2001\, has published three in-depth reports on the precarious plight of North Koreans in China and the cruel and inhuman practice of forcibly sending them back to one of the world’s most oppressive regimes. The first\, The North Korean Refugee Crisis: Human Rights and International Response (2006)\, edited by Stephan Haggard and Marcus Noland\, establishes that most if not all North Koreans in China merit a prima facie claim to refugee or refugee sur place status. The second\, Lives for Sale: Personal Accounts of Women Fleeing North Korea to China (2010) calls upon China to set up a screening process with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to determine the status of North Koreans and ensure they are not forcibly returned. The third\, to be published in April\, Hidden Gulag second edition\, by David Hawk\, presents the harrowing testimony of scores of North Koreans severely punished after being returned to North Korea. \n  \nReasons North Koreans in China should be considered refugees \nAlthough China claims that North Koreans in its country are economic migrants subject to deportation\, we submit that North Koreans in China should merit international refugee protection for the following reasons: \nFirst\, a definite number of those who cross the border can be expected to do so out of a well founded fear of persecution on political\, social or religious grounds. It is well known that in their own country North Koreans suffer persecution if they express or even appear to hold political views unacceptable to the authorities\, listen to foreign broadcasts\, watch South Korean DVDs\, practice their own religious beliefs\, or try to leave the country. Some 200\,000 are incarcerated in labor camps and other penal facilities on political grounds. Moreover\, North Koreans imprisoned for having gone to China for food or employment often try\, once released\, to leave again. Some conclude they will always be under suspicion\, surveillance and persecution in North Korea and therefore cross the border once again\, this time seeking political refuge\, ultimately in South Korea. \nBecause China has no refugee adjudication process to determine who is a refugee and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has no access to North Koreans at the border\, it has not been possible to ascertain how many North Koreans are seeking asylum because of a well-founded fear of political or other persecution. But those who cross the border because of political\, religious or social persecution will no doubt fit the definition of refugee under the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol.[1] \nSecond\, those who cross the border into China for reasons of economic deprivation\, probably the majority\, may also qualify as refugees if they have been compelled to leave North Korea because of government economic policies that could be shown to be tantamount to political persecution. These North Koreans are not part of the privileged political elite and therefore have insufficient access to food and material supplies. In times of economic hardship in particular\, food is distributed by the government first to the army and Party based on political loyalty whereas many of the North Koreans crossing into China during periods of famine are from the “impure\,” “wavering” or “hostile” classes\, which are the poor\, deprived lower classes\, designated as such under North Korea’s songbun caste system.[2]  Their quest for economic survival could therefore be based on political discrimination and persecution. Examining such cases in a refugee determination process might establish that certain numbers of North Koreans crossing into China for economic survival merit refugee status under the 1951 Convention. \nThird\, and by far the most compelling argument why North Koreans should not be forcibly returned is that most if not all fit the category of refugees sur place. As defined by UNHCR\, refugees sur place are persons who might not have been refugees when they left their country but who become refugees “at a later date” because they have a valid fear of persecution upon return. North Koreans who leave their country because of economic reasons have valid reasons for fearing persecution and punishment upon return. Their government after all deems it a criminal offense to leave the country without permission and punishes persons who are returned\, or even who return voluntarily. North Koreans in China therefore could qualify as refugees sur place. \nThe High Commissioner for Refugees\, Antonio Guterres in 2006 while on a visit to China raised the concept of refugees sur place with Chinese officials. He told them that forcibly repatriating North Koreans without any determination process and where they could be persecuted on return stands in violation of the Refugee Convention. To UNHCR since 2004\, North Koreans in China without permission are deemed “persons of concern\,” meriting humanitarian protection.[3] It has proposed to China a special humanitarian status for North Koreans\, which would enable them to obtain temporary documentation\, access to services\, and protection from forced return. To date\, China has failed to agree to this temporary protected status. \nWhile China has cooperated with UNHCR in making arrangements for Vietnamese and other refugees to integrate in China or resettle elsewhere\, it has refused to cooperate when it comes to North Koreans. Only in cases where North Koreans have made their way to foreign embassies or consulates or the UNHCR compound in Beijing has China felt impelled to cooperate with governments or the UNHCR in facilitating their departure to South Korea or other countries. In the vast majority of cases\, China considers itself bound to an agreement it made with North Korea in 1986 (the “Mutual Cooperation Protocol for the Work of Maintaining National Security and Social Order and the Border Areas”). This agreement obliges China and North Korea to prevent “illegal border crossings of residents.” Chinese police as a result collaborate with North Korean police in tracking down North Koreans and forcibly returning them to North Korea without any reference to their rights under refugee or human rights law or the obligations of China under the agreements it has ratified. Implementation of this agreement sounds remarkably like the efforts made by the former Soviet Union to support the German Democratic Republic’s actions to punish East Germans for trying to leave their country. It is an agreement that undermines and stands in violation of China’s obligations under the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (which it signed in 1982)\, its membership in UNHCR’s Executive Committee (EXCOM)\, which seeks to promote refugee protection\, and the human rights agreements to which China has chosen to adhere. So too do China’s domestic laws contradict its international refugee and human rights commitments. A local law in Jilin province (1993) requires the return of North Koreans who enter the province illegally. \nChina is bound not only by the Refugee Convention that prohibits non-refoulement but the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel\, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment\,\nwhich China ratified in 1988. It prohibits the return of persons to states “where there are substantial grounds for believing” that they would be “subjected to torture.”  Indeed\, the Committee against Torture (CAT)\, the expert body monitoring the convention’s implementation\, has called upon China to establish a screening process to examine whether North Koreans will face the risk of torture on return\, to provide UNHCR access to all North Korean persons of concern\, and to adopt legislation incorporating China’s obligations under the convention\, in particular with regard to deportations. \nAnother UN expert body\, the Committee on the Rights of the Child\, which monitors compliance by China and other states with the Convention on the Rights of the Child\, similarly has called on China to ensure that no unaccompanied child from North Korea is returned to a country “where there are substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk of irreparable harm to the child.” \nChina of course has legitimate interests in wanting to control its borders. It is concerned about potential large scale outflows from North Korea and the impact of such flows on North Korea’s stability. It also is said to be concerned about potential Korean nationalism in its border areas where there are historic Korean claims. But China should not become complicit in the serious human rights violations perpetrated by North Korea against its own citizens. The reports of the United Nations Secretary-General and of the Special Rapporteur on human rights in North Korea as well as the resolutions of the General Assembly\, adopted by more than 100 states\, have strongly criticized North Korea for its practices and called upon North Korea’s “neighboring states” to cease the deportation of North Koreans because of the terrible mistreatment they are known to endure upon return. \n  \nRecommendations \nTo encourage China to fulfill its international obligations in this matter\, the following recommendations are offered: \nFirst\, additional hearings should be held by the United States Congress on the plight of North Koreans who cross into China. A spotlight must be kept on the issue to seek to avert China’s forced repatriation of North Koreans to situations where their lives are at risk. \nSecond\, members of Congress should lend support to the efforts of the Parliamentary Forum for Democracy\, established in 2010\, so that joint inter-parliamentary efforts can be mobilized in a number of countries around the world on behalf of the North Koreans in danger in China. Such joint efforts can also offer solidarity to South Korean colleagues protesting the forced return of North Koreans. \nThird\, the United States should encourage UNHCR to raise its profile on this issue. It further should lend its full support to UNHCR’s appeals and proposals to China and mobilize other governments to do likewise in order to make sure that the non-refoulement provision of the 1951 Refugee Convention is upheld and the work of this important UN agency enhanced. China’s practices at present threaten to undermine the principles of the international refugee protection regime. \nFourth\, together with other concerned governments\, the United States should give priority to raising the forced repatriation of North Koreans with Chinese officials but in the absence of response\, should bring the issue before international refugee and human rights fora. UNHCR’s Executive Committee as well as the UN Human Rights Council and General Assembly of the United Nations should all be expected to call on China by name to carry out its obligations under refugee and human rights law and enact legislation to codify these obligations so that North Koreans will not be expelled if their lives or freedom are in danger. Specifically\, China should be called upon to adopt legislation incorporating its obligations under the Refugee Convention and international human rights agreements and to bring its existing laws into line with internationally agreed upon principles. It should be expected to call a moratorium on deportations of North Koreans until its laws and practices are brought into line with international standards and can ensure that North Koreans will not be returned to conditions of danger. \nFifth\, the United States should promote a multilateral approach to the problem of North Koreans leaving their country. Their exodus affects more than China. It concerns South Korea most notably\, which already houses more than 23\,000 North Korean ‘defectors’ and whose Constitution offers citizenship to North Koreans. Countries in East and Southeast Asia\, East and West Europe as well as Mongolia and the United States are also affected as they too have admitted North Korean refugees and asylum seekers. Together with UNHCR\, a multilateral approach should be designed that finds solutions for North Koreans based on principles of non-refoulement and human rights and humanitarian protection. International burden sharing has been introduced for other refugee populations and should be developed here. \nSixth\, the United States should make known its readiness to increase the number of North Korean refugees and asylum seekers admitted to this country.[4] Other countries should be encouraged as well to step forward and take in more North Korean refugees and asylum seekers until such time as they no longer face persecution and punishment in their country. \n  \nThank you. \n  \nRoberta Cohen \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n\n  \n\n\n[1] Under the Convention\, a person is a refugee if he or she is outside his/her country of origin because of “a well-founded fear of being persecuted” for “reasons of race\, religion\, nationality\, membership of a particular social group or political opinion” and unable or unwilling to avail him or herself of the protection of that country. An exception is if the person has committed criminal acts (although in the case of North Korea\, the term criminal would be open to discussion). \n  \n\n\n[2] See Committee for Human Rights in North Korea\, Marked for Life: Songbun\, North Korea’s Social Classification System\, 2012 (forthcoming). \n\n\n[3] In September 2004\, the High Commissioner announced before UNHCR’s Executive Committee that North Koreans in China are ‘persons of concern.” One reason why UNHCR used this term was that it had no access to the North Koreans; another was that under the Refugee Convention\, persons of dual nationality could be excluded from refugee status. (However it has been pointed out that in the case of North Koreans\, not all are able to avail themselves of their right to citizenship in South Korea\, some may not choose to do so\, and South Korea may not take in every North Korean. The United States and other countries do not consider North Koreans ineligible for refugee status because of the dual nationality provision.) \n  \n  \n\n\n[4] See Roberta Cohen\, “Admitting North Korean Refugees to the United States: Obstacles and Opportunities\,” 38 North\, September 20\, 2011. \n\n\n 
URL:https://www.hrnk.org/event/chinas-repatriation-of-north-korean-refugees-5/
LOCATION:Hearing of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China\, United States
CATEGORIES:Congressional Hearings
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20120305T100000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20120305T110000
DTSTAMP:20260613T172259
CREATED:20230109T202525Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230109T202734Z
UID:725959-1330941600-1330945200@www.hrnk.org
SUMMARY:China’s Repatriation of North Korean Refugees
DESCRIPTION:Please see the video gallery for a live recording of this hearing. \nGood afternoon\, Chairman Smith\, Cochairman Brown\, and members of the Commission. \nOn behalf of the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea\, thank you for inviting me to speak with you at this hearing today. Our Committee considers it essential to draw attention to the case of 30 to 40 North Koreans who have been arrested by China and who now risk being forcibly returned to North Korea where they most assuredly will be subjected to severe punishment in violation of international refugee and human rights law. The fundamental right to leave a country\, to seek asylum abroad and not to be forcibly returned to conditions of danger are internationally recognized rights which China and North Korea must be obliged to respect. \nMr. Chair\, the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea is a Washington DC-based non-governmental organization\, established in 2001. Our Committee’s main statement has been prepared by Chair Roberta Cohen\, who was unable to be here today. I will draw upon that statement in my opening remarks. \nOver the past two decades\, considerable numbers of North Koreans have risked their lives to cross the border into China. They have done so because of starvation\, economic deprivation or political persecution. It is estimated that there are thousands or tens of thousands in China today. Most are vulnerable to forced returns where they will face persecution and punishment because leaving North Korea without permission is a criminal offense. Yet to China\, all North Koreans are economic migrants\, and over the years\, it has forcibly returned tens of thousands to conditions of danger. According to the testimonies and reports received by the Committee for Human Rights\, the North Koreans returned to their country endure cruel and inhuman punishment including beatings\, torture\, detention\, forced labor\, sexual violence\, and in the case of women suspected of become pregnant in China\, forced abortions or infanticide. Some have even been executed. \nWe therefore submit that North Koreans in China merit international refugee protection for the following reasons: First\, a definite number of those who cross the border may do so out of a well founded fear of persecution on political\, social or religious grounds that would accord with the 1951 Refugee Convention. Second\, the reasons why these North Koreans flee to China go beyond the economic realm. Those who cross the border into China for reasons of economic deprivation are often from poorer classes\, without access to the food and material benefits enjoyed by the privileged political elite. Subject to North Korea’s songbun classification system\, their quest for economic survival may be based on political persecution. Examining such cases in a refugee determination process might establish that certain numbers crossing into China for economic survival merit refugee status. Third\, and by far the most compelling argument why North Koreans should not be forcibly returned is that most if not all fit the category of refugees sur place. As defined by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)\, refugees sur place are persons who might not have been refugees when they left their country but who 2become refugees at a later date because they have a valid fear of persecution upon return. North Koreans who leave their country for reasons including economic motives have valid reasons for fearing persecution and punishment upon return. Accordingly\, UNHCR has urged China not to forcibly return North Koreans and has proposed a special humanitarian status for them so that they can obtain temporary documentation and access to services and not be repatriated. \nChina\, however\, has refused to allow UNHCR access to North Koreans in border areas where it could set up a screening process. It considers itself bound by an agreement it made with North Korea in 1986 obliging both countries to prevent “illegal border crossings\,” which replaced an earlier 1960 agreement. It also stands by its local law in Jilin province (1993) which requires the return of North Koreans who enter illegally.Both documents stand in violation of China’s obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention (which it signed in 1982)\, its membership in UNHCR’s Executive Committee (EXCOM)\, and the human rights agreements it has ratified. These include the Convention against Torture\, which prohibits the return of persons to states where they could be subjected to torture\, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child\, which prohibits the return of unaccompanied children to countries where they could be irreparably harmed. \nIt is reported that some local Chinese officials have at times provided documents to North Korean women married to Han Chinese\, which allows them and their children some form of protection and access to medical and educational services. Such practices should be encouraged but they are not Chinese policy or law. Most North Koreans in China have no rights and are vulnerable to exploitation\, forced marriages and trafficking as well as to forced returns where they will face persecution and punishment. Our Committee’s report Lives for Sale: Personal Accounts of Women Fleeing North Korea to China\, 2010\, documents the experiences of North Korean women in China and the extreme lack of protection for them. \nTo encourage China to fulfill its international obligations to North Koreans on its territory\, our Committee puts forward the following recommendations: \nFirst\, the United States Congress should consider additional hearings on the plight of North Koreans who cross into China to keep a spotlight on the issue and try to avert forced repatriations to conditions of danger. \nSecond\, members of Congress should consider supporting the efforts of the Parliamentary Forum for Democracy\, established in 2010\, so that joint inter-parliamentary efforts can be mobilized in a number of countries on behalf of the North Koreans in danger in China. \nThird\, the United States should encourage UNHCR to raise its profile on this issue. It further should lend its full support to UNHCR’s appeals and proposals to China and mobilize other governments to do likewise in order to make sure that the provisions of the 1951 Refugee Convention are upheld and the work of this important UN agency enhanced. \nFourth\, together with other concerned governments\, the United States should give priority to raising the forced repatriation of North Koreans with Chinese officials but in the absence of a response\, should bring the issue before international refugee and human rights fora. UNHCR’s Executive Committee as well as the UN Human Rights Council and General Assembly of the United Nations should all be expected to call on China by name to carry out its obligations under refugee and human rights law and enact legislation to codify these obligations so that North Koreans will not be expelled if their lives or freedom are in danger. \nFifth\, the United States should consider promoting a multilateral approach to the problem of North Koreans leaving their country. Their exodus affects more than China. It concerns South Korea most notably\, whose Constitution offers citizenship to North Koreans. Countries in East and Southeast Asia\, East and West Europe as well as Mongolia and the United States are also affected. Together with UNHCR\, a multilateral approach should be designed that finds solutions for North Koreans based on principles of non-refoulement and human rights and humanitarian protection. International burden sharing has been introduced for other refugee populations and could be developed here. \nSixth\, the United States should consider ways to enhance its readiness to increase the number of North Korean refugees and asylum seekers admitted to this country. Other countries should be encouraged as well to take in more North Korean refugees and asylum seekers until such time as they no longer face persecution and punishment in their country. \nThank you\, Mr. Chairman\, and members of the Commission. I look forward to answering any questions you might have.
URL:https://www.hrnk.org/event/chinas-repatriation-of-north-korean-refugees/
LOCATION:Hearing of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China\, United States
CATEGORIES:Congressional Hearings
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20110920T140000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20110920T153000
DTSTAMP:20260613T172259
CREATED:20110921T013810Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230109T203447Z
UID:700769-1316527200-1316532600@www.hrnk.org
SUMMARY:Human Rights in North Korea: Challenges and Opportunities
DESCRIPTION:Please see the video gallery for a live recording of the hearing. \nGood afternoon\, Chairman Smith\, Mr. Payne\, and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to speak with you today about the human rights situation in North Korea\, as that country prepares for a second hereditary transmission of top leadership\, and about the apparent increase in the amount of information getting into North Korea. It is an honor and privilege to have an opportunity to discuss these issues with you today. \nAfter North Korean leader Kim Jong-il allegedly suffered a stroke in the summer of 2008\, the Kim regime proceeded with preparations for third generation succession. In September 2010\, one day ahead of a rare Workers’ Party of Korea conference in Pyongyang\, Kim Jong-il’s third son\, Kim Jong-un\, was made a daejang\, the equivalent to an American Four-Star General. Kim Jongun’s selection as one of the two Vice-Chairmen of North Korea’s National Defense Commission and the Workers’ Party Central Military Commission appears to confirm that he has been designated to succeed Kim Jong-il as leader of North Korea. According to experts\, should Kim Jong-un become North Korea’s leader\, it is likely that Kim Jong-un’s uncle Chang Sung-taek will act as a regent in the early stages\, as Kim Jong-il’s  third  son is still too young and inexperienced. \nIn April 2012\, North Korea will celebrate the 100th birthday of its founder\, “eternal president” Kim Il-sung\, who died in 1994. The Kim regime has stated its goal of turning North Korea into a “strong and prosperous nation” (kangsong-daekuk) by the year 2012. The year 2012 may provide North Korea with an opportunity to take some significant steps towards the accomplishment of hereditary succession. The year 2012 will also mark possible changes in countries of key importance to North Korea: presidential elections will be held in March in Russia\, in October in the People’s Republic of China\, in November in the United States\, and in December in South Korea. Changes affecting the Lower House and the government may also be expected in Japan during the year 2012. \nAccording to experts and testimony by recent North Korean defectors\, there is no evidence that the human rights situation in North Korea has improved as the Kim regime proceeds with steps towards leadership succession.  On the contrary\, it appears that\, as North Korea engaged in grave military provocations such as the sinking of the ROKS Cheonan on March 26\, 2010\, and the shelling of the South Korean Island of Yeonpyeong on November 23\, 2010\, the border crackdown aimed at preventing North Koreans from defecting to China has intensified\, and the political prisoner camp population has been on the increase. \nThe 2010 State Department Report on Human Rights Practices in North Korea\, quoting The Washington Post and South Korea’s Donga Daily\, estimates the total number of prisoners detained in political penal-labor camps to be between 150\,000 and 200\,000. In May 2011\, Amnesty International released satellite imagery and new testimony shedding light on the horrific conditions in North Korea’s political prisoner camps. According to Amnesty International\, the prisoner population detained at such camps is around 200\,000\, and a comparison of the latest satellite photos with satellite imagery from 2001 indicates a considerable increase in the scale of the camps. According to testimony by former inmates\, many of those detained at these camps are unaware of the crimes they have allegedly committed. The majority of prisoners are held in areas inside the camps known as “Total Control Zones\,” where they have to be detained until they breathe their last. \nIn 2003\, based on prisoners’ testimonies and satellite imagery\, the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea published one of the most comprehensive reports to date on North Korea’s political prisoner camp system\, entitled “The Hidden Gulag: Exposing North Korea’s Prison Camps.” Our organization is currently working on the second edition of “Hidden Gulag\,” based on information provided by North Koreans who were previously trapped in prison-labor camps. \nDespite North Korea’s relentless denial that such camps exist\, our research and interviews have revealed the detailed operation of an enormous system of arbitrary and extra-judicial detention coupled with a regime of forced labor that abuses scores of thousands of North Koreans at any one time\, and has brutalized hundreds of thousands of North Koreans since the inception of this system. \nWitnesses interviewed by our organization include about 60 of the hundreds of former North Koreans previously detained in the network of prison camps\, penitentiaries\, police detention facilities and mobile labor brigades. Their testimony and personal stories detail an extraordinary amount of unprovoked and unnecessary human suffering. This network of detention and forced labor facilities constitutes the North Korean “gulag\,” appropriating the common name for the Stalinist prison-labor camps of the former Soviet Union. \nDespite the political oppression affecting the overwhelming majority of North Koreans\, more information from the outside world appears to be making its way into the world’s most reclusive nation. Although\, officially\, all personal radios must have a fixed dial and be registered with state security offices\, programming by stations including Voice of America\, Radio Free Asia and broadcasters based in South Korea may have a listenership of around 30% in North Korea. The number of radio sets smuggled from China has been on the increase. The North Korean authorities continue to attempt to jam foreign broadcasting\, but face serious limitations in their efforts\, as jamming is energy-intensive and North Korea is experiencing endemic energy shortages. \nIn recent years\, we have also found out that there has been a significant increase in the amount of information entering North Korea via channels other than radio waves. This development is mostly the result of the marketization that has taken place in North Korea. Such marketization is by no means an intended top-down reform program\, but rather a function of state failure. Mr. Kim Kwang-jin\, a former high-ranking North Korean official who defected to South Korea\, also a former visiting scholar and current non-resident fellow of our organization\, has spoken about North Korea’s “three economies:” the centrally planned state economy\, which is in a virtual state 3 of collapse; the “palace economy\,” operating in the range of hundreds of million a dollars a year\, employing North Korea’s military-industrial complex to earn the Kim regime the foreign currency needed to procure luxury goods and maintain its grip on power; and the “people’s economy\,” much smaller by comparison\, operating through informal markets to provide ordinary people a coping mechanism enabling them to survive. \nDuring the informal marketization of North Korea\, supply chains have developed from China to North Korea’s capital city of Pyongyang\, and MP3 players\, CD-ROMs\, DVDs and thumb drives have been entering North Korea along these supply chains. Statistical data included in a 2010 survey of North Korean refugees and travelers by the Broadcasting Board of Governors indicate that 27% of respondents have listened to foreign radio\, 48% have come in contact with foreign DVDs and other video material\, while 27% have watched foreign TV. The same survey indicates that 74% of North Koreans have access to TV sets\, 46% to DVD players\, 16% to computers\, and 8% to MP3 players. A subsequent study conducted by the BBG indicates that computer thumb drives are becoming increasingly popular but are not yet as common as MP3 players. Such data imply access\, and not ownership or in-home access to such devices. \nDue to severe restrictions imposed not only on travel outside North Korea\, but also inside that country\, the majority of the defectors come from the border regions with China\, such as the North Hamgyong Province. For that and other reasons\, statistical data collected by the BBG or other organizations through defector interviews are not necessarily representative of the North Korean population generally\, or the North Korean refugee population in China. \nIn addition to contributing to the increase in the flow of information into North Korea through the introduction of new electronic devices\, another side effect of these informal supply chains is that information is also being passed from one member to the next along the chain. It appears that the “Korean Wave” (called Hallyu in South Korea and Nampoong\, or “Southern Wind” in North Korea)\, including South Korean soap operas\, other TV series\, music and fashion\, popular elsewhere in Asia and beyond\, has also reached North Korea\, in particular the capital city of Pyongyang\, although the percentage of those aware of the “Korean Wave” is difficult to determine. \nIn January 2008\, Egyptian company Orascom Telecom Holding was awarded a license to establish a 3G mobile network in North Korea. When Koryolink\, North Korea’s cellular phone network was launched in December 2008\, it had 5\,300 subscribers. According to data released by Orascom\, Koryolink’s parent company\, North Korea’s cellular phone network reached 535\,133 users in the January-March period of 2011\, up from 431\,919 users in the final quarter of 2010. On a year-to-year basis\, the number of subscribers among North Korea’s 24 million people represented a jump of 420 percent from 125\,661 in the first quarter of 2010. According to Orascom\, during the first quarter of 2011\, while the number of subscribers was on the increase\, average monthly cell phone usage decreased from 316 minutes in the last quarter of 2010 to 270. \nOn a year-to-year basis\, the decrease constituted a drop of 41 minutes compared to an average 311 minutes during the first quarter of 2010. While Orascom officials including Aldo Mareuse\, the company’s Chief Financial Officer\, have interpreted the decrease in average cell phone usage as the result of “lower income segments” entering the market\, other experts disagree\, and point out that half a million out of a population of 24 million is still a low percentage\, and it is likely 4that cell phones are still only in the hands of those close to the Kim regime. In its half-year earnings report for January-June 2011\, published on August 10th\, Orascom stated that the number of subscribers in North Korea had reached 660\,000. \nSeparate from the expansion of the Koryolink network\, citizens of North Korea have also been using Chinese cellular phones smuggled across the border into North Korea. Media organizations and NGOs in South Korea have even recruited North Koreans living inside North Korea as informants. The South Korean press and other media organizations including The New York Times have reported that\, using Chinese cellular phones in areas of North Korea where a signal is available\, a handful of North Koreans assume great risks to overcome North Korea’s near-total news blackout. Given that the level of political access these sources have is rather limited\, the information they provide is not necessarily useful in understanding the inner workings of the Kim regime\, but it offers valuable insights into everyday life in the world’s most secluded nation. \nA group of experts that has recently traveled to North Korea was told by Koryolink representatives that 3G internet service via Apple iPad will be made available in Pyongyang this fall via a special SIM card developed by Koryolink. Nevertheless\, internet access is likely to continue to be restricted to foreign residents and those close to the Kim regime. The percentage of North Koreans possessing computers not connected to the web is estimated to be around 3% of the entire population. \nBecause the North Korean people are so restricted in the information they receive about their own country and the outside world\, the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea has recommended that the United States should continue to expand radio broadcasting into North Korea and encourage other efforts that provide information directly to the North Korean people in accordance with the North Korea Human Rights Act. Our Committee has also recommended that the United States should make known to the North Korean people that their welfare is of great concern to the American people. \nBased on data collected through interviews with North Korean defectors and the proven track record of success in winning the ideological confrontation during the Cold War\, radio broadcasting will likely continue to be one of the few media available to grant the people of North Korea access to information from the outside world. In addition to radios smuggled from China\, computers not connected to the internet\, thumb drives\, DVDs\, CD-ROMs and MP3 players have become increasingly available\, although access to such devices is still relatively limited. Efforts to increase the flow of information into North Korea may benefit from taking into account the increasing availability of such vehicles. \nThank you\, Mr. Chairman\, Mr. Payne\, and members of the Subcommittee. I look forward to answering any questions you might have.
URL:https://www.hrnk.org/event/human-rights-in-north-korea-challenges-and-opportunities/
LOCATION:House Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa\, Global Health\, and Human Rights
CATEGORIES:Congressional Hearings
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20110602T140000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20110602T153000
DTSTAMP:20260613T172259
CREATED:20110603T013810Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230109T203547Z
UID:700770-1307023200-1307028600@www.hrnk.org
SUMMARY:Implementation of the North Korean Human Rights Act
DESCRIPTION:I thank the Committee for its invitation to testify on the implementation of the North Korean Human Rights Act of 2004\, re-authorized in 2008. I represent\, as Executive Director\, the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea\, a bi-partisan\, Washington-based research and advocacy organization devoted to the advancement of the human rights of the people of North Korea. I should add that my views in all likelihood do not reflect the views of every member of the Board. \nI speak here today as an individual who has spent many years working on this issue\, including service here in the House of Representatives over ten years ago as the senior defense and foreign policy advisor of the Policy Committee\, during which time I worked with this Committee on a number of matters relating to North Korea. This included the DoD Authorization Act which established the role of North Korea Policy coordinator in 1998\, the report of the Speaker’s Special Advisory Group on North Korea in 1999 (available at: http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/nkag-report.htm)\, and the first steps that were taken toward \nthe enactment of the North Korean Human Rights Act which became law in 2004. I know from first-hand experience the deep interest and profound dedication of members and staff of this Committee\, on North Korean human rights issues\, and applaud your consistent efforts to protect the people of North Korea from the human rights abuses afflicted on them by their own regime. \nIn 2009\, our co-chair the late Stephen J. Solarz\, a distinguished former member of Congress and chairman of an important Subcommittee of this Committee\, convened a group of human rights specialists in Washington to discuss priorities for addressing the human rights crisis in North Korea. Under his leadership\, we developed a set of ten policy recommendations\, a key one of which was to enhance the implementation of the North Korea Human Rights Act. \nWe recommended that the administration establish a specific office with the responsibility for implementing the NKHRA refugee resettlement mandate. We advised that it was critical for the State Department to better educate embassy personnel in countries of asylum for North Korean refugees to understand the circumstances facing these refugees and the nature of the North Korean regime. We also recommended an increase in the staffing levels of U.S. personnel\, particularly Korean speakers\, in the region’s embassies and consulates to handle North Korean refugee resettlement issues. Further\, we recommended that the State Department establish a hotline in coordination with the UNHCR and the Republic of Korea\, so that North Korean refugees in danger would have ways to contact those who can offer them immediate protection. \nThe Enforcement of the North Korea Human Rights Act \nMadame Chairman\, in your letter of invitation\, you specifically requested that I address the number of North Korean refugees that have been resettled in the United States\, and certain questions regarding the implementation of the NKHRA. Regarding the number of refugees\, I must rely on figures from the Department of State and information from other organizations\, but I am informed that 120 individuals have been given asylum in the United States since the enactment of the NKHRA. This number seems very small\, and of course it remains very difficult for North Korean refugees to gain access to any American or international official who could hear their requests for permission to come to the United States. The number of refugees who have made it to South Korea in recent years has been growing and is very encouraging. The government of the Republic of Korea is to be commended for their attention to the plight of these people and its efforts to help them adjust to South Korean society. The problem\, of course\, is China’s policy of repatriating North Koreans without giving them access to a screening procedure to determine whether they are refugees. Increasingly\, we hear reports of Chinese officials turning a blind eye toward North Korean attempts to recapture North Korean escapees in China\, and in fact\, there is growing evidence of Chinese complicity in these North Korean violations of Chinese jurisdictional sovereignty. Changing China’s attitude toward North Korean refugees should be an important objective of U.S. policy toward China. \nPersuade China to Respect the Rights of North Korean Refugees \nNorth Koreans who attempt to move about inside their own country in search of food\, medicine and jobs have often been arrested and detained. At the same time\, their government refuses to acknowledge the fundamental right of people to leave their country and return to it. For more than two decades\, North Koreans have been fleeing their country because of economic deprivation and political persecution. Whether they are forced back to North Korea or return voluntarily\, they are subjected to detention\, punishment\, imprisonment\, and sometimes execution. \nBecause of their reasonable fear of persecution on return to North Korea\, all of the people who flee North Korea may well qualify as refugees sur place and warrant the protections that international law requires for refugees. International law\, particularly the 1951 UN Refugee Convention\, strictly and specifically prohibits forced repatriation of a person to another state where there are substantial grounds for believing that they would be in danger of being subjected to torture or persecution. \nYet China repatriates North Koreans without affording them any access to a screening process whereby their claims for refugee status could be assessed. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has often requested to have access to North Koreans in order to determine their status\, but China has restricted UNHCR‟s access and North Koreans‟ access to UNHCR‟s offices in Beijing. The United States should lend its full support to UNHCR‟s appeals and mobilize other governments to do likewise in order to make sure that the provisions of the 1951 Refugee Convention are upheld\, and the work of this important UN agency enhanced. The United States should also raise with China the need to respect the rights of North Korean women who stay in China to raise their families and afford these residents legal status for themselves and their children. Repatriation of North Koreans not only leads to their imprisonment and other abuses\, but it also encourages trafficking\, forcing North Korean women who fear repatriation into forced marriages\, prostitution\, and physical and psychological abuse. \nEstablish a First Asylum Program for North Korean Refugees \nThere is no reason for China to have to bear the burden of resettling all North Korean refugees. The United States should work with South Korea and countries around the world to establish multilateral First Asylum arrangements\, as was done for the Vietnamese boat people in the late 1970s. Arrangements should be negotiated with countries in the region which will provide temporary asylum to these refugees with the assurance that the refugees will be permanently resettled elsewhere. \nSouth Korea should be supported in its efforts to grant asylum to North Korean refugees who reach its embassies and consulates abroad since it is the country whose Constitution protects the rights of North Koreans fleeing abroad. Given the special connections between Mongolia and the Koreas\, the government of Mongolia should be encouraged to play a more active role in providing asylum and facilitating resettlement to a third country. The United States should also initiate the development of an international plan with UNHCR for a potential refugee crisis in the event of political destabilization in North Korea. \nRecognize the Need to Develop Policies to Attract Critically Important High-Level Defectors from North Korea \nThe vast majority of refugees from North Korea are clearly victims of an oppressive state—they are poorly-educated\, under-nourished\, impoverished\, and in many cases\, psychologically broken. They may well choose to restart their lives among their kinsmen in South Korea where they have some common understanding of the language and culture\, and where government programs are in place to facilitate their assimilation. Yet there are tremendous success stories—people who have emerged from their circumstances to be leaders in their new surroundings. \nIt is very difficult for American policy to fine-tune is an approach that allows people who would like to come to the U.S. at some later point if they so desire\, but such policies would reap tremendous benefits. \nMy organization had the honor of hosting a very well-educated high-level North Korean defector\, Mr. Kim Kwangjin\, who used his English language fluency to explain the regime’s corrupt financial practices and provide advice on how U.S. policies could influence the regime’s behavior for the better. He was able to publish two major reports on political transition and wrote very valuable reports on how information is shared in North Korea\, and how North Korea’s banking system operates during his short two years with us. We would have liked to have seen this incredible national asset to have been given citizenship and a permanent position in the United States\, but he had no choice but to return to Seoul this past March to resume his position at a think-tank the South Korean government operates for high-level defectors. There ought to be a better organized effort on the part of the United States to attract defectors of interest and give them an opportunity to speak openly about what they know about the inner workings of the regime. \nNo one knows better how to bring about reform in North Korea than the defectors from North Korea. Since the election of President Lee Myung Bak\, many of them have been given new freedom to share their information and insights. They should be an excellent resource for learning more about how the military\, party\, security services and government work\, current human rights conditions in North Korea\, including in prisons\, and how to bring about reform. \nThe United States should also help develop an educated cadre of experts and potential leaders who might later return to North Korea. It should create a scholarship program for study in the United States for North Koreans who have departed\, and in some cases expand it to include North Koreans who may be permitted to travel abroad for schooling. Congressman Solarz felt particularly strongly that a program adopted by the United States during the period of Apartheid in South Africa produced a generation of leaders who were prepared to take over the reins of leadership when the opportunity arose. \nProvide Essential Information Directly to the People of North Korea \nBecause the North Korean people are so restricted in the information they receive about their own country and the world outside\, the United States should continue to expand radio broadcasting into North Korea and encourage other efforts that provide information directly to the North Korean people in accordance with the NKHRA. The United States should also make known to the North Korean people that their welfare is of great concern to the American people and that the U. S. and other nations are regularly restricted by the North Korean government from providing food aid and other supplies to them. The United States government should use its good offices to persuade neighboring countries to provide locations and assistance for transmission facilities for Radio Free Asia\, Voice of America\, and defector organizations. \nI recommend that the Congress direct the Department of State to provide additional funding and if necessary\, technical assistance in financial management\, to permit Free North Korea Radio to expand its excellent broadcasts into North Korea. Independent surveys have identified Free North Korea Radio as the most effective way to get information into North Korea. \nRun by defectors under the leadership of Kim Seong Min\, it has produced the most hard-hitting and effective broadcasts into North Korea\, even while facing North Korean assassination attempts targeted against its personnel\, political badgering in South Korea\, having to move offices repeatedly\, and shoe-string budgets with strenuous financial reporting requirements. \nStop the Flow of North Korea’s Ill-gotten Wealth \nIn order to finance its military programs\, security services and loyal elite\, the North Korean regime has systematically engaged in international criminal activity including drug trafficking\, counterfeiting of goods and currency\, and banking and insurance fraud. Although a small office exists in the State Department to coordinate the Proliferation Security Initiative\, only a few cases have been pursued rigorously. The pursuit of cases against North Korea is sometimes overcome by other priorities (e.g.\, the maintenance of a favorable negotiating atmosphere)\, but the administration should recognize the nexus between these international illicit activities and North Korea‟s abuse of human rights at home and pursue enforcement operations rigorously. \nPrepare for Political Transition and Humanitarian Crises in North Korea the impending change of leadership when Kim Jong Il dies presents both a challenge and an opportunity for regional peace and security. The implications for the human rights of North Korea‟s people are profound. Although new leadership may not reverse Kim Jong Il‟s policies overnight\, it may prove more receptive to addressing some human rights concerns as a means of signaling to the rest of the world that its intentions are friendly. \nIn the event of political change in North Korea\, international access to the prison camps will need to be given the highest priority. Prisoners constitute a “vulnerable group” to whom food\, medicine and shelter should be provided immediately. An orderly departure program from the camps will need to be implemented and resettlement arranged for those whose treatment or condition precludes re-integration into North Korean society. The International Labor Organization (ILO) will need to be brought in to review standards of work at the camps where reports of forced and slave labor and below-subsistence food rations have been producing large numbers of deaths in detention. \nThe international community should also prepare a plan for addressing the severe economic needs of the people of North Korea. Under the most optimistic scenario\, a package of international economic assistance should be envisioned if new leadership demonstrates a willingness to pursue improvements in North Korea‟s human rights practices. In foreign investment\, core labor standards\, including the prohibition of forced labor\, as established in the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work\, must be ensured. At the appropriate time\, international aid for „states in transition‟ should be made available to North Korea to help with the establishment of the rule of law\, respect for human rights\, political parties\, an independent media and the other essential features of a democratic society. \nSeek a Full Accounting of Foreign Citizens Held in North Korea Against their Will \nNorth Korea‟s admitted government-sponsored abduction of citizens of other nations\, and its refusal to allow them to decide their own choice of residence is a clear violation of international law. The Committee for Human Rights has just released an extraordinary report entitled\, “TAKEN! North Korea‟s Criminal Abduction of Citizens of Other Countries.” It explains that North Korea‟s policy of abducting foreign citizens dates back to policy decisions made by North Korea‟s founder Kim Il-sung himself\, institutionalized in an espionage reorganization by his son Kim Jong-il around 1976. \nThe abducted came from widely diverse backgrounds\, at least twelve nationalities\, both genders\, and all ages\, and were taken from places as far away as London\, Copenhagen\, Zagreb\, Beirut\, Hong Kong\, and China\, in addition to Japan. Initially\, over 80\,000 skilled professionals were abducted from South Korea during the Korean War. In the 1960s\, 93\,000 Koreans were lured from Japan and held against their will in North Korea. A decade later\, children of North Korean agents were kidnapped apparently to blackmail their parents. Starting in the late 1970s\, foreigners who could teach North Korean operatives to infiltrate targeted countries were brought to North Korea and forced to teach spies. Since then\, people in China who assist North Korean refugees have been targeted and taken. The staggering sum of foreigners who are held against their will in North Korea is at least 180\,308. \nIn addition\, many South Korean families have been separated since the Korean War\, and more recently famine\, extreme poverty\, and political persecution in the North have led to the flight of North Koreans who are then separated from their families. Although North Korea has allowed brief visits under closely-supervised family reunions\, only 1\,600 of the 125\,000 South Korean applicants have been able to participate. Some ten million await information about missing family members. The ICRC should be brought in to use its expert tracing facilities to learn the whereabouts of the missing. \nBroaden United States Policy on North Korea to Include Bilateral and Multilateral Approaches to Human Rights Issues \nI would like to congratulate Amb. Robert King for his recent visit to North Korea. He is doing what a special envoy for North Korean human rights issues should do—representing the President in obtaining the release of a detained citizen of the United States\, and speaking openly about human rights issues directly with officials in Pyongyang. All too often in dealing with North Korea\, concerns about peace and nuclear disarmament have taken a priority over the defense of human rights. However\, precedents exist for integrating human rights concerns into policies toward countries where nuclear weapons occupy a central point of discussion. Both Democratic and Republican administrations have found effective bilateral and multilateral means of promoting human rights goals with the Soviet Union even though they were negotiating nuclear weapons agreements with its leaders at the same time. Broader discussions about political\, economic\, energy\, human rights and humanitarian concerns have the potential to create a more solid foundation for talks about nuclear issues. \nThe United States should raise human rights concerns and seek North Korean agreement on specific steps forward\, such as: 1) International monitoring of food distribution to ensure it reaches the intended recipients; 2) Accelerated and expanded family reunifications; 3) Decriminalization of movement within North Korea and across the border\, and an end to the persecution of those who return voluntarily or are forced back into North Korea; 4) The release of innocent children and family members of those convicted of political crimes; 5) Access to prisoners by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)\, the World Food Program (WFP) and other international agencies; 6) Reviews of the cases of prisoners of conscience with the ICRC or Amnesty International with a view to their release; and 7) Identification and provision of a full accounting of prisoners of war from the Korean War and abductees missing from South Korea\, Japan\, and other nations. While these steps do not address the full range of 8 human rights abuses committed by the North Korean regime\, we believe they represent human rights issues that can be raised in negotiations with the regime. \nU. S. multilateral initiatives and discussions should also give prominence to North Korean human rights issues. North Korea has ratified five international human rights treaties\, has recently placed the term “human rights” in its Constitution\, and has participated to a very limited degree in UN reviews of its human rights record. The U. S. should recognize and build on the obligations that the North Korean government has undertaken in international agreements. It should express strong support for the recommendations on North Korean human rights contained in Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon‟s and reports of the Special Rapporteur and press a broad range of other governments to do likewise. \nThe misery suffered by the people of North Korea is often dismissed as being too difficult to deal with. With good reason\, many people conclude that the regime in North Koreais impervious to external pressure. Yet there are initiatives that can be taken to signal that the regime‟s abuse of its own people is a matter of global concern and must be stopped. As I have discussed above\, there are also near-term measures that can be taken to alleviate the plight of those who have fled North Korea. \nMadame Chairman\, your Committee‟s concern for the rights of the people of North Korea has been an inspiration for many years. It has led to the enactment of the NKHRA in 2004\, its extension in 2008\, and its strong enforcement today. It has been my honor to testify before you. I can only hope that in the very near future the people of North Korea will have the freedom to read what you have done on their behalf and express their views freely in hearings like this themselves.
URL:https://www.hrnk.org/event/implementation-of-the-north-korean-human-rights-act/
LOCATION:Committee on Foreign Affairs U.S. House of Representatives
CATEGORIES:Congressional Hearings
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20110602T100000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20110602T120000
DTSTAMP:20260613T172259
CREATED:20110603T013810Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230109T224600Z
UID:700774-1307008800-1307016000@www.hrnk.org
SUMMARY:Religious Freedom\, Democracy\, Human Rights in Asia: Status of Implementation of the North Korean Human Rights Act
DESCRIPTION:Committee on Foreign Affairs U. S. House of Representatives 112th Congress \nChuck Downs: \nThank you\, Madam Chairman. It is a great pleasure for me to be here today. As some of you may recall\, I spent a few years working on Capitol Hill for the Policy Committee. I have the greatest respect for this particular committee and everything you have done for North Korea. \nI appear before you today as the executive director of the U.S. Committee for Human Rights in North Korea\, and my statement goes through a number of issues relating to North Korea\, all of which you are familiar with. But you have asked me to focus on the North Korean Human Rights Act today\, which this committee sponsored in 2004\, and Madam Chairwoman\, you reauthorized as recently as 2008. It is a great piece of legislation\, one that stands as a hallmark of the American people’s interest in the human rights of the people of North Korea. You are to be commented for that incredible achievement\, and it gives us a roadmap from which we can look at a number of issues relating to North Korean human rights. \nBob King\, whose excellent appearance today\, his fine testimony\, and his recent trip to North Korea\, is a living example of how wise it was to create a position of Special Envoy for North Korean Human Rights. \nMy organization had the pleasure of having as its distinguished co-chair for many years the late Congressman Stephen Solarz. I actually remember helping people prepare for testimony before Congressman Solarz when he was the chairman of one of your subcommittees. \nHis death is a great loss\, as is that of former Congressman Lantos\, he is with us in spirit today. \nTwo thousand and four was an extremely interesting year for human rights in North Korea. You will all immediately think that that was the year that the North Korean Human Rights Act was passed. I believe it was passed on July 21st of 2004. The same year\, a former U.S. military defector\, Charles Jenkins\, managed to put the North Korean Government in a position of having to release him so that he could join with his wife\, a former Japanese abductee\, in Japan. He left North Korea on July 12th. \nThere was another big event also in July. Some 468 North Korean refugees who had made it through China\, went through Yunnan Province\, made it to Vietnam\, and were sent back to South Korea with the approval of the government and the cooperation of the Government of Vietnam\, socialist Vietnam\, and the Government of the Republic of South Korea. \nThese actions\, starting with the North Korean Human Rights Act\, infuriated North Korea\, and North Korea said in a formal statement issued by KCNA\, the North Korean mouthpiece\, ‘‘The DPRK will certainly make NGO organizations in some countries pay for the North Korean Human Rights Act.’’ \nOn August 14\, an American citizen\, a young man from Utah\, 24 years old\, decided to travel by himself in Yunnan. He said goodbye to his friends who went back to Beijing\, and he decided to go up the Leaping Tiger Gorge to a place called Zhongdian. He visited a restaurant there\, a Korean restaurant\, three times\, and disappeared. \nOur organization is looking very closely at the possibility that this American citizen\, who spoke perfect Korean because he had been a Mormon missionary in Korea\, and he spoke Chinese very well and\, of course\, he spoke English very well with a Midwestern standard dialect—he may\, in fact\, have been abducted by North Korea. \nThis would make the United States the 14th country to have lost an individual to North Korea. We quite often think that the Japanese were the only ones abducted from seaside resorts along the coast of Japan\, but that is not\, in fact\, the case—the North Koreans have abducted four Lebanese\, people from the Netherlands\, people from France\, and a Romanian. \nThe Romanian was lured to Hong Kong\, found herself in Pyongyang. Malaysians and Singaporeans were also lured to what they thought were job offers from people they thought were Japanese\, and they ended up in Pyongyang. Many of these people were never heard from again except that they had made it into the notes of other abductees and other defectors and agents who eventually defected. \nSo thank you\, Madam Chairwoman. I appreciate the opportunity to be here and to focus on the wide range of crimes that North Korea commits against human rights.
URL:https://www.hrnk.org/event/religious-freedom-democracy-human-rights-in-asia-status-of-implementation-of-the-north-korean-human-rights-act/
LOCATION:2172 Rayburn HOB
CATEGORIES:Congressional Hearings
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR