검색결과: "UN 사무총장"에 해당하는 글 2건 | Search results for "UN 사무총장": 2 post(s)

  1. 2014.12.22 [UN 안보리] DPRK 상황을 의제로 상정
  2. 2007.01.02 반기문 신임 UN 사무총장의 후세인 이라크 전직 대통령 사형집행에 관한 발언/입장

UN Security Council

7353rd Meeting

Provisional Agenda: The situation in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea

 

22 December 2014

 

UN 안전보장이사회

제7353차 회의

잠정 의제: DPRK에서의 상황

 

2014. 12. 22.

 

Public meeting in connection with the letter dated 5 December 2014 from the representatives of Australia, Chile, France, Jordan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Republic of Korea, Rwanda, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/2014/872).

 

http://webtv.un.org/meetings-events/security-council/watch/the-situation-in-the-democratic-peoples-republic-of-korea-security-council-7353rd-meeting/3958194597001

 

 

[Audio: English Interpretation/음성: 영어 통역]

http://downloads.unmultimedia.org/radio/library/ltd/mp3/2014/1271988.mp3

 

Keywords: DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF KOREA, JEFFREY FELTMAN, IVAN SIMONOVIC, HUMAN RIGHTS, CYBER SECURITY

 

 

[Excerpts/발췌]

 

http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/unifeed/2014/12/un-dprk-16

 

The UN Security Council today kicked off a debate on  human rights in the Peoples' Democraticp People’s Republic of Korea, with a call that a case be referred to the International Criminal Court.

 

[Excerpts/발췌]

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQEy9IBehfA

 

Statement by H.E. Mr. OH Joon, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Korea to the United Nations

 

오준 주유엔 대한민국 대사 발언


 

Letter (S/2014/872)

 

S/2014/872

Distr.: General

5 December 2014

Original: English

 

Letter dated 5 December 2014 from the representatives of Australia, Chile, France, Jordan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Republic of Korea, Rwanda, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council

 

 

         We the undersigned members of the Security Council — Australia, Chile, France, Jordan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, the United Kingdom and the United States — are deeply concerned about the situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

          We are particularly concerned by the scale and gravity of human rights violations detailed in the comprehensive report undertaken by the Human Rights Council commission of inquiry on human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (A/HRC/25/63), as contained in document S/2014/276. These violations threaten to have a destabilizing impact on the region and the maintenance of international peace and security.

          Therefore, we write to request that the situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea be formally placed on the Council’s agenda without prejudice to the item on non-proliferation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. We request a meeting of the Security Council on the situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, pursuant to rule 2 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, and request that a senior official from the Secretariat and a senior official from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights formally brief the Council under that agenda item, which will enable Council members to receive further information from the Secretariat on this situation and its implications for international peace and security.

                 We would be grateful if the present letter could be circulated as a document of the Security Council, with a view to considering this agenda item as early as possible in the month of December. 


Security Council Media Stakeout

 2014. 12. 22.

 

 안보리 기자회견

 

2014. 12. 22.


Informal comments to the media by H.E. Mr. OH Joon, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Korea to the United Nations on the situation of Human Rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK)

 

오준 주유엔 대한민국 대표부 대사

 

Informal comments to the media by Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights, Ivan Šimonović, on the situation of Human Rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK)

 

이반 시모노비치 인권담당 사무차장보

 

http://webtv.un.org/meetings-events/security-council/watch/ivan-Šimonović-on-the-situation-of-human-rights-in-the-democratic-peoples-republic-of-korea-security-council-media-stakeout-22-december-2014/3957338562001

 

 

Ban Ki-moon on the situation of Human Rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea

 

반기문 UN 사무총장

 

http://webtv.un.org/topics-issues/watch/ban-ki-moon-on-the-situation-of-human-rights-in-the-democratic-peoples-republic-of-korea-media-stakeout-22-december-2014/3956868844001


[Media - Press encounters]

Off-the-Cuff

Secretary-General's press encounter on Ebola (full transcript)

New York, 22 December 2014

 

(...)

Q: Secretary-General, the Security Council will later be holding its first ever meeting on the situation of human rights in North Korea. It’s an issue you’re well acquainted on. Can you tell us in your view how the human rights situation in North Korea should be an issue of international concern?

SG: I’m aware of this and I’ve been closely following this situation on the DPRK [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea]’s human rights issues.

Speaking broadly in general terms, human rights is one of the three pillars of the United Nations Charter and that should be the basis of all our work. When there is no human rights promotion and protection, there cannot be, it’s very difficult to think about political stability as well as sustainable development. That is why human rights should be given the highest priority for any countries in dealing with United Nations principles. When there is a serious, gross violation of human rights, then it can create a lot of movement of people fleeing the countries, and it creates refugee issues and [displacement] problems. Then, it affects the political stability and it affects development. Therefore, the United Nations regards this with the highest priority on protecting human rights. I am closely following what kind of decision the Security Council will take on this matter.


[Meetings Coverage and Press Releases/회의취재 및 보도자료]

 

22 December 2014

 

SC/11720

 

Security Council, in Divided Vote, Puts Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s Situation on Agenda following Findings of Unspeakable Human Rights Abuses

 

안보리, DPRK의 상황을 의제로 상정

7353rd Meeting (PM)

 

Concerted action by the international community was needed following a Human Rights Council report on appalling, systematic abuses in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, high United Nations officials told the Security Council today, following a procedural vote of 13 in favour to 2 against (China, Russian Federation), with 2 abstentions (Chad, Nigeria) that put the situation on the body’s agenda.

“Rarely has such an extensive charge-sheet of international crimes been brought to this Council’s attention,” Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights, Ivan Šimonović said, during the first meeting under the new agenda item that was decoupled with that concerning non-proliferation.  Today’s meeting also heard from Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs, Taye-Brook Zerihoun.

The meeting was requested in a letter sent to the Council President by 10 of its members (document S/2014/872) expressing concern about the “the scale and gravity of human rights violations” described in the report of the Commission of Inquiry established by the Human Rights Council (document S/2014/276) and its impact on international peace and security.

A resolution to submit the Commission report to the Security Council was adopted by the General Assembly on 18 December, following action by its Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural).  The resolution encouraged the Council to consider referral of the situation to the International Criminal Court, as well as targeted sanctions against those who contributed to what the Commission had called “crimes against humanity”.

At this afternoon’s meeting, Mr. Šimonović said that the report described murder, extermination, disappearances, enslavement and rape, forced abortions and other sexual violence, with victims targeted on political, religious, racial and gender grounds.  “The report documents a totalitarian system that is characterized by brutally enforced denial of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, as well as the rights to freedom, expression, information of association,” he stated.

Describing a loyalty rating system in the country, mass denial of food and other abuses contained in the report, he said that the Commission expressed its deepest horror at the country’s prison camp system, where, it estimated, hundreds of thousands had perished and some 100,000 were currently being held.

Noting that the Commission of Inquiry had highlighted the connections between the human rights situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and security in the region, he said the sustained military focus and nuclear priority of the Government had been pursued at the expense of the well-being of its people.  “If we are to reduce tension in the region, there must be movement towards real respect for human rights in the [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea].  This is deserving of the Security Council’s fullest attention and action.”

At the same time, he noted new signs of engagement between that country and international human rights mechanisms and bilateral negotiations with Japan on alleged abductions of Japanese nationals, which were an opportunity for real change.  The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) would support such progress, he pledged, urging that the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea be invited to visit without preconditions.

The Commission of Inquiry report, he said, would be followed up by a field-based structure in Seoul to serve as a hub for documentation, technical assistance and advocacy to advance accountability and improve human rights in that country.

The report had been presented to the Council in the context of international criminal law, he said, adding that the 15-member body could advance two crucial goals:  accountability and engagement for reform.  He encouraged it to “carefully monitor developments in the coming months to see whether engagement leads to real change, or should take further action”.

Assistant Secretary-General Zerihoun said that, aside from the Commission’s report, the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation had issued a report alleging that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was responsible for a recent cyber attack targeting Sony Pictures Entertainment.  While the United Nations was not privy to information on which the Bureau’s conclusions were based, the rise in the incidence and severity of cyber attacks was of increasing concern.

He concluded:  “It is not just the nuclear issue that deserves international attention and action,” and with that, he urged the Security Council to consider the wider implications of the reported grave human rights situation.

Agreeing that recent engagement offered an opportunity for redoubled efforts towards trust, dialogue and cooperation on all tracks, he said Member States should increase humanitarian assistance to the country.  He also encouraged a resumption of credible dialogue and meaningful engagement.  That would help overcome the standoff and go hand in hand with efforts to ensure accountability.

Before the procedural vote this afternoon, China’s representative, explaining why he and the Russian representative had objected to the agenda item, said that the Council was not the forum to take up human rights issues, which themselves should not be politicized.  Issues on the Korean peninsula were sensitive and the additional focus would hamper the Council’s efforts in peace and security there.

Also speaking before the vote was Australia’s representative, who said that the magnitude of the violations depicted a situation that threatened to destabilize the region.  That was why his country, along with 10 other Council members, had sent the letter to the Council president requesting that the situation be placed on the agenda, without prejudice to the item on non-proliferation.

Following the briefings, all Council members took the floor.  Some mentioned the cyber-attack issue, but most that had requested the meeting described horrors included in the report and urged the Council to refer the situation to the International Criminal Court and consider targeted sanctions.  They urged the body to stay seized of the issue and take action as appropriate.  Speakers described the report as heart-breaking and yearned for change.

Those speakers urged the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to take the opportunity to improve the situation themselves, but, like the representative of the United Kingdom, held that, if it failed to hold violators to account, the international community must be ready to do so.  Chad’s representative, in his national capacity, called for prudence before action was taken too hastily.  The Russian Federation’s representative stated that the Council must stop taking on issues outside its purview, of which this meeting was an example.

Also speaking today were the representatives of the United States, France, Nigeria, Luxembourg, Jordan, China, Chile, Rwanda, Lithuania, Argentina and Republic of Korea.

The meeting began at 3:08 p.m., was suspended at 3:15 p.m., resumed at 3:22 p.m. and ended at 5:10 p.m.

Statements

GARY QUINLAN (Australia) described the meeting as an historic step forward for the international community’s efforts to consider the situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and its broader implications.  It also sent a vital message to the people there that the world was aware of their suffering and stood in solidarity with them.  The Council recognized that the dangerous threat to international peace and security posed by that regime was not limited to its weapons programmes and proliferation, but also flowed from its atrocious treatment of its people.  Australia strongly disagreed with those who asserted that the Council had no business considering the issue.  Human rights violations of the type and scale being seen in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had reverberations beyond that country and amounted to a rejection of global norms that underpinned stable societies and undermined peaceful inter-State relations.

With the Commission of Inquiry’s report, he said, the world now had a comprehensive, evidence-based assessment of the systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations being committed by that regime, which compelled a response.  By submitting the report to the Council for consideration and action, General Assembly members recognized that the Council had a responsibility to ensure accountability for the crimes being committed.  He urged countries having the most influence on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to press the case for fundamental change there.

SAMANTHA POWER (United States) said today’s meeting reflected a growing consensus that the widespread and systematic human rights violations committed by Democratic People’s Republic of Korea threated international peace and security.  The Commission had conducted more than 200 interviews and held public hearings in which more than 80 witnesses had given testimony.  It had found that systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations were being committed; the evidence had provided “reasonable grounds” that crimes against humanity had been committed, pursuant to State policies.  A former guard testified that the baby of a political prisoner had been cooked and fed to animals — abuse that fit a pattern of testimonies of sadistic acts.  An estimated 80,000 to 120,000 people were being held in prison camps where such crimes occurred.

She urged the Council to take up the issue because the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s response to the Commission’s report showed it was sensitive to criticism of its human rights record, threatening that efforts to hold it accountable would be met with “catastrophic” consequences.  If the Government wanted to be taken off the Council’s agenda, it should acknowledge its systematic violations, dismantle political prison camps, allow free, unfettered access of independent human rights observers and hold perpetrators accountable.  The Council must consider the recommendation that the situation be referred to the International Criminal Court.

FRANÇOIS DELATTRE (France) welcomed the Commission’s report, which documented cases in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea of murder, arbitrary detentions, torture, rape, forced disappearances, impeded humanitarian access and use of famine.  Hundreds of thousands of political prisoners had died in the camps through the years, and today, the Council had convened to hear the cries of those living under a blood-thirsty regime.  Its authorities should be held accountable for their crimes, as that was a moral obligation of the international community.  The Council should consider the Commission’s recommendation to refer the situation to the Criminal Court.  The regime’s violations threatened international peace and security, and destabilized the region.  The severity, scale and nature of the violations had revealed a “unique” State in terms of terror.  Nuclear blackmail could not dissuade the Council from considering the situation.  Pyongyang must take responsibility, release political prisoners and open itself to international media, non-governmental organizations and the United Nations.

USMAN SARKI (Nigeria), noting that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had participated in the first and second cycles of the Universal Periodic Review, encouraged that Government to strengthen its engagement with the Human Rights Council and treaty bodies, with a view to promoting and protecting its citizens’ rights.

SYLVIE LUCAS (Luxembourg) said the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had methodically flouted international law, and since 2006, conducted ballistic tests, regularly threatening nuclear strikes.  Just as serious, the country had repeatedly violated the most basic rights of its people, as documented in the “damning” Commission of Inquiry report on 7 January.  The text outlined crimes against humanity, which fell within the purview of the Rome Statute.  Respect for human rights was a hallmark of a stable society willing to live peacefully among its neighbours.  The Council should consider the Commission’s recommendation to refer the matter to the Court.  The Council also should consider taking targeted sanctions against those responsible for crimes against humanity.  She invited the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to authorize a visit of the Special Rapporteur and encouraged the Council to be regularly briefed on the situation there.

DINA KAWAR (Jordan) agreed that the report depicted a menace to international peace and security when combined with the country’s continued nuclear and ballistic missile activity.  The Council should make every effort to put an end to the abuses, as well as to the threat of use of nuclear weapons.  She called on the country to take prompt action to meet the concerns of the international community by inviting the Special Rapporteur and facilitating humanitarian aid.

MARK LYALL GRANT (United Kingdom) said the appalling contents of the report showed a paranoid, callous and dangerous regime, and a totalitarian State without parallel in the modern world.  The Council could not ignore such grave findings.   He welcomed signs that the international community was increasingly paying attention to the country.  “If the [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea] fails to hold violators to account, the international community must be ready to do so,” he stated.  He supported appropriate Council action to ensure accountability, including consideration of a referral to the International Criminal Court.  Countries untethered from the rule of law presented a threat to peace and security, he added.  The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea must address the situation and take the first positive moves to improve it.  The Council must remain seized of the matter.

LIU JIEYI (China) reiterated the position that China was against politicization of human rights issues, and that the Security Council was not the appropriate forum for their discussion.  As a neighbour of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, China was had great interest in reducing tensions in the Korean peninsula and was working for the denuclearization of the region, by, among other efforts, encouraging the return to six-party talks.

CRISTIÁN BARROS MELET (Chile) said that his country had signed onto the request for the meeting and believed it was timely and necessary.  The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had dismissed the allegations of violations in the report, threatening at the same time to perform a new nuclear test.  A broader focus on the situation must be maintained with greater pressure brought to bear, not only on the nuclear issue, but on bringing an end to the impunity of those accountable.  He urged the country to allow a visit of the Special Rapporteur and called on the Council to remain seized of the matter.

OLIVIER NDUHUNGIREHE (Rwanda) said that, as a country that, in 1994, had suffered the worst human rights violations, it valued today’s meeting to examine such gross violations.  The three pillars of the responsibility to protect outlined the State’s primary duty to protect its people from the most serious abuses, with the international community obliged to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other means to do so.  If a State failed in its duty, the international community must be prepared to take action, in line with the Charter.  The Council should engage the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea on the basis of those pillars.  Rwanda was encouraged that that country had indicated a willingness to allow the Special Rapporteur’s access to its territory and hoped that would be pursued.  It was important for the Council to receive information from the Secretariat on the situation and its implications for international peace and security.  Rwanda supported the Commission’s recommendation to foster inter-Korean dialogue and urged all actors to engage in good faith to create favourable conditions for resuming political talks.  He hoped the Council would remain seized of the matter.

RAIMONDA MURMOKAITĖ (Lithuania) said that those responsible to protect the rights of North Koreans had ruthlessly enforced almost complete denial of their freedoms, with extermination, enslavement, torture, forced abortion and prolonged starvation.  Even as mass starvation was claiming thousands of lives, the State had given precedence to military spending.  There were indications that the Government was ready to engage in a human rights dialogue, but such signals needed to be followed by concrete action.  Lithuania welcomed the recent resolution of the General Assembly on the human rights situation in that country and encouraged the Council to follow suit and take appropriate action to ensure accountability, including through possible referral of the situation to the International Criminal Court, and consideration of the scope for effective targeted sanctions.  The crimes against humanity in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea would continue as long as the policies, institutions and patterns of impunity there remained in place.

MARÍA CRISTINA PERCEVAL (Argentina) said her Government had voted in favour of the resolutions of the Human Rights Council and Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural), both of which condemned the gross, widespread and systematic human rights violations committed in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.  The inclusion of the issue on today’s agenda was outside the mandate of the Council, which would not contribute to the correct functioning of the United Nations system to extend its range of action beyond maintenance of international peace and security.  Today’s exception should not set a precedent.  She voiced concern over the Commission’s conclusion of widespread human rights violations, as well as the existence of crimes against humanity.  She also underscored the importance of diplomacy and political negotiations, with the goal of declaring the Korean peninsula free of nuclear weapons, adding that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea must protect and ensure the human rights of its people.

EVGENIY ZAGAYNOV (Russian Federation) said his Government was against the convening of today’s meeting, as it could lead to negative consequences for the effectiveness of the Council and other United Nations bodies.  Human rights issues should be considered in the Human Rights Council, which was created for that purpose.  Today’s discussion was unlikely to promote dialogue with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea on the issue, for which the authorities had earlier stated they would be ready.

OH JOON (Republic of Korea) said that, despite international efforts to address human rights issues in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the situation had continued to worsen, ultimately warranting the Council’s attention. This year’s Assembly resolution on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was unique in that it contained a recommendation on the Council’s role in considering such matters.  The decision to place the situation on the Council’s agenda was a starting point for further discussion and engagement.  Human rights violations in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea were so systematic and widespread that they posed a threat to regional and international peace and security.

He urged the Council’s attention to the grave situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, citing the Commission’s finding that many of the violations amounted to crimes against humanity.  The Council must play a crucial role in ensuring accountability, including through referring the situation to the Court.  His Government took serious note of the United States’ statement that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was behind a cyber attack on Sony Pictures.  Addressing the human rights issue was essential for maintaining peace and stability on the peninsula and in the region.  He hoped Pyongyang would engage with the international community through human rights dialogue, including with the Special Rapporteur, and through technical cooperation with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).

MAHAMAT ZENE CHERIF (Chad), speaking in his national capacity, noted the massive violations alleged in the report and said the situation was indeed of deep concern if the veracity of the information was established.  At the same time, noting that the country had denied the report and that there had been little access by international observers, he urged prudence, pointing to errors that had been committed in the past due to taking hasty action on the basis of a report.  He called on the country’s representatives to clarify the situation and to allow access for that purpose, as well as to engage in dialogue.


Source:

http://www.unmultimedia.org/radio/library/2014/12/1271988.html

http://www.un.org/press/en/2014/sc11720.doc.htm

http://www.un.org/sg/offthecuff/index.asp?nid=3778

UN Secretary-General BAN Ki-moon's comments/position on the execution of the death penalty against the former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein

 

반기문 신임 UN 사무총장의 사담 후세인 이라크 전직 대통령 사형집행에 관한 발언/입장


Media Stakeout

 

2 January 2007

 

 

반기문 UN 사무총장 기자회견

 

2007. 1. 2.

 

02 January 07 Media Stakeout: Informal comments to the Media by the Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, on the situation in Sudan and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and other matters.
[Webcast: Archived Video - 12 minutes ]

 

[5:33 - 6:39]


 

[Meetings Coverage and Press Releases/회의취재 및 보도자료]

Off-the-Cuff

Secretary-General's encounter with the UN press corps

New York, 2 January 2007

 

 

반기문 UN 사무총장의 UN 기자단과의 기자회견

 

New York

2007. 1. 2.

 

(...)

 

Q: Should Saddam Hussein have been executed, Mr. Secretary-General?

 

SG: Saddam Hussein was responsible for committing heinous crimes and unspeakable atrocities against the Iraqi people. We should never forget the victims of his crimes. The issue of capital punishment is for each and every Member State to decide. As a Secretary-General, at the same time, while I am firmly against impunity, I also hope that the members of the international community should pay due regard to all aspects of international humanitarian laws. During my entire tenure, I will try my best to help Member States, the international community, to strengthen the rule of law.

 

(...)


[UN News]

Ban Ki-moon takes over as UN Secretary-General, calls for common action to face crises

 

UN 사무총장직을 이어받은 반기문, 위기에 맞서기 위하여 공동행동 촉구

 

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

2 January 2007 – Passing an honour guard and welcomed with applause from staff, former Republic of Korea Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon took over formally as United Nations Secretary-General today with a call for collective action to address a host of international crises from Sudan’s Darfur conflict to the nuclear programmes of Iran and North Korea.

Mr. Ban, who succeeded Kofi Annan to become the eighth UN Secretary-General as the New Year came in on 1 January, smiled broadly as he entered the towering landmark building housing UN Headquarters on New York’s East River, where he paid tribute at the memorial for UN personnel who have fallen in the line of duty.

“I am very much overwhelmed by all this warm welcome,” he told a crowd of reporters. “Your presence this morning is a vivid proof that the United Nations is much alive in the front line addressing all the challenges and issues and trying to give hope to all the people around the world,” he said.

“I start my day as Secretary-General of the United Nations with much expectations and hope and promise and I need your strong support. I start my duty at a daunting time in international affairs starting from Darfur to Middle East, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, many other crises that trouble our world,” he added, stressing that these issues need to be addressed collectively.

Answering questions, Mr. Ban said he would immediately turn his attention to the issue of Darfur more than three years of fighting between Sudanese Government forces, allied militias and rebel groups seeking greater autonomy have left more than 200,000 people dead and driven more than 2.5 million from their homes.

Asked about North Korea’s nuclear weapons programme, he said that in his former position he had been deeply involved personally and as Secretary-General he will first try to facilitate the smooth progress of the six-party talks between the two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the United States seeking a solution.

Asked about the hanging of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, Mr. Ban said the issue of the death penalty was a question for each country to decide.

“Saddam Hussein was responsible for committing heinous crimes and unspeakable atrocities against the Iraqi people,” he noted. “We should never forget the victims of his crimes. The issue of capital punishment is for each and every Member State to decide.

“As a Secretary-General, at the same time, while I am firmly against impunity, I also hope that the members of the international community should pay due regard to all aspects of international humanitarian laws. During my entire tenure, I will try my best to help Member States, the international community, to strengthen the rule of law.”


Daily Noon Press Briefing

 

2 January 2007

 

대변인 일일 정오 브리핑

 

2007. 1. 2.

 

02 January 07

Daily Noon Press Briefing: By the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General.
[Webcast: Archived Video - 30 minutes ]

 

[2:32 - 3:25]
[7:27 - 10:32]
[15:45 - 16:46]

[24:22 - 24:59]

[26:51 - 27:48]


 

 

2 January 2007

DAILY PRESS BRIEFING BY THE OFFICE OF THE SPOKESPERSON FOR THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

 

2007. 1. 2.

UN 사무총장 대변인실 일일 브리핑

Noon Briefings

 

(...)

 

Turning now to Iraq, the Secretary-General was asked about the death sentence imposed over the weekend against Saddam Hussein and he said that we should never forget the victims of Saddam Hussein’s crimes.  The Secretary-General said that it is up to each Member State to decide on the issue of capital punishment, but he added that all States should pay due respect to international humanitarian law.

The Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Iraq, Ashraf Qazi, issued a statement over the weekend on the imposition of the death sentence against Saddam Hussein, saying that the United Nations stands firmly against impunity, and understands the desire for justice felt by many Iraqis.  However, Qazi added, the United Nations remains opposed to capital punishment, even in the case of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.

 

(...)

 

Question:  Congratulations.  I was just hoping you could square the statement by Mr. Qazi that the United Nations remains opposed to capital punishment.  The Secretary-General did not sound like he was fundamentally opposed to capital punishment, that it was up to Member States to decide, and also -- if you could point to –- within international humanitarian law, whether there are specific prohibitions, conditions on the death penalty that he may have been sort of tacitly referring to in his statement.

 

Spokesperson:  Yes, I think that what he was tacitly referring to is that there have been several statements made about the fact that the UN and its Human Rights Council do not recognize the death penalty.  And what he said today is a nuance on the situation, stating that we should think first about the victims and the need for justice -– and he did mention that it is up to each country to decide, and he talked about respect for humanitarian law.

 

Question:  Is he opposed to the death penalty?
 

Spokesperson:  He just wanted to leave it open to Member States.

 

Question:  But does this actually reflect a change in the UN policy on the death penalty, because before, every time the death penalty was mentioned, UN officials were opposed to it.  Mr. Ban was questioned twice on this and specifically did not say that.  So does this reflect a change in the UN policy?

 

Spokesperson:  No, it does not.  The UN policy still remains that the Organization is not for capital punishment.  However, the way the law is applied in different countries, he left it open to those different countries.

 

Question:  While commenting on Saddam Hussein and capital punishment, the Secretary-General made no reference to the trial that took place, because UN experts, including the former Secretary-General, had said that the trial was not credible.  So where does Mr. Ban Ki-moon stand on that trial?
 

Spokesperson:  On the trial, he has not commented on it yet, but if you want to have his comments on the trial, I will request some comments. 

 

Question:  And to follow up on that.  Also, Iraq is occupied and there is a fight against that occupation, and there are rules and laws governing what kinds of trials get held about the people who get captured by the occupiers.  And so I would appreciate a response, because it was not just some country that imposed a death penalty, but it was an occupied country.

 

Spokesperson:  You want his take on the trial itself…  Yes.

 

Question:  Many people are feeling that it is a war crime to have done this execution.

 

Spokesperson:  I will definitely get back to you on this.

 

(...)

 

Question:  (...) And also, can we go back to the death penalty?  I am a bit confused.  If the Secretary-General thinks that the position of the UN remains unchanged on this, why did he not restate that the UN is opposed to the death penalty, just like Mr. Qazi did?
 

Spokesperson:  Oh, I think essentially, because his national position is that there are some countries that do recognize the death penalty, and, from what I gather, he would like to leave it open to the different countries.
 

Question:  What do you mean by national position?  You started to refer to his national position?
 

Spokesperson:  No, it’s the fact that the death penalty is authorized.

 

(...)

 

Question:  On the question of the death penalty -- how does that statement that Mr. Ban wants to leave it open to those countries that recognize the death penalty to do that -– how is that consistent with the UN’s opposition to capital punishment?
 

Spokesperson:  Well, as I said, he stated both today and the general position of the UN stands. 
 

Question:  But why did Mr. Ban want to make an exception for those countries that do recognize the death penalty if the position of the Organization is to be opposed to it?
 

Spokesperson:  If you need more clarifications on his part, I will ask him to provide them.

 

(...)

 

Question:  On the first day, isn’t he sending a mixed message on the Iraq death penalty situation?  You have a Special Representative saying “we oppose it, it’s a violation” –- all of that –- and then the Secretary-General comes in and says:  “Well, it’s up to every country”.  On his first day in office, you have this man [talkover] Does the UN want to get more involved in Iraq or does it not want to?

 

Spokesperson:  I don’t think this was the issue.  The issue was the actual execution, and he stressed, when he started the statement –- let me stress that -– he said first we have to think of the victims, which means that the need for justice was stressed from the start of his statement.

 

(...)


[OHCHR - Press Release] 

 

HIGH COMMISSIONER RENEWS CALL FOR RESTRAINT IN IRAQ

 

3 January 2007

 

UN 인권최고대표, 이라크에 자제할 것 재차 촉구

 

2007. 1. 3.

 

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, today renewed her call for restraint by the Government of Iraq in the execution of sentences of death imposed by the Iraqi High Tribunal. On 28 December 2006, alongside the confirmation of the death sentence of Saddam Hussein, the death sentences of two other co-defendants, Awad Hamad Al-Bandar and Barzan Ibrahim Al-Hassan, were also upheld on appeal. “International law, as it currently stands, only allows the imposition of the death penalty as an exceptional measure within rigorous legal constraints. The concerns that I expressed just days ago with respect to the fairness and impartiality of Saddam Hussein’s trial apply also to these two defendants”, the High Commissioner said. “I have therefore today directly appealed to the President of the Republic of Iraq to refrain from carrying out these sentences.”The High Commissioner also noted that under Iraq’s international obligations, it is bound to afford Awad Hamad Al-Bandar and Barzan Ibrahim Al-Hassan the opportunity to seek commutation or pardon of the sentence.


 

[UN News]

UN human rights chief calls on Iraq not to hang co-defendants of Saddam

UN 인권수장, 이라크후세인의 공동피고인들 사형집행하지 말 것 촉구

 

Louise Arbour

3 January 2007 – The top United Nations human rights official appealed directly to Iraqi President Jalal Talabani today not to execute two high-ranking colleagues of former president Saddam Hussein, who was hanged on Saturday.

“International law, as it currently stands, only allows the imposition of the death penalty as an exceptional measure within rigorous legal constraints,” UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour said referring to the scheduled hanging of two of Mr. Hussein’s co-defendants, Awad Hamad Al-Bandar and Barzan Ibrahim Al-Hassan.

“The concerns that I expressed just days ago with respect to the fairness and impartiality of Saddam Hussein’s trial apply also to these two defendants, she added in a statement. “I have therefore today directly appealed to the President of the Republic of Iraq to refrain from carrying out these sentences.”

Noting that the death sentences on the two were upheld together with that on Mr. Hussein, Ms. Arbour said that under Iraq’s international obligations, the country is bound to afford the two the opportunity to seek commutation or pardon of the sentences.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon fully endorsed Ms. Arbour’s call for restraint, his spokesperson Michele Montas told the daily news briefing in New York.

“The Secretary-General is of course aware of the ongoing debate concerning a total ban of the death penalty,” she said.

“Until the matter is resolved, he respects the right of Member States to have their own positions on it. However, the Secretary-General strongly believes in the wisdom of Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states ‘Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person,’” she added.

On the eve of Mr. Hussein’s execution Ms. Arbour likewise appealed to Iraq to avoid precipitously in light of concerns over the fairness of his trial.

“The appeal judgment is a lengthy and complex decision that requires careful study,” she said in a statement on Friday. “There were a number of concerns as to the fairness of the original trial, and there needs to be assurance that these issues have been comprehensively addressed. I call therefore on the Iraqi authorities not to act precipitately in seeking to execute the sentence in these cases.”

She noted that international law proscribes the imposition of the death sentence after an unfair trial. “All sections of Iraqi society, as well as the wider international community, have an interest in ensuring that a death sentence provided for in Iraqi law is only imposed following a trial and appeal process that is, and is legitimately seen as, fair, credible and impartial. That is especially so in a case as exceptional as this one,” she added.

She pointed out that under international treaties that Iraq has signed, Mr. Hussein had the right to appeal to the appropriate authorities for consideration of commutation or pardon.


Daily Noon Press Briefing

 

3 January 2007

 


대변인 일일 정오 브리핑

 

2007. 1. 3.

03 January 07

Daily Noon Press Briefing: By the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General.
[Webcast: Archived Video - 35 minutes ]

 

[1:38 - 3:30]

[7:50 - 9:20]
[10:30 - 11:23]
[15:25 - 17:58]
[18:18 - 18:52]
[23:21 - 24:09]
[24:54 - 27:20]
[28:18 - 28:53]
[35:05 - 33:51]


 

 

3 January 2007

DAILY PRESS BRIEFING BY THE OFFICE OF THE SPOKESPERSON FOR THE SECRETARY-GENERAL


2007. 1. 3.

UN 사무총장 대변인실 일일 브리핑

 

(...)

 

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights -– this is now about Iraq -- Louise Arbour, today renewed her call for restraint by the Government of Iraq in the execution of death sentences that have been imposed by the Iraqi High Tribunal.  Last week, the death sentences of two of Saddam Hussein’s co-defendants, Awad Hamad Al-Bandar and Barzan Ibrahim Al-Hassan, were upheld on appeal.

 

Arbour underlined that international law, as it currently stands, only allows the imposition of the death penalty as an exceptional measure within rigorous legal constraints.  Given that her concerns about the fairness and impartiality of Saddam Hussein’s trial apply also to the other two defendants, the High Commissioner today directly appealed to the Iraqi President to refrain from carrying out these sentences.

 

We have her full statement upstairs.

 

I was asked several questions yesterday, questions about the Secretary-General’s view on capital punishment, and I have since spoken with him this morning about that topic, and I have a few things to add.

 

The Secretary-General is, of course, aware of the ongoing debate in the General Assembly concerning a total ban of the death penalty.  Until the matter is resolved, he respects the right of Member States to have their own positions on it.

 

However, the Secretary-General strongly believes in the wisdom of article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states, “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”

 

In that context, he fully endorses the call made today by Louise Arbour for restraint by the Government of Iraq in the execution of the death sentences imposed by the Iraqi High Tribunal.

 

(...)

 

Question:  As far as the execution -- the question of execution -- the Secretary-General just issued a statement.  Does that mean that the Secretary-General has in fact corrected his position by supporting what is mentioned in the Geneva Convention?  And does he still stick by the fact that it is up to the Member States to decide who to hang, who not to hang?

 

Spokesperson:  I think yesterday he was acknowledging the fact that, as you know, there is no consensus at the United Nations over the issue of the death penalty.  There was a debate at the General Assembly a few years ago and it ended up with the majority of Member States opting for –- refusing to condemn the death penalty.

 

He recognizes the fact that we are trying to work towards the abolition of that practice.  However, he acknowledges also the fact that Member States have their positions on the issue.

 

Question:  Yes, Michele.  Just two things, one briefly a follow-up on that, Louise Arbour’s statement, questions of fairness of the process.  It sounded like the Secretary-General yesterday was, to a certain degree, defending the process and saying that Iraq was dealing –- the Iraqis were dealing with their past.  Is he essentially –- is it his position that this process by which Saddam Hussein has been tried and executed is not there?

 

(...)

 

And you had another question before…

 

Correspondent:  Does the Secretary-General, it’s his view, are you saying, that he does not view the process that led to the trial and execution of Saddam Hussein, that it was essentially questions about its fairness?

 

Spokesperson:  Well, we discussed this with him.  He was talking simply about the executions.  He was not talking about whether the trial was fair or not.  I think in this specific case, he already supported this morning the statement made by Louise Arbour.  And as you know, Louise Arbour also mentioned the fact that there are practices in the international courts condemning executions.  But she also acknowledges that there are differences within Member States about this situation.

 

(...)

 

Question:  This afternoon, human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch have criticized the Secretary-General’s statement on the execution of Saddam Hussein.  Does he have any response to those statements?

 

Spokesperson:  Well, I already gave his statement on the issue. 

 

Question:  But what are his views on the trial of Saddam Hussein?

 

Spokesperson:  He has not expressed his view on the trials.  He has supported today the call that Ms. Arbour sent to the Iraqi Government and that he was very strongly behind Ms. Arbour on this.  His opinion is that we should press for the abolition of capital punishment, but it should be a slow process, as you know.

 

Question:  But what are his views?  Ms. Arbour has given her views, but what are his views?

 

Spokesperson:  On the actual trial?

 

Question:  On the actual trial and execution.

 

Spokesperson:  He said what he thought in terms of the executions.  In terms of the trial, he has not expressed his views on it yet.

 

Question:  Just to follow up on that.  The Secretary-General was speaking yesterday at a time many world countries were issuing statements condemning even the process that Saddam went through.  So did it come across his mind that when he made his statements he undermines his position as an objective Secretary-General for this Organization?  And considering the statement that came from Iraq, from Mr. Ashraf Qazi who probably what we stated more, you know, what we know about the UN position.

 

Spokesperson:  Well, I think he…

 

Question:  When you spoke to him this morning what did he tell you?  Isn’t he worried now that people think he’s not really an objective Secretary-General, he’s more [inaudible]?

 

Spokesperson:  I think his statement here was clear.  I think it should be taken –- yesterday there was -- the complete statement does talk about, you know, the usual practice in humanitarian law and it does mention the larger picture.  I don’t think it’s fair to say that he’s changing his views or anything of that sort.  I think he’s clarified.  You had asked me to ask him to clarify his views and I think he did.

 

Question:  So what does he think of the Saddam, like versus this -– the Vatican issued a statement about last minute procedures.  What does he think?

 

Spokesperson:  [Inaudible] specifics in terms of the trial itself and what led to the execution, the times preceding the immediate execution.

 

(...)

 

Question:  I have a question; it’s obviously a period of transition here at the UN. I’m just curious about the future of Louise Arbour and her job.  Where do things stand with the new Secretary-General?

 

Spokesperson:  Well, we don’t know yet.  As I said yesterday and I will say it again today, there is going to be a review process –- all senior managers in their different positions -– and you should know more about this in a few weeks.

 

[The Spokesperson’s Office later clarified that Ms. Arbour’s current tenure is a four-year tenure, which was approved by the General Assembly and which ends in July 2008.]

 

Question:  How confident is he of Louise Arbour’s performance?

 

Spokesperson:  You heard him support Louise Arbour’s position today.

 

(...)

 

Question:  What was his view on the, how his death penalty quote…

 

Spokesperson:  …was received?  That’s why he wanted this morning to make, you know, to stress the fact that he supports definitely what we have in the Covenant of Human Rights, and he supports what has been the, let’s say, the tradition in the human rights bodies of the United Nations and the international courts.

 

Question:  …he made a mistake?

 

Spokesperson:  No, he didn’t say he made a mistake.  He said that, you know, he is a representative of 192 countries and there are 192 countries who disagree on the death penalty.  That was all, I think.  I think it was maybe, might have been blown a little bit out of the proportion he meant. 

 

(...)

 

Question:  Michele, you just sort of referred in passing to the fact that Ban Ki-moon supports the abolition of the death penalty, which sounds like an extremely strong position.  Did he say that this morning to you?  I mean, where does that come, where did he express support for the abolition of the death penalty?
 

Spokesperson:  Well, I think he did express it in his comments this morning when he spoke to me, and his comments when he mentioned the fact that Ms. Arbour spoke about those two executions to be taking place shortly.  I think he did, to me, it was important to him to stress that he was going along with what humanitarian law says.  And, he was going along with what have been traditional UN practices pushing towards the abolition…

 

Question:  So, he made it clear that he believes that we should, the UN should move towards the abolition of capital punishment?

 

Spokesperson:  Yes.

 

Question:  [talkover]

 

Spokesperson:  Well, we have the Covenant on Human Rights…

 

Question:  Well, the Covenant on Human Rights actually says, actually states where the death penalty is legal, it should happen only in the worst cases and he cited specifically that this, that Saddam’s were the most heinous crimes, so that sounds like, to me, like one of the worst cases, so I don’t understand.  Where… [talkover]…

 

Spokesperson:  You mentioned yourself that there are cases where…

 

Question:  It seems to me that according to that Covenant it allows executions only in the worst cases, but it allows executions [talkover]…

 

Spokesperson:  You have also the individual laws of countries.  Let’s face it -- we have 192 Member States in this Organization. 

 

Question:  Excuse me ma’am, Ms. Arbour issued that [inaudible] statement before Saddam’s execution, and I am sure Mr. Secretary-General had enough time to do his research before taking his position.  Why didn’t he call for similar restraint yesterday, instead of openly supporting the execution of Saddam?

 

Spokesperson:  You know, Ms. Arbour is the High Commissioner for Human Rights.  It is her job.

 

Question:  You are the UN position.  This is not something new…

 

Spokesperson:  But he acknowledged simply that there were Member States who had different practices and different laws.

 

(...)

 

Question:  What is his position –- I understand he supports the abolition of the death penalty -- but what is his position on a moratorium of the death penalty?  Does he think that it is feasible that the General Assembly, for instance, passes a resolution on a moratorium?

 

Spokesperson:  Well, this is a prerogative of the General Assembly.  Once the General Assembly sets such a decision, takes such a decision, I think the Secretary-General will certainly carry it forward and push it forward.

 

(...)

 

Question:  One last question in addition to that.  Just back to the death penalty:  is it correct that the United Nations defers to national law on internal matters, especially when there is no global treaty or convention?  I mean, is it not up to individual States to set their own laws?

 

Spokesperson:  Yes, it is the case, and this is what was referred to yesterday by the Secretary-General.

 

Question:  It sounds that perhaps Mr. Ban is stepping away from that?

 

Spokesperson:  I don’t think he’s stepping away from that.  I think it is a common position here.

 

(...)


[The New York Times]

 

January 3, 2007

New U.N. Chief Invites Controversy by Declining to Oppose Hussein Execution

2007. 1. 3.

신임 UN 수장, 사담 후세인 사형집행에 반대 안해 논란

UNITED NATIONS, Jan. 2 — On his first day of work as secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, the mild-spoken South Korean diplomat who had suggested he would bring new caution to the post, invited controversy by declining to criticize the death penalty applied to Saddam Hussein.

Mr. Ban commented on the execution of Mr. Hussein just after entering United Nations headquarters on Tuesday morning to start his job.

“Saddam Hussein was responsible for committing heinous crimes and unspeakable atrocities against the Iraqi people,” Mr. Ban said in response to questions from a crush of reporters outside the Security Council’s chambers. “We should never forget the victims of his crimes, “ he said.

“The issue of capital punishment is for each and every member state to decide,” he added.

“While I am firmly against impunity, I also hope the members of the international community should pay due regard to all aspects of international humanitarian laws.”

Mr. Ban’s remarks appeared to contradict bedrock United Nations policy opposing the death penalty on human rights grounds.

He seemed to have tripped in his effort to tread lightly on the political views of the many United Nations members.

The remarks also seemed to show that Mr. Ban, who was South Korea’s foreign minister when he was chosen in October as secretary general, had not completed the transition from representing his country to leading the United Nations.

Michèle Montas, Mr. Ban’s spokeswoman, said the death penalty was legal in South Korea.

On Dec. 30, hours after Mr. Hussein was hanged, the United Nations special representative for Iraq, Ashraf Qazi, said in Baghdad that although the United Nations “understands the desire for justice felt by many Iraqis,” it could not support the execution.

“Based on the principle of respect for the right to life,” Mr. Qazi said, “the United Nations remains opposed to capital punishment, even in the case of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.”

Ms. Montas, whose first day on the job also was Tuesday, said Mr. Ban had not intended to change United Nations policy, but had added his own “nuance.” Mr. Hussein was hanged in a hasty execution at dawn on Dec. 30, in a chamber where many Iraqis had been killed under his brutal rule.

In public comments before his first meeting with United Nations staff, Mr. Ban said, “We have to show the international community that we are ready and eager to change.” He said the organization had faced “harsh and sometimes unfair criticism,” and acknowledged that “staff morale has plummeted.” But he said United Nations workers must be ready to “multitask” and to move frequently from armchair jobs at headquarters in New York into the field.

“My watchword will be meritocracy,” he said, in words that should be well received by the Bush administration, which backed Mr. Ban to succeed Kofi Annan, who served two five-year terms, in part because of Mr. Ban’s pledges to streamline the United Nations bureaucracy.

In veiled words, Mr. Ban seemed to hint that he would not overreach his power, but that he expected cooperation from the United States. Speaking of the many crises facing the organization, he said, “Not a single person, including the secretary general of the United Nations; not a single country, however strong, powerful, resourceful, maybe, can address this.”


Source:

http://www.un.org/webcast/2007.html

http://www.un.org/sg/offthecuff/index.asp?nid=964

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=21137

http://www.un.org/press/en/2007/db070102.doc.htm

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=2937

http://www.un.org/press/en/2007/db070103.doc.htm

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=21147 

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/03/world/middleeast/03nations.html