In Security Council, UN officials urge renewed engagement with DPR Korea on human rights

 

 안보리에서 UN 관리들 DPRK에 재차 관여할 것 촉구

 

 

A wide view of the Security Council during a briefing on the situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). UN Photo/Loey Felipe

 

22 December 2014 – Despite a grim litany of human rights abuses committed against its own people and ongoing provocations to global peace and security, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) has shown signs of compliance with human rights mechanisms prompting hopes that the Asian nation may one day yield to the call for full accountability and reform, two senior United Nations officials stated today.

Briefing the Security Council on the situation in the DPRK, Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights Ivan Šimonović highlighted the “widespread and systematic” crimes perpetrated by the Pyongyang Government, as detailed in a recent report produced by the UN Commission of Inquiry on human rights in the DPRK.

Released in February, the 400-page report, culled from first-hand testimony from victims and witnesses, details “unspeakable atrocities” committed in the country spanning murder, enslavement, torture, rape, forced starvation and disappearances which, Mr. Šimonović said, in many instances “constitute crimes against humanity.”

“Rarely has such an extensive charge-sheet of international crimes been brought to this Council’s attention,” he told the 15-member body, which decided in an 11-2-2 vote at the outset of the meeting to put the issue on its provisional agenda.

“It 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 of opinion, expression, information and association.”

In its report, the Commission found that the DPRK “displays many attributes of a totalitarian State,” with State surveillance permeating private lives and virtually no expression critical of the political system going undetected – or unpunished. Military spending – predominantly on hardware and the development of weapons systems and the nuclear programme – has always been prioritized, even during periods of mass starvation, the report added.

Referring to a 2013 survey conducted by the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and World Food Programme (WFP), Mr. Šimonović explained that 84 per cent of households in the DPRK were not consuming enough food. Moreover, he noted, the State’s political prison-camp system – which the Commission estimated contained up to 120,000 people – imposed deliberate starvation, forced labour, executions and torture upon its inmates.

The UN official also reaffirmed the Commission of Inquiry’s suggestion that the DPRK’s human rights situation and the security situation in the region were inextricably linked.

“Comprehensive human rights violations by the DPRK have had a significant impact on regional peace and security, from international abductions and enforced disappearances to trafficking and the outflow of desperate refugees,” he continued. “If we are to reduce tension in the region, there must be movement towards real respect for human rights in the DPRK.”

Nonetheless, Mr. Šimonović voiced optimism that a reversal in the status quo was still possible amid “promising new signs” of the DPRK authorities’ engagement with international human rights mechanisms. The country’s representatives had engaged productively with the UN Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review and held an “unprecedented” meeting with the UN Special Rapporteur. At the same time, he said, Pyongyang had reopened investigations into alleged abductions of Japanese nationals.

“All these developments may present an opportunity for real change,” he stated. “Other countries in the region have shown in the recent past that it is possible to dismantle deep-seated structures of repression and receive assistance in reform, leading to new recognition and standing in the international community.”

Also briefing the Council was Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs Tayé-Brook Zerihoun, who agreed, noting that the situation provided an opening to restart credible dialogue in order to help overcome the current standoff on the Korean Peninsula.

“These signals of engagement offer an important opportunity for the United Nations and the wider international community to redouble efforts towards building trust, dialogue and cooperation on all tracks,” Mr. Zerihoun declared. “It is also an opportunity for the DPRK to work with the international community to improve the human rights situation and the living conditions of the people of the country.”

For his part, Mr. Šimonović called for greater Council engagement on the situation in the DPRK now that it had been presented with the Commission’s report in order to advance what he said were “two crucial goals: accountability and engagement for reform” in the country.

“Concerted actions by the international community can have a powerful deterrent effect and may begin to change the policy of the DPRK,” he said, adding that the UN body should continue to “carefully” monitor developments in order to see whether engagement will lead to real change or whether it should take action by referral to the International Criminal Court and by adopting targeted sanctions.

“The people of the DPRK have endured decades of suffering and cruelty. They need your protection. And the cause of justice, peace and security in the region requires your leadership.”


Source: http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=49667#.VJjjHBePkU

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

General Assembly decides to refer UN report on human rights in DPR Korea to Security Council

UN 총회, DPRK에서의 인권에 관한 UN 보고서를 안보리에 회부하기로 결정

 

18 December 2014 – Condemning “ongoing systematic, widespread and gross violations of human rights” in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution today by which it would transmit a UN-backed report probing such violations to the Security Council.

The 400-page report was released in February by the UN Commission of Inquiry on human rights in the DPRK, which was established by the Geneva-based Human Rights Council in March 2013. Documenting in great detail the rights violations committed in the DPRK, the report called for urgent action to address the human rights situation, including referral to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The resolution adopted today by the General Assembly, acting on the recommendations of its Third Committee (the Assembly’s main body dealing with social, humanitarian and cultural issues) commends the work the Special Rapporteur on human rights in the DPRK and the Commission of Inquiry and decides that the commission’s report should be submitted to the Security Council.

The Assembly encouraged Council members to take appropriate action to ensure accountability, including through consideration of referral of the situation to the ICC and of targeted sanctions against those appearing most responsible for crimes against humanity.

The Assembly resolution, adopted by a recorded vote of 116 in favour to 20 against, with 53 abstentions, lists examples of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, describes a system of political prison camps, the forcible transfer of populations and limitations on movement, as well as violations of rights fundamental freedoms of women, children, and persons with disabilities.

The Assembly expressed its concern that the DPRK Government refuses to recognize the Special Rapporteur’s mandate or to cooperate, continuing not to acknowledge the grave human rights situation in the country, and failing to prosecute those responsible for violations, including those that may amount to crimes against humanity.

Strongly urging the Government of the DPRK to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, it urges implementation of the commission’s recommendations without delay. It also welcomes the recent willingness expressed by the Government to consider human rights dialogues, technical cooperation with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and a country visit of the Special Rapporteur.


Source: http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=49648&Cr=&Cr1=#.VJR6BBeMJs

Resolutions

 

결의

 

A/RES/69/1-A/RES/69/...
 

Resolution No.

 

 결의안 번호

Plenary or Cttee.

 

 본회의 또는 위원회

Agenda Item No.

 

 의제 안건 번호

Meeting Record/ Date/ Press Release/ Vote

 

회의기록/일자/보도자료/표결

Draft

 

초안

Topic

 

주제

A/RES/69/188

C.3

68 (c)

A/69/PV.73

A/69/488/Add.3 DR I

Situation of human rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea

 

조선민주주의인민공화국에서의 인권상황

18 December 2014

GA/11604

116-20-53

 

 

A/69/PV.73

2014. 12. 18.

GA/11604

 

찬성 116표/반대 20표/기권 53표


General Assembly

69th Session - 73rd Plenary Meeting

 

18 December 2014

 

 

UN 총회

제69차 회기 - 제73차 본회의

 

2014. 12. 18.

 

http://webtv.un.org/meetings-events/general-assembly/watch/general-assembly-73rd-plenary-meeting-69th-session/3951343975001

 

 

[Excerpts/발췌]

http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/unifeed/2014/12/un-dprk-15

 

The UN General assembly today voted to ask the UN Security Council to refer the human rights situation in the People's Democratic Republic of Korea (DPRK) to the International Criminal Court.


[Third Committee's Report to the Plenary/본회의에 제출하는 제3위원회 보고서]

 

 

A/69/488/Add.3

Item 68 (c):
Human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives

 

United Nations

 

A/69/488/Add.3

General Assembly

 

Distr.: General

3 December 2014

 

Original: English

 

 

 

 

Sixty-ninth session

Agenda item 68 (c)

 

 

 

 

 


         *  The report of the Committee on this item is being issued in five parts, under the symbol A/69/488 and Add.1-4.

                 

 

 

Promotion and protection of human rights: human

rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs

and representatives

 

 

Report of the Third Committee*

 

 

Rapporteur: Mr. Ervin Nina (Albania)

 

II. Consideration of proposals

 

 

             A.    Draft resolutions A/C.3/69/L.28 and Rev.1 and amendment thereto contained in document A/C.3/69/L.63

 

 

8.       At the 42nd meeting, on 6 November, the representative of Italy, on behalf of Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Micronesia (Federated States of), Montenegro, the Netherlands, Norway, Panama, Poland, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America, introduced a draft resolution entitled “Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” (A/C.3/69/L.28). Subsequently, Bosnia and Herzegovina joined in sponsoring the draft resolution.

9.       At its 46th meeting, on 18 November, the Committee had before it a revised draft resolution (A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1), submitted by the sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/69/L.28, as well as Botswana, Kiribati, Monaco, Palau, Seychelles, Tuvalu, Ukraine, Uruguay and Vanuatu.

10.    At the same meeting, the representative of Italy made a statement and announced that Maldives, the Marshall Islands, New Zealand and Serbia had joined in sponsoring the draft resolution.

 

                           Action on the amendment contained in document A/C.3/69/L.63

 

11.     At the 46th meeting, on 18 November, the Chair drew the attention of the Committee to the amendment submitted to draft resolution A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1, as contained in document A/C.3/69/L.63.

12.    At the same meeting, the representative of Cuba made a statement and orally revised the amendment (see A/C.3/69/SR.46).

13.    The representatives of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, China, Japan, Belarus, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the Russian Federation and South Africa made statements in connection with the amendment, as orally revised.

14.    The representative of Italy also made a statement, in which he requested a recorded vote on the amendment, as orally revised.

15.    At the same meeting, the Committee rejected the amendment contained in document A/C.3/69/L.63, as orally revised, by a recorded vote of 77 to 40, with
50 abstentions. The voting was as follows:

In favour:

          Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Belarus, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Burundi, China, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, South Africa, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.

Against:

          Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kiribati, Latvia, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America.

Abstaining:

          Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Bhutan, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Chad, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominican Republic, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Nauru, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Papua New Guinea, Qatar, Rwanda, Seychelles, Singapore, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, United Republic of Tanzania, Yemen, Zambia.

16.    Before the vote, statements were made by the representatives of Italy, Japan, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the United States of America, Albania, Switzerland (on behalf also of Australia, Austria, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) and Ecuador; after the vote, a statement was made by the representative of Uruguay (see A/C.3/69/SR.46).

 

                           Action on draft resolution A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1

 

17.    At the 47th meeting, on 18 November, the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea made a statement and requested a recorded vote on the draft resolution.

18.    At the same meeting, the Committee adopted draft resolution A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1 by a recorded vote of 111 to 19, with 55 abstentions (see para. 36, draft resolution I). The voting was as follows:[1]

In favour:

          Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Uruguay, Vanuatu.

Against:

          Belarus, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), China, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Ecuador, Egypt, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Myanmar, Oman, Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Uzbekistan, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of),
Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.

Abstaining:

          Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Cameroon, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Libya, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, South Sudan, Suriname, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Yemen, Zambia.

19.    Before the vote, statements were made by the representatives of Japan, the Syrian Arab Republic, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Cuba, Belarus, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and Ecuador; after the vote, statements were made by the representatives of India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Myanmar, Thailand, Zimbabwe, Malaysia, Brazil, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Viet Nam, Singapore, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Norway (see A/C.3/69/SR.47).



         [1]           Subsequently, the delegation of Grenada indicated that it had intended to vote in favour.

 

(...)

 

III. Recommendations of the Third Committee

 

 

36.    The Third Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of the following draft resolutions:

 

 

                     Draft resolution I

                     Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic

of Korea

(...)


[Meetings Coverage and Press Releases/회의취재 및 보도자료]

 

18 December 2014

 

GA/11604

Adopting 68 Texts Recommended by Third Committee, General Assembly Sends Strong Message towards Ending Impunity, Renewing Efforts to Protect Human Rights

Sixty-ninth session,
73rd & 74th Meetings (AM & PM)

 

Sending a strong message to end impunity and to renew efforts to promote and protect human rights, especially for vulnerable groups, the General Assembly adopted 61 resolutions and seven decisions recommended by its Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) while deferring action on one draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Myanmar pending the issuance of budget implications.

(...)

Recorded votes were requested on a number of drafts, reflecting varying views on a range of topics, including albinism, the right to development and the use of mercenaries.  Among those texts tabled for a vote was a landmark resolution on the human rights situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.  By that text, adopted by a recorded vote of 116 in favour to 20 against, with 53 abstentions, the Assembly, for the first time, decided to submit the Special Rapporteur’s report on that country to the Security Council.  Also by the text, the Assembly encouraged the Council to take appropriate action to ensure accountability, including through consideration of referral of the situation in that country to the International Criminal Court and consideration of the scope for effective targeted sanctions against those who appeared to be most responsible for acts that the Commission of Inquiry had said could possibly constitute crimes against humanity.

As in previous years, delegates had differing views on such special rapporteur reports and draft resolutions on specific countries.  Some speakers said the double standards and selectivity of so-called country-specific reports violated human rights and even threatened the right to self-determination.  Some said dialogue was the only way to effectively address human rights concerns.

Explanations of position came from a number of delegations, including those whose countries were the subject of draft resolutions.  The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea said his delegation had rejected the draft resolution on the human rights situation in his country because, in part, it was politically driven and failed to reflect the reality on the ground.  Commenting on the draft text on his country, passed by a vote of 83 in favour to 35 against, with 68 abstentions, Iran’s representative said such reports and draft resolutions were unfairly targeting States.

 

(...)

 

Background

The General Assembly met this morning to take action on draft resolutions and decisions contained in reports of its Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural).

 

(...)

 

Opening Statement

 

(...)

 

Introduction of Reports

ERVIN NINA (Albania), Rapporteur of the Third Committee, introduced its reports as follows:

(...)

He also presented the Committee’s reports on human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms (document A/69/488/Add.2); human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives (document A/69/488.Add.3);

(...)

 

Action on Draft Resolutions

(...)

The Assembly then turned to the Third Committee’s report Human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives (document A/69/488/Add.3), containing four draft resolutions covering the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Syria, Myanmar and Iran.  It deferred consideration of a draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Myanmar until the issuance of the pertinent Fifth Committee report.

Speaking in explanation of vote before the votes, the representative of the United Arab Emirates stated that his country was one of the co-sponsors of the resolution on human rights in Syria because it was necessary to put an end to the human rights violations, including killings and arbitrary detentions, suffered by “the brotherly people of Syria”.

Also speaking in explanation of position before the votes, the representative of Syria said that his delegation opposed the draft resolution which criticized the human rights situation in his country.  Some regimes were feeding the violence in Syria.  They were not content with arming terrorist groups; they were establishing military training camps.  Saudi Arabia was the main cause of religious hatred in the region.  The Qatari regime had also provided millions of dollars to terrorist organizations.  The report’s criticism was paradoxical given the violations against women and minorities in those and other States.  He urged all countries to reconsider their positions and vote against the text.

Also speaking in explanation of position before the votes, the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea said that his delegation rejected the draft resolution on human rights situation in his country, because it was “the product of a political plot”.  The European Union and Japan had drafted the text based on the fabricated report of the Commission of Enquiry, which had never visited the country.  They had blocked all possibilities for dialogue and cooperation by forcibly pushing the adoption of the resolution.  Their intention was not the promotion of human rights, but sycophancy and subservience to the United States, which had conducted shocking violations as evidenced by the Central Intelligence Agency torture crimes.

The representative of Iran, in explanation of position before the votes, said that the draft resolution on human rights situation in his country was “political, prejudicial and unbalanced.”  It ignored the fact that Iranian society was a vibrant and multi-voiced society.  It also failed to acknowledge the positive developments in Iran since the beginning of the new Government’s tenure and the constant readiness of the Iranian Government to cooperate with the United Nations human rights mechanisms.  Country-specific resolutions, such as the one before the Assembly, were counterproductive because they increased distrust and damaged the Organization’s credibility.

In explanation of position before the votes, the representative of Cuba said that her country had always opposed country-specific resolutions in the Third Committee because they were politically motivated and contributed nothing to the promotion of human rights.  The Human Rights Council and the Universal Period Review mechanism were the forums in which the human rights situations of all countries should be considered on an equal footing.  The resolution on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had created a dangerous precedent that threatened the right to self-determination of States.  By referring the issue to the Security Council and the International Criminal Court, the text promoted the sanctioning of countries.

The representative of Algeria, also speaking in explanation of position before the votes, voiced regret at the continued double standards in the proliferation of country-specific resolutions.  Differences on human rights should be resolved through dialogue, not confrontation.  The General Assembly should adopt a new approach that promoted technical cooperation, dialogue and transparency.  Selective resolutions that targeted specific countries undermined the mandate of the Human Rights Council.

In explanation of position before the votes, the representative of Papua New Guinea said that the international community had agreed on the notion that the Human Rights Council had and should continue to underpin the development of human rights.  The Universal Periodic Review process had been an important catalyst in that process around the world.  Papua New Guinea had had three special rapporteurs visit the country to report on various human rights issues.  While the country had not agreed with every aspect of the reports, it had welcomed the scrutiny.  He called on Iran and other countries to allow rapporteurs to visit.  In view of that, his delegation would abstain on the resolution related to Iran.

Also speaking in explanation of vote before the votes, the representative of Saudi Arabia said that the delegate of Syria had referred to his country.  The General Assembly Chair requested that he wait to exercise his right of reply until the end of the consideration of the draft resolutions.

The Assembly then adopted, by a recorded vote of 116 in favour to 20 against, with 53 abstentions, a draft titled “Situation of human rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea”.

Also by a recorded vote of 127 in favour to 13 against, with 48 abstentions, it adopted a text titled “Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic”.

In another recorded vote — 83 in favour to 35 against, with 68 abstentions — the Assembly adopted a draft titled “Situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran”.

In explanation of position after adoption, the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea thanked the delegations that had voted against the resolution regarding his country and stated that the United States was viciously attempting to destroy his nation’s ideology and system.  In the light of that dangerous campaign undertaken, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea would continue to uphold its pride and honour in its socialist system and would do its utmost to defend it.

The representative of El Salvador, also in explanation of position after adoption, said that his delegation had agreed with the text of the draft resolution on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea that had been originally presented, with the exception of paragraph 8.  For constitutional and legal reasons, he noted that he could not support the language in that paragraph.  Given the results of voting on the amendment that would have changed that language, and given that co-sponsoring countries had included elements for more “rapprochement”, he said that his delegation had changed its position and had decided to vote for the resolution.  However, he emphasized that his country was not currently a party to the Rome Statute, and therefore, its vote in favour of the resolution should not be considered as in any way a change of position on that.

Costa Rica’s representative, in explanation of position after the action, said that country-specific assessments should be undertaken and that the Human Rights Council was the forum in which those situations should be discussed and examined.  Furthermore, the Universal Periodic Review was the appropriate mechanism with which to examine human rights.  Cooperation and constructive dialogue and other mechanisms should continue to be part of the way human rights were promoted and protected.

In explanation of position, Sri Lanka’s representative said he had voted against the draft text on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.  He urged that Government to take action to address concerns.  “Name and shame” resolutions were unproductive, he said, adding that a cooperative approach had been proposed, but had not been supported.  The draft text’s reference to encouraging the Security Council’s referral of the issue to the International Criminal Court was “unacceptable”.

 

Right of Reply

(...)

 

Action on Draft Resolutions

(...)


[Voting Record/표결 기록]

 

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/69/PV.73

 

A/69/PV.73

 

General Assembly
Sixty-ninth session
73rd plenary meeting
 

Thursday, 18 December 2014, 10 a.m.

 

New York

 

(...)

 

(c) Human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives


Report of the Third Committee (A/69/488/Add.3)


The Acting President: The Assembly has before it four draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 36 of its report.
Before proceeding further, I should like to inform members that action on draft resolution III, entitled “Situation of human rights in Myanmar”, is postponed to a later date to allow time for the review of its programme budget implications by the Fifth Committee. The Assembly will take action on draft resolution III as soon as the report of the Fifth Committee on its programme budget implications is available.
I shall now give the floor to representatives who wish to speak in explanation of vote or position on draft resolutions I, II or IV before we take action on the draft resolutions.

 

(...)

 

Mr. An Myong Hun (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea): My delegation would like to state its position on draft resolution I, entitled “Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”, as contained in document A/69/488/Add.3, which was submitted by the European Union (EU) and Japan.

My delegation totally rejects this draft resolution because it has nothing to do with the promotion and protection of human rights, but is the product of a political plot and confrontation against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The European Union and Japan drafted the draft resolution on the basis of a fabricated report of the Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (A/HRC/25/63), whose members have never been in my country. Let me once again make it clear that the report of the Commission of Inquiry is a document born of a political plot and has no basic attributes or credibility to be recognized as a General Assembly document, as it is based on the fabricated testimonies of a handful of defectors who committed crimes and fled their homeland.

 

We have consistently maintained our position of countering confrontation and giving priority to dialogue and cooperation in the field of human rights, and we have also clarified our willingness to engage in broad-ranging constructive dialogue. However, the European Union and Japan completely blocked all possibilities of cooperation in the field of human rights, including a visit to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea by a Special Rapporteur and a human rights dialogue between the EU and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, by forcibly pushing the adoption of the draft resolution, which does not reflect the reality on the ground. Consequently, the European Union and Japan themselves disclosed that their real intention in submitting a draft resolution was not for the genuine promotion and protection of human rights, but purely as an act of subservience and sycophancy in support of the hostile policy of the United States against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to overthrow our political and social system.

 

If countries sponsoring draft resolution I are really interested in the promotion and protection of human rights, they should address the issue of the grave human rights violations being committed in Western countries, such as the recently revealed Central Intelligence Agency’s crimes of torture committed by the United States in the most brutal and shocking manner. My delegation remains consistent with regard to its principled position of holding a dialogue on cooperation in the field of human rights. However, this delegation will not tolerate any attempt to abuse human rights issues as a tool for overthrowing our social system.

 

Once again, my delegation emphasizes that we strongly reject all the country-specific draft resolutions — not only draft resolution I against my country, but also draft resolutions on the situation of human right in the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Syrian Arab Republic and Myanmar. My delegation firmly believes that all countries will vote against the draft resolution sponsored by the EU and Japan, in line with the principles and universally accepted position to oppose politicization, selectivity and double standards over human rights.

 

(...)

 

Mrs. Moreno Guerra (Cuba) (spoke in Spanish): Cuba has traditionally maintained a principled position against country-specific draft resolutions that aim to condemn developing countries based on politically motivated reasons that have nothing to do with defending human rights and that contribute nothing to that cause. These toxic and selective practices of politicization and applying double standards in the consideration of situations of human rights were the reason that led to the discrediting and dissolution of the Human Rights Commission. The establishment of the Human Rights Council and its Universal Periodic Review mechanism offer the possibility to consider situations of human rights issues in all countries on an equal footing, based on genuine and constructive dialogue.

 

Cuba would like to reiterate that international cooperation based on the principles of objectivity, unconditionality, impartiality and non-selectivity is the only way to effectively promote and protect all human rights. Unfortunately, that is not the goal being pursued today with the draft resolutions against these countries, which are clearly and undoubtedly politically motivated.

 

With regard to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, a dangerous precedent has been established that violates the rights of sovereignty and self-determination of States in referring the issue to the Security Council and, subsequently, to the International Criminal Court. That has a significant negative impact in that it irresponsibly promotes punishment and sanctions on the basis of allegations that have not been proved on the ground. We reiterate that these actions are contradictory to the atmosphere of cooperation and dialogue that is needed in order to strengthen an international system in which all are respected on an equal footing, independently of their wealth or power.

Cuba has roundly opposed country-specific draft resolutions, both in the Third Committee and in the Human Rights Council. In that spirit, we will continue to vote against draft resolutions on the human rights situations in friendly countries, and to disassociate ourselves from the consensus on draft resolutions that are not normally subject to a vote.

We would like to indicate that opposition to these selective and politicized draft resolutions do not prejudge in any way the resolution of the pending issues mentioned in paragraph 3 of the draft resolution, which require a fair and honourable solution with the agreement of all stakeholders.

 

Ms. Mansouri (Algeria): My delegation would like to explain its position before the Assembly takes action on the draft resolutions on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (draft resolution I), the Syrian Arab Republic (draft resolution II) and the Islamic Republic of Iran (draft resolution IV), as contained in the report of the Third Committee (A/69/488/Add.3).


My delegation regrets the continued selectivity, double standards, politicization and proliferation of country-specific draft resolutions, as previously highlighted during the ministerial meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement held in Algiers in May. My delegation strongly believes that differences on human rights issues should be resolved through constructive dialogue, and not through confrontational, politically motivated action. Indeed, practice has demonstrated that country-specific draft resolutions have not contributed to the improvement of human rights situations. They only jeopardize trust and provoke confrontation among Member States by ignoring the principle of impartiality, which should govern human rights situations and mechanisms.


The Assembly should adopt a new cooperative approach to the consideration of human rights in those countries that enables the establishment of dialogue and the development of technical cooperation between the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the countries concerned in a transparent, fair and equal manner. Moreover, the Universal Periodic Review mechanism should be considered as the primary tool for considering human rights issues, and such discussions should take place in an atmosphere of constructive dialogue within the Human Rights Council. The continued submission of selective draft resolutions that target specific countries is a violation of the principle of universality and objectivity and undermines the mandate of the Human Rights Council. For those reasons, my delegation will abstain in the voting on all country-specific draft resolutions.

 

(...)

 

The Acting President: We will now take decisions on draft resolutions I, II and IV, one by one.


We turn first to draft resolution I, entitled “Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”. A recorded vote has been requested.

 

A recorded vote was taken.

 

In favour:

Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, South Sudan, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Uruguay, Vanuatu

 

Against:

Belarus, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), China, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Ecuador, Egypt, Gambia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Myanmar, Oman, Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Uzbekistan, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Zimbabwe

 

Abstaining:

Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Cameroon, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominican Republic, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Guinea, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Libya, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Suriname, Tajikistan, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Yemen, Zambia

 

Draft resolution I was adopted by 116 votes to 20, with 53 abstentions (resolution 69/188).

 

(...)

 

The Acting President: I shall now give the floor to delegations that wish to speak in explanation of vote following the voting.

 

Mr. An Mayong Hun (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea): The delegation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea would like to express its thanks to those delegations that voted against resolution 69/188. My delegation again fully rejects this forcibly adopted resolution against my country. The resolution proves once again that the United States and its followers are ever more viciously resorting to their plot to defame our image and destroy our ideology and system under the pretext of human rights. In the light of the increasingly dangerous human rights campaigns undertaken by hostile forces against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, we will keep in our hearts the pride and honour of the socialist system, which was chosen as being consolidated and developed by our people, and we will work to the utmost to defend it.

 

Mr. Zamora Rivas (El Salvador) (spoke in Spanish): El Salvador would like to explain its vote on resolution 69/188, entitled “Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”.


El Salvador abstained in the voting at the time the resolution was adopted in the Third Committee. We would like to express our agreement with the text that was originally presented, with the exception of paragraph 8 for constitutional and legal reasons that do not allow our country to support the paragraph’s language. Accordingly, El Salvador supported the proposed amendment contained in document A/C.3/69/L.63, which aimed to delete paragraph 8. The amendment, which was not adopted, sought to substitute for paragraph 8 language calling for rapprochement and dialogue on human rights issues. Given the outcome of the voting on the amendment and on the text as a whole today, which includes the second part of the amendment that was not adopted by the Committee, and given the fact that the sponsor countries decided to include in the text aspects on openness to dialogue, El Salvador decided to change its position and to vote in favour of the resolution, despite the fact that paragraph 8 was retained.


Nevertheless, for the record, El Salvador would like to state that with regard to operative paragraph 8, and despite the fact that it has voted in favour of the resolution on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, El Salvador is currently not a State party to the Rome Statute, and by extension to the International Criminal Court. That is why our vote in favour of this resolution should not be considered as our country’s recognition of the jurisdiction of this international tribunal as stated in paragraph 8.

 

Ms. Murillo (Costa Rica) (spoke in Spanish): I would like to make a general statement following the adoption of these country-specific resolutions.


Our concern about the human rights situation in the specific countries referred to in the resolutions submitted for consideration in the plenary today led us to vote in favour of all three resolutions. In addition, we maintain our principled position that all country-specific situations should be assessed on their respective merits — including, in this case, steps taken by countries to improve their human rights situations. Nevertheless, my country reiterates that the Human Rights Council has the main mandate on this issue. We should therefore support the Council and give it a prominent role on the issues before us today. The Human Rights Council has the necessary tools at its disposal to consider specific cases that are cause for concern to the international community — situations that, owing to their seriousness, require country-specific attention, such as special procedures. That is why my country believes that addressing country-specific situations should take place in the Human Rights Council. We therefore did not join the resolutions as sponsors in the Third Committee.

We acknowledge that the Universal Periodic Review mechanism provides the appropriate means to consider human rights situations based on transparent, reliable and objective information. Strengthening the mechanism will help to further strengthen the Human Rights Council as the main body of the United Nations for the promotion and protection of human rights throughout the world without any distinction. Nevertheless, that should not distract us from our responsibility to express ourselves about situations that are of critical importance for fundamental rights, wherever they occur in the world, or from considering country-specific situations when necessary.


Costa Rica believes that constructive dialogue and cooperation, including cooperation with special procedures and other human rights mechanisms and open invitations to visit countries, should continue to serve as the path towards effectively promoting and protecting human rights. We call on all States to commit truly to that effort.

 

Mr. Wickramarachchige (Sri Lanka): Sri Lanka wishes to make the following statement following the voting on resolution 69/188, entitled “Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”.


Sri Lanka voted against this resolution. Our vote does not in any way demonstrate disregard for the promotion or protection of human rights. On the contrary, Sri Lanka remains committed to the advancement of human rights, and concerned about the alleged human rights situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. We urge the Government to take mesures to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms. Sri Lanka vehemently condemns all acts of abduction and expresses deep concern about the safety of those victims.

Sri Lanka believes that country-specific resolutions designed to name and shame are not the appropriate means to address or advance human rights. When this resolution was considered in the Third Committee, Sri Lanka voted in favour of the proposal presented by Cuba to replace the current paragraphs 7 and 8 with provisions that would enable the adoption of a cooperative approach. However, the proposal failed to receive the necessary support in the Committee. The current paragraphs 7 and 8 require that the Commission of Inquiry report on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea be submitted to the Security Council. They also encourage the Council to consider referring the situation to the International Criminal Court. That is an unacceptable approach, especially as the country concerned has indicated its willingness to engage, and even to accept the visit of a Special Rapporteur. Sri Lanka categorically rejects that proposition in the resolution, which places the onus on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to address alleged human rights violations.

For those reasons, having abstained in the past, Sri Lanka was compelled to vote against this resolution.

 

(...)


 

[Adopted Resolution/채택된 결의안]

 

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/69/188

 

 

United Nations

A/RES/69/188

General Assembly

Distr.: General

21 January 2015

Sixty-ninth session

Agenda item 68 (c)

 

 

Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 18 December 2014

[on the report of the Third Committee (A/69/488/Add.3)]

69/188.    Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

 

 

          The General Assembly,

          Reaffirming that all States have an obligation to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms and to fulfil the obligations that they have undertaken under the various international instruments,

          Recalling all previous resolutions adopted by the General Assembly, the Commission on Human Rights and the Human Rights Council on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, including Assembly resolution 68/183 of 18 December 2013 and Council resolution 25/25 of 28 March 2014,[1] and mindful of the need for the international community to strengthen its coordinated efforts aimed at achieving the implementation of those resolutions,

          Deeply concerned at the grave human rights situation, the pervasive culture of impunity and the lack of accountability for human rights violations in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,

          Welcoming the report of the commission of inquiry on human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,[2] and expressing grave concern at the detailed findings contained therein,

          Noting the transmission of the report of the commission of inquiry to the Security Council on 14 April 2014,

          Recalling the responsibility of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to protect its population from crimes against humanity,

          Taking note of the report of the Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Council on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,[3] regretting that he still has not been allowed to visit the country and that he has received no cooperation from the authorities of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and taking note also of the comprehensive report of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea submitted in accordance with resolution 68/183,[4]

          Mindful that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,[5] the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,5 the Convention on the Rights of the Child[6] and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women,[7] and recalling the concluding observations of the treaty bodies under the four treaties,

          Noting with appreciation the signature of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities[8] and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography[9] by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, encouraging the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to take speedy steps to ratify the Convention and the Optional Protocol, and urging the Government to fully respect the rights of persons with disabilities and children,

          Acknowledging the participation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in the second universal periodic review process, noting the acceptance by the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea of 113 out of the 268 recommendations contained in the outcome of the review[10] and its stated commitment to implement them and look into the possibility of implementing a further 58 recommendations, and emphasizing the importance of the implementation of the recommendations in order to address the grave human rights violations in the country,

          Noting with appreciation the collaboration established between the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the United Nations Children’s Fund and the World Health Organization in order to improve the health situation in the country, and the collaboration established with the United Nations Children’s Fund in order to improve the quality of education for children,

          Noting the decision on the resumption, on a modest scale, of the activities of the United Nations Development Programme in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and encouraging the engagement of the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea with the international community to ensure that the programmes benefit the persons in need of assistance,

          Noting also the cooperation between the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the World Food Programme, the United Nations Children’s Fund and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations on food security assessments, underscoring the importance of those assessments in analysing changes in the national, household and individual food security and nutritional situation and thereby in supporting donor confidence in the targeting of aid programmes, noting further the letter of understanding signed by the Government and the World Food Programme and the importance of further improvements in operating conditions, bringing access and monitoring arrangements closer to international standards for all United Nations entities, and noting with appreciation the work of international aid operators,

          Noting further the importance of the issue of international abductions and of the immediate return of all abductees, taking note of the outcome of the government-level consultation between the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Japan in May 2014, and expecting concrete and positive results from the investigations being conducted by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea on all the Japanese nationals, in particular victims of abduction,

          Noting the importance of the inter-Korean dialogue, which could contribute to the improvement of the human rights and humanitarian situation in the country,

          Welcoming the resumption of the reunions of separated families across the border in February 2014, and, given that this is an urgent humanitarian concern of the entire Korean people, hoping that necessary arrangements for further reunions on a larger scale and a regular basis will be made by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea and members of the Korean diaspora,

          1.       Condemns the long-standing and ongoing systematic, widespread and gross violations of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, including those which the commission of inquiry on human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, established by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 22/13 of 21 March 2013,[11] has said may amount to crimes against humanity, and the continuing impunity for such violations;

          2.       Expresses its very serious concern at:

          (a)    The persistence of continuing reports of violations of human rights, including the detailed findings made by the commission of inquiry in its report,2 such as:

(i)      Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including inhuman conditions of detention; rape; public executions; extrajudicial and arbitrary detention; the absence of due process and the rule of law, including fair trial guarantees and an independent judiciary; extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary executions; the imposition of the death penalty for political and religious reasons; collective punishments extending up to three generations; and the extensive use of forced labour;

(ii)     The existence of an extensive system of political prison camps, where a vast number of persons are deprived of their liberty and subjected to deplorable conditions and where alarming violations of human rights are perpetrated, and in this regard strongly urges the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to immediately end this practice and to release all political prisoners unconditionally and without any delay;

(iii)   The forcible transfer of populations and the limitations imposed on every person who wishes to move freely within the country and travel abroad, including the punishment of those who leave or try to leave the country without permission, or their families, as well as punishment of persons who are returned;

(iv)    The situation of refugees and asylum seekers expelled or returned to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and sanctions imposed on citizens of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea who have been repatriated from abroad, leading to punishments of internment, torture, other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, sexual violence or the death penalty, and in this regard strongly urges all States to respect the fundamental principle of
non-refoulement, to treat those who seek refuge humanely and to ensure unhindered access to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and his Office, with a view to protecting the human rights of those who seek refuge, and once again urges States parties to comply with their obligations under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees
[12] and the 1967 Protocol thereto[13] in relation to refugees from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea who are covered by those instruments;

(v)     All-pervasive and severe restrictions on the freedoms of thought, conscience, religion or belief, opinion and expression, peaceful assembly and association, the right to privacy and equal access to information, by such means as the persecution, torture and imprisonment of individuals exercising their freedom of opinion and expression, religion or belief, and their families, and the right of everyone to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives, of his or her country;

(vi)    Violations of economic, social and cultural rights, which have led to severe hunger, malnutrition, widespread health problems and other hardship for the population in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, in particular for women, children, persons with disabilities and the elderly;

(vii)   Violations of the human rights and fundamental freedoms of women, in particular the creation of internal conditions that force women to leave the country and make them extremely vulnerable to trafficking in persons for the purpose of prostitution, domestic servitude or forced marriage and the subjection of women to forced abortions, gender-based discrimination, including in the political and social spheres, and other forms of sexual and gender-based violence;

(viii)  Violations of the human rights and fundamental freedoms of children, in particular the continued lack of access to basic economic, social and cultural rights for many children, and in this regard notes the particularly vulnerable situation faced by, inter alia, returned or repatriated children, street children, children with disabilities, children whose parents are detained, children living in detention or in institutions and children in conflict with the law;

(ix)    Violations of the human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons with disabilities, especially in the use of collective camps and of coercive measures that target the rights of persons with disabilities to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children;

(x)     Violations of workers’ rights, including the right to freedom of association and effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining, the right to strike as defined by the obligations of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,5 and the prohibition of the economic exploitation of children and of any harmful or hazardous work of children as defined by the obligations of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea under the Convention on the Rights of the Child;6

(xi)    Discrimination based on the songbun system, which classifies people on the basis of State-assigned social class and birth, and also includes consideration of political opinions and religion;

          (b)     The continued refusal of the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to recognize the mandate of the Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Council on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea or to extend cooperation to the Special Rapporteur;

          (c)     The continued lack of acknowledgement by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea of the grave human rights situation in the country and its consequential lack of action to implement the recommendations contained in the outcome of its first universal periodic review;[14]

          (d)     The failure of the authorities of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to prosecute those responsible for human rights violations, including violations which the commission of inquiry has said may amount to crimes against humanity;

          3.       Underscores its very serious concern at the systematic abduction, denial of repatriation and subsequent enforced disappearance of persons, including those from other countries, on a large scale and as a matter of State policy, and in this regard strongly calls upon the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea urgently to resolve these issues of international concern, in a transparent manner, including by ensuring the immediate return of abductees;

          4.       Expresses its very deep concern at the precarious humanitarian situation in the country, which could rapidly deteriorate owing to limited resilience to natural disasters and to government policies causing limitations in the availability of and access to food, compounded by structural weaknesses in agricultural production resulting in significant shortages of diversified food and the State restrictions on the cultivation of and trade in foodstuffs, as well as the prevalence of chronic malnutrition, particularly among the most vulnerable groups, pregnant women, children, persons with disabilities and the elderly, and urges the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, in this regard, to take preventive and remedial action, cooperating where necessary with international donor agencies and in accordance with international standards for monitoring humanitarian assistance;

          5.       Commends the Special Rapporteur for the activities undertaken so far and for his continued efforts in the conduct of his mandate despite the denial of access;

          6.       Also commends the work of the commission of inquiry and recognizes the importance of its report, and regrets that the commission received no cooperation from the authorities of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, including with regard to access to the country;

          7.       Acknowledges the commission’s finding that the body of testimony gathered and the information received provide reasonable grounds to believe that crimes against humanity have been committed in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, pursuant to policies established at the highest level of the State for decades;

          8.       Decides to submit the report of the commission of inquiry to the Security Council, and encourages the Council to consider the relevant conclusions and recommendations of the commission and take appropriate action to ensure accountability, including through consideration of referral of the situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to the International Criminal Court and consideration of the scope for effective targeted sanctions against those who appear to be most responsible for acts that the commission has said may constitute crimes against humanity;

          9.       Welcomes the steps taken by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights towards establishing a field-based structure in the Republic of Korea to strengthen the monitoring and documentation of the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, to ensure accountability, to provide the Special Rapporteur with increased support, to enhance the engagement and capacity-building of the Governments of all States concerned, civil society and other stakeholders and to maintain the visibility of the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, including through sustained communications, advocacy and outreach initiatives;

          10.     Calls upon Member States to undertake to ensure that the field-based structure of the Office of the High Commissioner can function with independence, that it has sufficient resources and that it is not subjected to any reprisals or threats;

          11.     Strongly urges the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to respect fully all human rights and fundamental freedoms and, in this regard:

          (a)     To immediately put an end to the systematic, widespread and grave violations of human rights emphasized above, inter alia, by implementing fully the measures set out in the above-mentioned resolutions of the General Assembly, the Commission on Human Rights and the Human Rights Council, and the recommendations addressed to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea by the Council in the context of the universal periodic review and by the commission of inquiry, the United Nations special procedures and treaty bodies;

          (b)     To protect its inhabitants, address the issue of impunity and ensure that those responsible for violations of human rights are brought to justice before an independent judiciary;

          (c)     To tackle the root causes leading to refugee outflows and prosecute those who exploit refugees by human smuggling, trafficking and extortion, while not criminalizing the victims;

          (d)     To ensure that citizens of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea who are expelled or returned to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea are able to return in safety and dignity, are treated humanely and are not subjected to any kind of punishment, and to provide information on their status and treatment;

          (e)     To extend its full cooperation to the Special Rapporteur, including by granting him full, free and unimpeded access to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and to other United Nations human rights mechanisms so that a full needs assessment of the human rights situation may be made;

          (f)      To engage in technical cooperation activities in the field of human rights with the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and his Office, as pursued by the High Commissioner in recent years, with a view to improving the situation of human rights in the country, and to strive to implement the accepted recommendations stemming from the universal periodic review;

          (g)     To engage in cooperation with the International Labour Organization;

          (h)     To continue and reinforce its cooperation with United Nations humanitarian agencies;

          (i)      To ensure full, safe and unhindered access to humanitarian aid and take measures to allow humanitarian agencies to secure its impartial delivery to all parts of the country on the basis of need in accordance with humanitarian principles, as it pledged to do, and to ensure access to adequate food and implement more effective food security policies, including through sustainable agriculture, sound food production distribution measures and the allocation of more funds to the food sector, and to ensure adequate monitoring of humanitarian assistance;

          (j)      To further improve cooperation with the United Nations country team and development agencies so that they can directly contribute to improving the living conditions of the civilian population, including accelerating progress towards the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, in accordance with international monitoring and evaluation procedures;

          (k)     To consider ratifying and acceding to remaining international human rights treaties, which would enable a dialogue with the human rights treaty bodies;

          12.     Urges the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to implement the recommendations of the commission of inquiry without delay;

          13.     Encourages all Member States, the General Assembly, the Human Rights Council, the Office of the High Commissioner, the United Nations Secretariat, civil society organizations, foundations and engaged business enterprises and other stakeholders towards which the commission of inquiry has directed recommendations to implement or take forward those recommendations;

          14.     Welcomes the recent willingness expressed by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to consider human rights dialogues with States and groups of States, technical cooperation with the Office of the High Commissioner and a country visit of the Special Rapporteur;

          15.     Calls upon the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to continue to engage constructively with international interlocutors with a view to promoting concrete improvements in the human rights situation on the ground, including through dialogues, official visits to the country and more people-to-people contact;

          16.     Decides to continue its examination of the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea at its seventieth session, and to this end requests the Secretary-General to submit a comprehensive report on the situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and requests the Special Rapporteur to continue to report his findings and recommendations, as well as to report on the follow-up to the implementation of the recommendations of the commission of inquiry, in line with Human Rights Council resolution 25/25.1

 

73rd plenary meeting
18 December 2014

 



[1] See Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 53 (A/69/53), chap. II.

[5] See resolution 2200 A (XXI), annex.

[6] United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1577, No. 27531.

[7] Ibid., vol. 1249, No. 20378.

[8] Ibid., vol. 2515, No. 44910.

[9] Ibid., vol. 2171, No. 27531.

[11] See Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 53 (A/68/53), chap. IV, sect. A.

[12] United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 189, No. 2545.

[13] Ibid., vol. 606, No. 8791.


Source:

http://www.un.org/press/en/2014/ga11604.doc.htm

http://www.un.org/en/ga/69/resolutions.shtml

http://www.un.org/en/ga/third/69/reports.shtml

UN General Assembly

69th Session

Third Committee

 

18 November 2014 

 

 

UN 총회

제69차 회기

제3위원회

 

2014. 11. 18.

 

 

STATUS OF ACTION ON DRAFT PROPOSALS

 

결의안에 대한 ... 상황

 

Symbol

문서기호

Agenda Item

의제 안건

Title

제목

Main Sponsor

제안국

Intro

 

PBIs

 

Action

 

A/C.3/69/L.28

68 (c)

Situation of human rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea

 

조선민주주의인민공화국에서의 인권상황

Italy (on behalf of the EU) and Japan

 

이탈리아 (EU를 대표하여) 및 일본

42nd Mtg

06-Nov

 (Italy)

 

제42차 회의

2014. 11. 6.

 (이탈리아)

None

 

없음

 

A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1

None

 

없음

Adopted by Vote:

 111-19-55

47th Mtg

 18-Nov

 

표결에 의한 가결:

찬성 111표/반대 19표/기권 55표

제47차 회의

2014. 11. 18.

A/C.3/69/L.63

68 (c)

Amendment to A/C.3/69/L.28

 

A/C.3/69/L.28에 대한 수정안

Cuba

 

쿠바

 

None

 

없음

Rejected by Vote:

40-77-50

46th Mtg

18-Nov

 

표결에 의한 부결:

찬성 40표/반대 77표/기권 50표

제46차 회의

2014. 11. 18.


General Assembly

69th Session

Third Committee

 

18 November 2014

 

 

UN총회

제69차 회기

제3위원회

 

2014. 11. 18.

 

 

[46th Meeting/제46차 회의]

http://webtv.un.org/meetings-events/general-assembly/main-committees/3rd-committee/watch/third-committee-46th-meeting-–-69th-general-assembly/3897813256001 

  

 

[47th Meeting/제47차 회의]

 

http://webtv.un.org/meetings-events/general-assembly/main-committees/3rd-committee/watch/third-committee-47th-meeting-–-69th-general-assembly/3899324250001


[Meetings Coverage and Press Releases/회의취재 및 보도자료]

 

18 November 2014

 

GA/SHC/4122

Intensely Debating Targeted Country Reviews, Third Committee Approves Draft Texts on Iran, Syria, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

Sixty-ninth session,

46th & 47th Meetings (AM & PM)

Dialogue, Not Politically Driven Actions, Triggers Human Rights Advancements, Delegates Hear During Day-Long Discussions

 

Differences on human rights issues should be resolved through constructive dialogue and not confrontational politically motivated actions, the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) heard today as it concluded its discussion on the Human Rights Report and took action on a package of draft resolutions on human rights questions and situations in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Syria and Iran.

During a heated debate on a draft resolution on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, which was approved by a recorded vote of 111 in favour to 19 against, with 55 abstentions, many delegates voiced strong positions against the text.  Of particular concern were operative paragraphs 7 and 8.

By the terms of operative paragraph 7, the General Assembly would acknowledge the commission’s finding that the body of testimony gathered and the information received provide reasonable grounds to believe that crimes against humanity have been committed in the Democratic People’s Republic.  The latter operative paragraph would have the Assembly decide to submit the report of the commission of inquiry to the Security Council, and encourages the Council to consider the relevant conclusions and recommendations of the commission and take appropriate action to ensure accountability, including through consideration of referral of the situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to the International Criminal Court and consideration of the scope for effective targeted sanctions against those who appear to be most responsible for acts that the commission has said may constitute crimes against humanity.

Prior to voting on that draft text, the Committee rejected a draft resolution, by a recorded vote of 40 in favour to 77 against, with 50 abstentions.  That draft text, tabled by Cuba, contained a proposal to replace the two abovementioned paragraphs with the a text that would have the Assembly decide to adopt a new cooperative approach to the consideration of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea that will enable:  the establishment of dialogues by representatives of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea with States and groups of States interested in the issue; the development of technical cooperation between the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; and the visit of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to the country.

Ensuing discussions saw a range of positions among delegates.  Emphasizing that human rights should not be a pretext for political gains as country-specific resolutions undermined state sovereignty, a representative of Venezuela said the focus should be on taking a constructive approach to human rights issues. 

Representing a view held by a number of countries and the European Union, Japan’s representative said the Human Rights Council’s Commission of Inquiry had submitted an unprecedented and historic report on the human rights situation in the country, where systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations were being committed.

Rejecting those claims as well as the draft resolution, a delegate of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea said the Commission’s report was a compilation of groundless political allegations and had no credibility as an official United Nations document.  Ecuador’s representative said country-specific resolutions did not improve human rights situations, calling on all countries to make positive contributions to human rights mechanisms.

Representatives of India, Pakistan, Indonesia and Malaysia said that they preferred constructive dialogue that respected the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity, which was the reason their delegations had decided to abstain on the vote.

Similar points were raised when the Committee approved a draft text on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, by a vote of 78 in favour to 35 against, with 69 abstentions.  Agreeing with the Non-Aligned Movement’s position, a number of speakers said the use of country-specific resolutions violated the principles of non-selectivity and objectivity based on the United Nations Charter.  Indeed, China’s representative said country-specific resolutions jeopardized trust and provoked confrontation among Member States.  However, Canada’s representative noted that there were extremely troubling developments in the human rights situation of Iran that had justified the draft text.

Iran’s representative said the draft text ignored the readiness of his country to cooperate with the United Nations human rights mechanisms as well as its readiness to report and implement recommendations received through the Council’s universal periodic review.  Politically motivated vendettas were counterproductive and pointless, he said.

(...)

 

Background

The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) met this morning to continue and conclude its general discussion on the report of the Human Rights Council (documents A/69/53 and A/69/53/Add.1).  For background, see Press Release GA/SHC/4121.

(...)

Under its agenda item on human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives, the Committee would take action on a draft resolution on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1) and amendments on the aforementioned draft text contained in document A/C.3/69/L.63.

(...)

 

Statements

(...)

 

Right of Reply

(...)

 

Introductions of and Action on Draft Resolutions

(...)

The Committee then turned to its agenda item on the situation of human rights and reports of the special rapporteurs, first taking up draft texts on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

A representative of Cuba, speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, said that politicization and double standards were evident in the adoption of resolutions against countries that were part of the Movement.  The universal periodic review mechanism was the primary tool for considering human rights issues and such discussions should take place in an atmosphere of constructive dialogue.  The continued selectivity of some resolutions that targeted specific countries had violated the principles of universality and objectivity.  He called for all countries to vote against such politically motivated resolutions.

The Committee then took up a draft text on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (document A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1), introduced by Italy’s representative, on behalf of the European Union and Japan.

Regarding a proposed amendment to “L.28/Rev.1”, contained in document A/C.3/69/L.63, Cuba’s representative said that his country wished to maintain the first part of the proposed amendment.  Having said that, he added, Cuba would vote against the resolution.  Cuba was not trying to prevent the Council from looking at the report of the Commission of Inquiry.  Rather, his delegation wished to take a principled position on the matter.  A number of delegates had referred to the trigger mechanism by which the Human Rights Council was becoming a tool for some countries, who were not interested in dialogue, to use to attack other countries.  The resolution was being used to establish a pattern that would permanently endanger all developing countries.  Cuba called for a greater spirit of cooperation and an opportunity for the country in question to clarify matters.  “We are trying to ensure that a precedent is not being set here,” he stressed.

Making a general statement, a representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea reiterated his delegation’s support for the statement delivered by Cuba’s representative.  He said that his country had consistently maintained its commitment to promoting and protecting its people’s rights and had fulfilled its obligations by taking sincere measures.  Unfortunately, he said, the European Union and Japan had chosen to seek confrontation by enforcing a draft text that had no relevance whatsoever.

Also making a general statement, a representative of China said that his country had maintained that differences on human rights issues should be resolved through constructive dialogue.  China was opposed to making human rights a pretext for political gains.  The Council was not the right forum for dealing with such issues and China would support the amendment [“L.63”] tabled by Cuba.

Italy’s representative said that the amendment was not agreeable to the co-sponsors and, therefore, his delegation called for a vote on the amendment.

Japan’s representative also called for a vote on the amendment.

A representative of Belarus expressed support for the Non-Aligned Movement and said that her country rejected resolutions that had resulted in interferences in the internal affairs of a country.  Country-specific resolutions, such as the one currently before the Committee, undermined sovereignty and, therefore, Belarus would vote in favour of Cuba’s amendment.

A representative of Venezuela said that his delegation supported the proposed amendment.  The focus should be on taking a constructive approach to human rights issues. As a result, his country did not support politically motivated draft resolutions.

A representative of the Russian Federation said that the draft resolution was not a balanced document and the amendment proposed by Cuba would give it a more balanced nature.  He reiterated his delegation’s opposition of country-specific resolutions.  “This method of work is ineffective and is only likely to exacerbate conflict between Member States,” he concluded.

A representative of South Africa expressed support for the Cuban proposal and said the draft resolution was in itself contradictory.  Politicization and referring matters to the Security Council were two issues of concern, he stressed, adding that the Security Council did not need to be advised by the General Assembly to discuss any issue related to peace and security.

Italy’s representative, also making a general statement before the vote on “L.63”, said that a lack of accountability at the national level left no option but to carry the issue to the international level.  He pointed out that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had shown no willingness to cooperate with the human rights mechanisms.

In a general statement, Japan’s representative stated that there were systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.  Therefore, his delegation could not agree with the amendment proposed by Cuba, which he said was a huge step backwards.

A representative of Iran said that the draft resolution could create a dangerous precedent.  Paragraphs 7 and 8 were against the United Nations Charter and the principle of cooperation.  The Security Council was not the place for considering human rights issues, she said.  For its part, Iran would vote in favour of the amendment.

The United States representative, speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, said that her delegation was opposed to the proposed amendment, which would strip the resolution of crucial language regarding accountability.  The United States had listened to recent overtures for dialogue by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, she said, “but we have heard this before.”  The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea must stop committing human rights violations instead of offering words, she stressed, calling on all Member States to vote against the amendment.

A representative of Albania, also speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, said that the amendment would eliminate two important paragraphs based on the fact that the Commission of Inquiry had not made a visit to the country.  But as the Commission itself had reported, despite numerous efforts, the Commission had received no response from the country.  The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was a country with a dark past, he said, and its violations had no parallel in the contemporary world.  He invited all countries to vote against the amendment.

A representative of Switzerland, speaking on behalf of Australia, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, said they would vote against the amendment proposed by Cuba and encouraged all Member States to do so.

A representative of Ecuador, also speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, said that the position of Ecuador on the amendment did not prejudice his country’s principled position on human rights.  “We reject human rights violations wherever they occur,” he stressed.  Nevertheless paragraphs 7 and 8 ran counter to the principle of cooperation in human rights.  Therefore, Ecuador would vote in favour of the proposed amendment.

Taking action, the Committee then rejected the draft amendment “L.63” by a recorded vote of 40 in favour to 77 against, with 50 abstentions.

Speaking in explanation of vote after the vote, Uruguay‘s representative said that her country had decided to co-sponsor the draft resolution on the human rights situation in Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.  While Uruguay supported the work of the Commission of Inquiry, her country understood that the approval of that resolution [“L.28/Rev.1”] would not constitute a precedent in terms of referring issues to the Security Council.

Next the Committee turned to a draft resolution on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (document A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1).

Japan’s representative said the Commission of Inquiry had submitted an unprecedented and historic report on the human rights situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.  The findings were based on public hearings involving more than 80 victims and on 240 confidential interviews with witnesses, he said, which had concluded that systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations were being committed.  One of the cases identified was the abduction of persons from foreign countries, he said, urging the secure and immediate return of those abductees and for those responsible for human rights violations to be held to account.

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea‘s representative said that his delegation was profoundly grateful to those delegations that had supported the amendment [“L.63”].  Turning to the draft resolution under consideration [L.28/Rev.1”], he rejected it categorically and said that it had no relevance to genuine human rights protection.  The report of the Commission of Inquiry was based on fabricated testimonies by a handful of defectors who had fled the country after committing crimes.  The report was a compilation of groundless political allegations and had no credibility as an official United Nations document.  His country had consistently prioritized dialogue, but the European Union and Japan were provoking confrontation by pushing ahead the draft resolution.  People around the world remembered how the United States unleashed a “war against Yugoslavia” in the name of “humanitarian intervention”.  The sponsors of the draft should be held responsible for destroying the opportunity for human rights cooperation, he said, calling on all Member States to vote against the draft.

Syria’s representative, speaking before the vote and associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement, expressed regret that some States had imposed resolutions for political reasons.  Some States had used pressure on others, threatening the foundations of their relations and destroying the common understanding on human rights, he added.  He rejected the selective approach taken and efforts made to interfere in the affairs of other States, he said, describing them as actions that were incompatible with the United Nations Charter.  Politicized resolutions were creating fewer opportunities to reinforce human rights around the world, he said, noting that the universal periodic review was the only mechanism to analyse human rights.  He said his delegation would vote against the resolution.

Also speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, Iran’s representative said that the practice of country-specific resolutions and the exploitation of that mechanism for political ends were violations of the United Nations Charter.  Her delegation would vote against all country-specific resolutions.

Also speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, Cuba’s representative said that his delegation had maintained a principled position against country-specific resolutions, especially when they had targeted developing countries.  The application of double standards in considering human rights issues was what led to the disintegration of the Human Rights Commission.  The Council and the universal periodic review provided a mechanism for genuine dialogue on human rights issues.  His delegation would not be complicit in referring that issue to the Security Council and the International Criminal Court.

Also speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, a representative of Belarus said country-specific resolutions were not in line with the United Nations Charter and principles.  The sponsors of such resolutions should not impose their own vision of implementing human rights, she added, saying her delegation would vote against the resolution.

Venezuela’s representative said he did not support politically motivated resolutions, as they were violations of the United Nations Charter.  The practice of adopting politically motivated resolutions that were country-specific ignored the principle impartiality that should govern human rights mechanisms, he added.  The submission of politically motivated resolutions was undermining the mandate of the Human Rights Council, he said, underlining that his delegation would vote against the resolution.

A representative of Ecuador reaffirmed the validity of the universal periodic review as the sole mechanism to analyse human rights situations as it was carried out in an equal and non-political footing.  Targeting some States through country-specific resolutions did not improve the human rights situation and did not contribute to dialogue, he added, calling on all countries to make positive contributions to human rights mechanisms.  He expressed his solidarity with the victims of human rights abuses and said Ecuador had abstained each year on the vote.  However, the current draft resolution was not consistent and his delegation would, therefore, vote against it.

The Committee then approved the draft text by a recorded vote of 111 in favour to 19 against, with 55 abstentions.

Speaking in explanation of position after the vote, a representative of India said that his delegation had abstained from voting on the resolution as a whole.  India had voted in favour of the amendment proposed by Cuba.  India was also unable to sign the statute of the International Criminal Court because the statute did not allow the Court to be free from political interference.  It also gave the Security Council powers that went beyond international laws.  In the current resolution, operative paragraphs 7 and 8 were the very reasons that had prevented India from joining the Rome Statute.  It was unfortunate that matters relating to human rights had been taken to a vote.  The United Nations should be a venue for cooperation on this matter, not confrontation.

Speaking in explanation of position after the vote, a representative of Pakistan said that as a firm believer in the universality of human rights, his country emphasized that efforts to advance the agenda of human rights at the global level should be pursued in a spirit of dialogue and cooperation.  Human rights violations were not confined to a single country.  Pakistan was opposed to the practice of “naming and shaming” through country-specific resolutions.  Referring matters to the International Criminal Court would further complicate the situation.  Therefore, Pakistan had abstained from the vote.

Indonesia’s representative, speaking in explanation of position after the vote, said that the resolution could have been adopted without a vote as in the past years.  There was a window of opportunity to achieve a consensus, but a lack of willingness from relevant parties had prevented that.  His country recognized the importance of the Human Rights Council and of dialogue in addressing human rights issues.  Therefore, his delegation had abstained from the vote.

Speaking in explanation of position after the vote, a representative of Myanmar said that his delegation, as a member of the Non-Aligned Movement, was opposed to country-specific resolutions.  The universal periodic review process was the most dependable and uncontroversial mechanism for advancing human rights around the world.  In line with that principled position, Myanmar had voted against the resolution.

Also speaking in explanation of position after the vote, a representative of Thailand said that her delegation had voted in favour of the draft resolution due to a concern for the worsening human rights situation, as reported by the Special Rapporteur.  She welcomed the willingness of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to work with the human rights mechanism and receive the visit of the Special Rapporteur.  She raised concerns on access to food, saying humanitarian assistance should be provided to all people without conditions.  Despite its vote in favour of the draft text, she reaffirmed her support for genuine dialogue and positive engagement with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

A representative of Zimbabwe, also speaking in explanation of position after the vote, said that she did not agree with country-specific resolutions nor that the Security Council was the appropriate body to discuss human rights issues.  She had voted in favour of the amendment of the text as she had rejected the precedent that would have been set by the operational paragraphs under discussion.

Also speaking in explanation of position after the vote, a representative of Malaysia said that he preferred constructive dialogue that respected the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity.  As the text of the draft resolution called for the Security Council to refer the situation of Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to the International Criminal Court, Malaysia believed constructive dialogue should take precedence before any punitive measures were sought, which was the reason his delegation had decided to abstain on the vote

Also speaking in explanation of position after the vote, Brazil’s representative said that his delegation had voted in favour of the resolution.  The text had recognized that while the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had made progress in a deeper engagement with the United Nations human rights system, there was room for more improvement.  While praising the Government’s decision to invite the Special Rapporteur to the country, Brazil was concerned at the conclusions in the report of the Commission of Inquiry and hoped that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea would make further progress towards the enjoyment of human rights.

In explanation of position after the vote, a representative of Lao People’s Republic said that his delegation shared the position that country-specific resolutions were not the right method for advancing human rights.  The current resolution went against the principles of non-politicization and respect for national sovereignty.  The universal periodic review was the best mechanism for reviewing human rights in any country.  Therefore, his delegation had voted against the resolution.

Also speaking in explanation of position after the vote, a representative of Viet Nam said that his delegation had voted against the resolution because constructive dialogue and discussion, through the universal periodic review mechanism, was the only and most appropriate way to examine a country’s human rights situation.  Viet Nam would continue to condemn all acts of abduction and send sympathies to victims.  His delegation called on the parties concerned to find a satisfactory solution through mutual dialogue.

Also speaking in explanation of position after the vote, Singapore’s representative said that her delegation had maintained a principled position against country-specific resolutions.  Singapore’s abstention, however, did not mean her country condoned the mistreatment of citizens.

In explanation of position after the vote, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s representative said there was no further need for human rights dialogue with the European Union, as its only political objective was to eliminate the ideal social system of his country.  Despite hostile forces, he added, the country would continue to safeguard its social system by all means.

Making a general statement, Norway’s representative said her delegation had supported the resolution due to deep concerns of human rights violations.  Welcoming the cooperation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea with the Special Rapporteur, she called on the country to follow through on it.

(...)


Voting Results on Display

 

화면상의 표결 결과

 

 

Amendment to A/C.3/69/L.28 (proposed by Cuba)

A/C.3/69/L.28에 대한 정안 (쿠바의 제안)

Recorded Vote: Recorded vote on A/C.3/69/L.63 as orally revised

 

 

A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1

Recorded Vote: Recorded vote on A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1*


[Adopted Resolution/채택된 결의안]

 

Situation of human rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea

 

조선민주주의인민공화국에서의 인권상황

 

A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1

 

 

 

United Nations

 

A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1*

 

General Assembly

 

Distr.: Limited

14 November 2014

 

Original: English

 

 

Sixty-ninth session

Third Committee

Agenda item 68 (c)

Promotion and protection of human rights: human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives

 

 

 

Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kiribati, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Palau, Panama, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Seychelles, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America and Uruguay and Vanuatu: revised draft resolution

 

 

Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

 

 

          The General Assembly,

          Reaffirming that all States have an obligation to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms and to fulfil the obligations that they have undertaken under the various international instruments,

          Recalling all previous resolutions adopted by the General Assembly, the Commission on Human Rights and the Human Rights Council on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, including Assembly resolution 68/183 of 18 December 2013 and Council resolution 25/25 of 28 March 2014,[1] and mindful of the need for the international community to strengthen its coordinated efforts aimed at achieving the implementation of those resolutions,

          Deeply concerned at the grave human rights situation, the pervasive culture of impunity and the lack of accountability for human rights violations in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,

          Welcoming the report of the commission of inquiry on human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,[2] and expressing grave concern at the detailed findings contained therein,

          Noting the transmission of the report of the commission of inquiry to the Security Council on 14 April 2014,

          Recalling the responsibility of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to protect its population from crimes against humanity,

          Taking note of the report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, regretting that he still has not been allowed to visit the country and that he has received no cooperation from the authorities of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and taking note also of the comprehensive report of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea submitted in accordance with resolution 68/183,

          Mindful that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,[3] the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,3 the Convention on the Rights of the Child[4] and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women,[5] and recalling the concluding observations of the treaty bodies under the four treaties,

          Noting with appreciation the signature of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities[6] and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography[7] by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, encouraging the Government to take speedy steps to ratify the Convention and the Optional Protocol, and urging the Government to fully respect the rights of persons with disabilities and children,

          Acknowledging the participation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in the second universal periodic review process, noting the Government’s acceptance of 113 out of the 268 recommendations contained in the outcome of the review[8] and its stated commitment to implement them and look into the possibility of implementing a further 58 recommendations, and emphasizing the importance of the implementation of the recommendations in order to address the grave human rights violations in the country,

          Noting with appreciation the collaboration established between the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the United Nations Children’s Fund and the World Health Organization in order to improve the health situation in the country, and the collaboration established with the United Nations Children’s Fund in order to improve the quality of education for children,

          Noting the decision on the resumption, on a modest scale, of the activities of the United Nations Development Programme in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and encouraging the engagement of the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea with the international community to ensure that the programmes benefit the persons in need of assistance,

          Noting also the cooperation between the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the World Food Programme, the United Nations Children’s Fund and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations on food security assessments, underscoring the importance of those assessments in analysing changes in the national, household and individual food security and nutritional situation and thereby in supporting donor confidence in the targeting of aid programmes, noting further the letter of understanding signed by the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the World Food Programme and the importance of further improvements in operating conditions, bringing access and monitoring arrangements closer to international standards for all United Nations entities, and noting with appreciation the work of international aid operators,

          Noting further the importance of the issue of international abductions and of the immediate return of all abductees, taking note of the outcome of the government-level consultation between the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Japan in May 2014, and expecting concrete and positive results from the investigations being conducted by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea on all the Japanese nationals, in particular victims of abduction,

          Noting the importance of the inter-Korean dialogue, which could contribute to the improvement of the human rights and humanitarian situation in the country,

          Welcoming the resumption of the reunions of separated families across the border in February 2014, and, given that this is an urgent humanitarian concern of the entire Korean people, hoping that necessary arrangements for further reunions on a larger scale and a regular basis will be made by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea and members of the Korean diaspora,

          1.       Condemns the long-standing and ongoing systematic, widespread and gross violations of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, including those which the commission of inquiry on human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, established by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 22/13 of 21 March 2013,[9] has said may amount to crimes against humanity, and the continuing impunity for such violations;

          2.       Expresses its very serious concern at:

          (a)    The persistence of continuing reports of violations of human rights, including the detailed findings made by the commission of inquiry in its report, such as:

          (i)      Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including inhuman conditions of detention; rape; public executions; extrajudicial and arbitrary detention; the absence of due process and the rule of law, including fair trial guarantees and an independent judiciary; extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary executions; the imposition of the death penalty for political and religious reasons; collective punishments extending up to three generations; and the extensive use of forced labour;

          (ii)     The existence of an extensive system of political prison camps, where a vast number of persons are deprived of their liberty and subjected to deplorable conditions and where alarming violations of human rights are perpetrated, and in this regard strongly urges the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to immediately end this practice and to release all political prisoners unconditionally and without any delay;

          (iii)   The forcible transfer of populations and the limitations imposed on every person who wishes to move freely within the country and travel abroad, including the punishment of those who leave or try to leave the country without permission, or their families, as well as punishment of persons who are returned;

          (iv)    The situation of refugees and asylum seekers expelled or returned to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and sanctions imposed on citizens of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea who have been repatriated from abroad, leading to punishments of internment, torture, other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, sexual violence or the death penalty, and in this regard strongly urges all States to respect the fundamental principle of
non-refoulement, to treat those who seek refuge humanely and to ensure unhindered access to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and his Office, with a view to protecting the human rights of those who seek refuge, and once again urges States parties to comply with their obligations under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees
[10] and the 1967 Protocol thereto[11] in relation to refugees from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea who are covered by those instruments;

          (v)     All-pervasive and severe restrictions on the freedoms of thought, conscience, religion or belief, opinion and expression, peaceful assembly and association, the right to privacy and equal access to information, by such means as the persecution, torture and imprisonment of individuals exercising their freedom of opinion and expression, religion or belief, and their families, and the right of everyone to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives, of his or her country;

          (vi)    Violations of economic, social and cultural rights, which have led to severe hunger, malnutrition, widespread health problems and other hardship for the population in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, in particular for women, children, persons with disabilities and the elderly;

          (vii)   Violations of the human rights and fundamental freedoms of women, in particular the creation of internal conditions that force women to leave the country and make them extremely vulnerable to trafficking in persons for the purpose of prostitution, domestic servitude or forced marriage and the subjection of women to forced abortions, gender-based discrimination, including in the political and social spheres, and other forms of sexual and gender-based violence;

          (viii)  Violations of the human rights and fundamental freedoms of children, in particular the continued lack of access to basic economic, social and cultural rights for many children, and in this regard notes the particularly vulnerable situation faced by, inter alia, returned or repatriated children, street children, children with disabilities, children whose parents are detained, children living in detention or in institutions and children in conflict with the law;

          (ix)    Violations of the human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons with disabilities, especially in the use of collective camps and of coercive measures that target the rights of persons with disabilities to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children;

          (x)     Violations of workers’ rights, including the right to freedom of association and effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining, the right to strike as defined by the obligations of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,3 and the prohibition of the economic exploitation of children and of any harmful or hazardous work of children as defined by the obligations of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea under the Convention on the Rights of the Child;4

          (xi)    Discrimination based on the songbun system, which classifies people on the basis of State-assigned social class and birth, and also includes consideration of political opinions and religion;

          (b)     The continued refusal of the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to recognize the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea or to extend cooperation to the Special Rapporteur;

          (c)     The continued lack of acknowledgement by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea of the grave human rights situation in the country and its consequential lack of action to implement the recommendations contained in the outcome of its first universal periodic review;[12]

          (d)     The failure of the authorities of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to prosecute those responsible for human rights violations, including violations which the commission of inquiry has said may amount to crimes against humanity;

          3.       Underscores its very serious concern at the systematic abduction, denial of repatriation and subsequent enforced disappearance of persons, including those from other countries, on a large scale and as a matter of State policy, and in this regard strongly calls upon the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea urgently to resolve these issues of international concern, in a transparent manner, including by ensuring the immediate return of abductees;

          4.       Expresses its very deep concern at the precarious humanitarian situation in the country, which could rapidly deteriorate owing to limited resilience to natural disasters and to government policies causing limitations in the availability of and access to food, compounded by structural weaknesses in agricultural production resulting in significant shortages of diversified food and the State restrictions on the cultivation and trade in foodstuffs, as well as the prevalence of chronic malnutrition, particularly among the most vulnerable groups, pregnant women, children, persons with disabilities and the elderly, and urges the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, in this regard, to take preventive and remedial action, cooperating where necessary with international donor agencies and in accordance with international standards for monitoring humanitarian assistance;

          5.       Commends the Special Rapporteur for the activities undertaken so far and for his continued efforts in the conduct of his mandate despite the denial of access;

          6.       Also commends the work of the commission of inquiry and recognizes the importance of its report, and regrets that the commission received no cooperation from the authorities of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, including with regard to access to the country;

          7.       Acknowledges the commission’s finding that the body of testimony gathered and the information received provide reasonable grounds to believe that crimes against humanity have been committed in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, pursuant to policies established at the highest level of the State for decades;

          8.      Decides to submit the report of the commission of inquiry to the Security Council, and encourages the Council to consider the relevant conclusions and recommendations of the commission and take appropriate action to ensure accountability, including through consideration of referral of the situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to the International Criminal Court and consideration of the scope for effective targeted sanctions against those who appear to be most responsible for acts that the commission has said may constitute crimes against humanity;

          9.       Welcomes the steps taken by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights towards establishing a field-based structure in the Republic of Korea to strengthen the monitoring and documentation of the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, to ensure accountability, to provide the Special Rapporteur with increased support, to enhance the engagement and capacity-building of the Governments of all States concerned, civil society and other stakeholders and to maintain the visibility of the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, including through sustained communications, advocacy and outreach initiatives;

          10.     Calls upon Member States to undertake to ensure that the field-based structure of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights can function with independence, that it has sufficient resources and that it is not subjected to any reprisals or threats;

          11.     Strongly urges the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to respect fully all human rights and fundamental freedoms and, in this regard:

          (a)     To immediately put an end to the systematic, widespread and grave violations of human rights emphasized above, inter alia, by implementing fully the measures set out in the above-mentioned resolutions of the General Assembly, the Commission on Human Rights and the Human Rights Council, and the recommendations addressed to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea by the Council in the context of the universal periodic review and by the commission of inquiry, the United Nations special procedures and treaty bodies;

          (b)     To protect its inhabitants, address the issue of impunity and ensure that those responsible for violations of human rights are brought to justice before an independent judiciary;

          (c)     To tackle the root causes leading to refugee outflows and prosecute those who exploit refugees by human smuggling, trafficking and extortion, while not criminalizing the victims;

          (d)     To ensure that citizens of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea who are expelled or returned to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea are able to return in safety and dignity, are treated humanely and are not subjected to any kind of punishment, and to provide information on their status and treatment;

          (e)     To extend its full cooperation to the Special Rapporteur, including by granting him full, free and unimpeded access to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and to other United Nations human rights mechanisms so that a full needs assessment of the human rights situation may be made;

          (f)      To engage in technical cooperation activities in the field of human rights with the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and his Office, as pursued by the High Commissioner in recent years, with a view to improving the situation of human rights in the country, and to strive to implement the accepted recommendations stemming from the universal periodic review;

          (g)     To engage in cooperation with the International Labour Organization;

          (h)     To continue and reinforce its cooperation with United Nations humanitarian agencies;

          (i)      To ensure full, safe and unhindered access to humanitarian aid and take measures to allow humanitarian agencies to secure its impartial delivery to all parts of the country on the basis of need in accordance with humanitarian principles, as it pledged to do, and to ensure access to adequate food and implement more effective food security policies, including through sustainable agriculture, sound food production distribution measures and the allocation of more funds to the food sector, and to ensure adequate monitoring of humanitarian assistance;

          (j)      To further improve cooperation with the United Nations country team and development agencies so that they can directly contribute to improving the living conditions of the civilian population, including accelerating progress towards the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, in accordance with international monitoring and evaluation procedures;

          (k)     To consider ratifying and acceding to remaining international human rights treaties, which would enable a dialogue with the human rights treaty bodies;

          12.     Urges the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to implement the recommendations of the commission of inquiry without delay;

          13.     Encourages all Member States, the General Assembly, the Human Rights Council, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the United Nations Secretariat, civil society organizations, foundations and engaged business enterprises and other stakeholders towards which the commission of inquiry has directed recommendations to implement or take forward those recommendations;

          14.     Welcomes the recent willingness expressed by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to consider human rights dialogues with States and groups of States, technical cooperation with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and a country visit of the Special Rapporteur;

          15.     Calls upon the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to continue engaging constructively with international interlocutors with a view to promoting concrete improvements in the human rights situation on the ground, including through dialogues, official visits to the country and more people-to-people contact;

          16.     Decides to continue its examination of the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea at its seventieth session, and to this end requests the Secretary-General to submit a comprehensive report on the situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and requests the Special Rapporteur to continue to report his findings and recommendations, as well as to report on the follow-up to the implementation of the recommendations of the commission of inquiry, in line with Human Rights Council resolution 25/25.1 



         *  Reissued for technical reasons on 18 November 2014.

         [1]           See Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 53 (A/69/53), chap. II, sect. A.

         [2]           A/HRC/25/63.

         [3]           See resolution 2200 A (XXI), annex.

         [4]           United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1577, No. 27531.

         [5]           Ibid., vol. 1249, No. 20378.

         [6]           Ibid., vol. 2515, No. 44910.

         [7]           Ibid., vol. 2171, No. 27531.

         [8]           A/HRC/27/10.

         [9]           See Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 53 (A/68/53), chap. IV, sect. A.

        [10]           United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 189, No. 2545.

        [11]           Ibid., vol. 606, No. 8791.

        [12]           A/HRC/13/13.

 

 


Cuba's Amendment to A/C.3/69/L.28

 

A/C.3/69/L.28에 대한 쿠바의 개정안

 

A/C.3/69/L.63

 

United Nations

 

A/C.3/69/L.63

General Assembly

 

Distr.: Limited

13 November 2014

 

Original: English

 

 

Sixty-ninth session

Third Committee

Agenda item 68 (c)

Promotion and protection of human rights:

human rights situations and reports of special

rapporteurs and representatives

 

 

 

Cuba: amendment to draft resolution A/C.3/69/L.28

 

 

 Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

 

 

Delete operative paragraphs 7 and 8 and insert a new operative paragraph 7 reading as follows:

                    Decides to adopt a new cooperative approach to the consideration of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea that will enable: (a) the establishment of dialogues by representatives of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea with States and groups of States interested in the issue; (b) the development of technical cooperation between the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; and (c) the visit of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to the country;

 


[Third Committee's Report to the Plenary/본회의에 제출하는 제3위원회 보고서]

 

 

A/69/488/Add.3

Item 68 (c):
Human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives

 

United Nations

 

A/69/488/Add.3

General Assembly

 

Distr.: General

3 December 2014

 

Original: English

 

 

 

 

Sixty-ninth session

Agenda item 68 (c)

 

 

 

 

 


         *  The report of the Committee on this item is being issued in five parts, under the symbol A/69/488 and Add.1-4.

                 

 

 

Promotion and protection of human rights: human

rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs

and representatives

 

 

Report of the Third Committee*

 

 

Rapporteur: Mr. Ervin Nina (Albania)

 

II. Consideration of proposals

 

 

             A.    Draft resolutions A/C.3/69/L.28 and Rev.1 and amendment thereto contained in document A/C.3/69/L.63

 

 

8.       At the 42nd meeting, on 6 November, the representative of Italy, on behalf of Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Micronesia (Federated States of), Montenegro, the Netherlands, Norway, Panama, Poland, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America, introduced a draft resolution entitled “Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” (A/C.3/69/L.28). Subsequently, Bosnia and Herzegovina joined in sponsoring the draft resolution.

9.       At its 46th meeting, on 18 November, the Committee had before it a revised draft resolution (A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1), submitted by the sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/69/L.28, as well as Botswana, Kiribati, Monaco, Palau, Seychelles, Tuvalu, Ukraine, Uruguay and Vanuatu.

10.    At the same meeting, the representative of Italy made a statement and announced that Maldives, the Marshall Islands, New Zealand and Serbia had joined in sponsoring the draft resolution.

 

                           Action on the amendment contained in document A/C.3/69/L.63

 

11.     At the 46th meeting, on 18 November, the Chair drew the attention of the Committee to the amendment submitted to draft resolution A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1, as contained in document A/C.3/69/L.63.

12.    At the same meeting, the representative of Cuba made a statement and orally revised the amendment (see A/C.3/69/SR.46).

13.    The representatives of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, China, Japan, Belarus, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the Russian Federation and South Africa made statements in connection with the amendment, as orally revised.

14.    The representative of Italy also made a statement, in which he requested a recorded vote on the amendment, as orally revised.

15.    At the same meeting, the Committee rejected the amendment contained in document A/C.3/69/L.63, as orally revised, by a recorded vote of 77 to 40, with
50 abstentions. The voting was as follows:

In favour:

          Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Belarus, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Burundi, China, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, South Africa, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.

Against:

          Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kiribati, Latvia, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America.

Abstaining:

          Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Bhutan, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Chad, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominican Republic, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Nauru, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Papua New Guinea, Qatar, Rwanda, Seychelles, Singapore, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, United Republic of Tanzania, Yemen, Zambia.

16.    Before the vote, statements were made by the representatives of Italy, Japan, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the United States of America, Albania, Switzerland (on behalf also of Australia, Austria, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) and Ecuador; after the vote, a statement was made by the representative of Uruguay (see A/C.3/69/SR.46).

 

                           Action on draft resolution A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1

 

17.    At the 47th meeting, on 18 November, the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea made a statement and requested a recorded vote on the draft resolution.

18.    At the same meeting, the Committee adopted draft resolution A/C.3/69/L.28/Rev.1 by a recorded vote of 111 to 19, with 55 abstentions (see para. 36, draft resolution I). The voting was as follows:[1]

In favour:

          Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Uruguay, Vanuatu.

Against:

          Belarus, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), China, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Ecuador, Egypt, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Myanmar, Oman, Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Uzbekistan, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of),
Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.

Abstaining:

          Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Cameroon, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Libya, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, South Sudan, Suriname, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Yemen, Zambia.

19.    Before the vote, statements were made by the representatives of Japan, the Syrian Arab Republic, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Cuba, Belarus, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and Ecuador; after the vote, statements were made by the representatives of India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Myanmar, Thailand, Zimbabwe, Malaysia, Brazil, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Viet Nam, Singapore, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Norway (see A/C.3/69/SR.47).



         [1]           Subsequently, the delegation of Grenada indicated that it had intended to vote in favour.

 

(...)

 

III. Recommendations of the Third Committee

 

 

36.    The Third Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of the following draft resolutions:

 

 

                     Draft resolution I

                     Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic

of Korea

(...)


Source:

http://www.un.org/press/en/2014/gashc4122.doc.htm

http://www.un.org/en/ga/third/69/votingsheets.shtml

http://www.un.org/en/ga/third/69/proposalstatus.shtml

UN Security Council
7272nd Meeting
Summit: "Threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts: Foreign terrorist fighters"

 

24 September 2014

 

 

UN 안전보장이사회

제7272차 회의

정상회의: "테러행위에 의해 야기된 국제평화와 안보에 대한 위협: 외국인테러전투원"

 

2014. 9. 24.

 

 

(Part 1)

 

[Engish Interpretation/영어 통역]

http://webtv.un.org/meetings-events/security-council/watch/part-1-foreign-terrorist-fighters-threats-to-international-peace-and-security-caused-by-terrorist-acts-security-council-7272th-meeting/3806081079001

 

President Barack Obama is serving as the honorary President of the Security Council 7272th meeting due to the Presidency of the United States of America on the Security Council for the month of September.

 

[1:10:41 - 1:16:29]

Republic of Korea: Statement by H.E. PARK Geun-hye, President of the Republic of Korea (Original/Floor: English)

 

대한민국: 박근혜 대한민국 대통령 발언 (원음: 영어)

 

(Part 2)

 

[Engish Interpretation/영어 통역]

http://webtv.un.org/meetings-events/security-council/watch/part-2-foreign-terrorist-fighters-threats-to-international-peace-and-security-caused-by-terrorist-acts-security-council-7272th-meeting/3806468725001

 

 

[Excerpts/발췌]

http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/unifeed/2014/09/un-isil-1

 

The Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution that US President Barack Obama said  ”establishes new obligations that nations must meet.” He said the legally binding resolution  requires nations “to prevent and suppress the recruiting, organizing, transporting or equipping foreign terrorist fighters as well as the financing of their travel or activities."

 

[Excerpts/발췌]

http://webtv.un.org/meetings-events/security-council/watch/ban-ki-moon-foreign-terrorist-fighters-threats-to-international-peace-and-security-caused-by-terrorist-acts-security-council-7272th-meeting/3806685601001

 

Statement by UN Secretary-General BAN Ki-moon

 

반기문 UN 사무총장 연설

 

 

[Excerpts/발췌]

http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/unifeed/2014/09/un-isil-2

 

Abdullah II Bin Al Hussein, King of Jordan said "there has to be a zero tolerance policy to any country, organization, or individual that facilitates, supports or finances terror groups or provides weapons or promotes propaganda" adding that, "countries cannot comply in one theatre while making mischief in another." Speakers include: UK, Russia, Iraq, Turkey, Argentina, Kenya and US.

 

 

[Excerpts/발췌]

http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/unifeed/2014/09/un-isil-3

 

The UN Syrian Ambassador welcomed the formation of an international coalition “supported internationally, or through agreements or through bilateral cooperation” to fight terrorism in Syria and Iraq. Speaking to the Security Council, he said that his country “cannot conceive” a coalition that includes Qatar or Saudi Arabia, since these countries that are “the primary supporters of terrorism.”

 

 

[Excerpts/발췌]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO-I-bufqzQ

 

Republic of Korea: Statement by H.E. PARK Geun-hye, President of the Republic of Korea (Original/Floor: English)

 

대한민국: 박근혜 대한민국 대통령 연설 (원음: 영어)


 

[Secretary-General BAN Ki-moon - Statement]

 

Secretary-General's remarks to Security Council High-Level Summit on Foreign Terrorist Fighters

New York, 24 September 2014

President Obama, thank you for your leadership in convening this Security Council Summit. This is the second time that you have presided over this Council on a matter with grave implications for international peace and security.

The world is witnessing a dramatic evolution in the nature of the terrorist threat.

In the last year, terrorist attacks have killed, maimed and displaced many thousands of civilians – the vast majority of them Muslims from Afghanistan to Somalia to Nigeria… from Iraq to Libya to Mali.

These attacks have been carried out by violent extremists who thrive in conditions of insecurity and injustice, fragility and failed leadership.

These groups ruthlessly hijack religion to control territory and vital economic resources. They brutalize women and girls. They target and slaughter minorities.

They are the enemies of faith.

As Muslim leaders around the world have said, groups like ISIL – or Da’ish -- have nothing to do with Islam, and they certainly do not represent a state.

They should more fittingly be called the “Un-Islamic Non-State”.

Yet these groups have become a magnet for foreign terrorist fighters who are easy prey to simplistic appeals and siren songs.

The UN’s Al Qaeda-Taliban Monitoring Team estimates that more than 13,000 foreign terrorist fighters from over 80 Member States have joined ISIL and the Al Nusra Front.

This growing phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters is a consequence -- not a cause -- of the conflict in Syria.
A long period of upheaval and, until recently, unresponsive leadership in Iraq – coupled with outrageous human rights abuses in Syria -- have created a hothouse of horrors.

There can be no genuine protection of civilians if extremist groups are permitted to act with impunity and the Syrian government continues its assault on its own people.

For more than a year, I have sounded the alarm about the vicious and unjustifiable actions of these groups and the danger they pose to Iraq, Syria, the wider region and international peace and security.

We need a creative and comprehensive political strategy in Syria and beyond to stem the flow of foreign terrorist fighters.

Terrorists must be defeated -- but we must do so in a way that avoids the deliberate acts of provocation that they set for us -- victimization, further radicalization and more civilian deaths.

Eliminating terrorism requires international solidarity and a multifaceted approach – among the many tools we must use, we must also tackle the underlying conditions that provide violent extremist groups the opportunity to take root.

Immediate security issues must be addressed.

Over the longer-term, the biggest threat to terrorists is not the power of missiles – it is the politics of inclusion.

It’s peaceful societies and respect for human rights. It’s education, jobs and real opportunity. It’s leaders who listen to their people and uphold the rule of law.

Missiles may kill terrorists. But good governance kills terrorism.

Free and independent societies – free from suffering, oppression and occupation – this is what will kill terrorism.

I welcome the Council resolution just adopted and its call for strengthening implementation of the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy.

Through the UN Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force, we are stepping up efforts in support of Member States and regions seriously affected by terrorism.

Through the UN Counter-Terrorism Centre, we are working with Member States to enhance understanding of the foreign terrorist fighter phenomenon and to develop and implement policies to combat their flow.

Through our collective efforts, we must ensure that all counterterrorism actions and policies are consistent with international human rights and humanitarian laws.

As the custodian of the Charter of the United Nations, I want to emphasize that all measures must be fully in line with the goals and values and principles of the United Nations.

I once again welcome the new unity of purpose in the Council on this issue under the leadership of President Obama.

I hope that this spirit will carry over to other pressing issues, particularly finally bringing peace to the people of Syria.

Thank you, Mr. President.


[Chong Wa Dae - Briefing]

 

 

Remarks at the Security Council by H.E. Park Geun-hye President of the Republic of Korea

Mr. President,


We are here today to tap into our collective wisdom as we take on an emerging challenge to peace and security in our world.


ISIL and terrorist fighters from around the globe are endangering Iraq. This isn’t simply a threat to one country or one region. It affects us all.


Today`s meeting, coming as it does soon after President Obama’s ISIL strategy and the latest action, couldn’t have come at a better time.


9/11 brought the fight against terrorism to the top of the global agenda - a cause that this Council has been key to advancing.


For Koreans, ISIL’s brutal slaughter of innocent people is an appalling reminder of a similar fate that befell our own citizen 10 years ago. 


There can never be any excuse for trampling the norms of humanity, and the random killing of women and children.


They go against what Islam stands for, what civilization stands for, and what humanity stands for.


Foreign terrorist fighters serve as their minions. They slip across borders to spread terror. They are a scourge to mankínd.


Ladies and gentlemen,


Today’s milestone Resolution highlights the need for greater cooperation to better roll back this threat. These include information sharing, border control, tackling violent extremism and law enforcement.
 

Korea will implement it thoroughly. Those involved will be brought sternly to book and their funding blocked.


Nor can we neglect the more fundamental approach of dealing with the conditions that conduce to terrorism.


Getting rid of poverty and making development sustainable :
these are essential, if we are to address the root cause of terrorism.


Korea is a partner in this campaign. We are increasing our ODA to least developed countries. And we are giving humanitarian aid to countries threatened by ISIL and foreign fighters.


We must go further. We must remain ever vigilant against cyber and nuclear terrorism - and the utter chaos and destruction they could unleash.


All too often cyberspace is used to finance, recruit for, and incite radical violence.


We must prevent cyberspace from becoming not only the target of terror, but also a tool of terror.


Nuclear terrorism - however unthinkable - is also a possibility.
The post-9/11 world has already seen terrorist groups seeking nuclear materials. This is why international efforts to prevent nuclear-terrorism must be stepped up.


I wish to acknowledge in this regard, President Obama`s leadership in proposing a summit on nuclear security 5 years ago in this very chamber.


Today, the global regime for nuclear security is getting stronger, thanks to summit meetings in Washington, in Seoul, and in the Hague.


In the same vein, may this meeting today help rally our collective resolve. And may it kick-start concrete international actions against the new scourge of foreign fighters.


The fight against faceless, nameless terrorists without borders won’t be easy. But we also know that terrorizing human dignity and humanity is a strategy that is doomed to fail.


Seven decades ago, the founders of the UN, defeated the totalitarian threat and envisioned a world of peace - a world that puts humanity first.


This Council is a guardian of our rights and dignity as humans. It must meet head on the challenge of violent extremism and foreign fighters who spread it.


And in the effort to stem this threat, you will always find in Korea a committed partner.


Thank you. 


 

[청와대 뉴스]

 

박근혜 대통령 발언문:

유엔 안보리 정상회의 대통령 발언



의장님, 오늘 우리는 국제평화와 안보를 위협하는 새로운 도전에 대응하여 지혜를 모으고 공동대처 방안을 마련하기 위해 이 자리에 모였습니다. 


오늘날 이라크의 평화와 안전을 위협하는 ISIL과 전 세계로부터 모집된 FTF는 더 이상 한 국가나 지역만의 문제가 아니라 우리 모두의 문제, 국제사회 전체의 문제가 되었습니다. 


이와 관련, 오바마 대통령이 얼마 전에 ISIL 대응전략을 발표한데 이어, 오늘 FTF 문제에 대한 공동대처를 위해 안보리 정상회의를 개최한 것을 시의적절하고 의미있게 생각합니다. 


13년 전, 세계를 충격에 빠뜨린 9.11. 테러 이후 테러와의 전쟁은 국제사회의 최우선 과제가 되었고, 그 중심에 안보리가 있어 왔습니다. 

저는 ISIL이 폭력적 극단주의 하에 무고한 민간인들을 잔혹하게 살해하는 것을 목격하면서, 10년 전 유사 조직에 의해 잔인하게 희생된 우리 국민의 모습이 떠올랐습니다. 


인도주의에 관한 규범을 무시하고 어린이와 여성들 까지도 무차별적으로 살해하는 테러행위는 이슬람의 평화와 관용의 정신에도 배치되는 반문명적이고 반인륜적 행위로 어떠한 이유로도 용납될 수 없습니다. 


그러한 테러집단의 하수인으로서 국경을 은밀히 넘나들며 테러를 확산시키는 FTF의 반인륜적 활동은 인류에 대한 심각한 위협입니다. 


의장님, 각국 정상 및 대표 여러분, 오늘 채택된 결의 S-2014688호는 국제사회의 효과적 대응을 위해 정보공유와 국경통제, 폭력적 극단주의 대응, 그리고 법 집행을 위한 국가간 협력을 강조하고 있습니다. 


이번 결의가 FTF 문제 해결을 위한 이정표가 될 것으로 확신합니다. 대한민국은 특히, 엄격한 법집행과 효과적인 자금출처 차단 등을 통해 안보리 결의를 충실히 이행해 나갈 것입니다. 


이러한 조치와 병행하여 FTF를 배양하는 환경과 토양에 대한 보다 근본적인 대처도 필요합니다. 유엔 세계대테러전략(GCTS)이 제시하고 있듯이 테러의 근원적 해결을 위해서는 빈곤퇴치와 지속가능 개발 달성이 중요합니다. 


이를 위해 대한민국은 저개발국 대상 ODA 지원 확대와 ISIL과 FTF의 위협에 처한 국가들에 대한 인도지원을 통해, 유엔의 대테러 대처 노력에 동참하고 있습니다. 

더 나아가, 극단주의에 물든 FTF들이 사이버 및 핵 테러로 가공할 파괴와 혼란을 초래하지 않도록 우리 모두가 경계를 늦추지 말아야 할 것입니다. 


사이버 공간은 이미 테러자금 조달과 전투원 모집, 종교적 극단주의 선전에 사용되고 있습니다. 앞으로 사이버 공간이 테러의 표적이 되거나, SNS가 테러의 수단이 되는 것을 막아야 합니다. 


극단주의자들에 의해 자행될 수 있는 또 하나의 우려는 핵테러 가능성입니다. 9.11 이후 테러집단이 핵물질 획득을 추구해 온 것은 잘 알려져 있습니다. 

이러한 차원에서 핵테러 방지를 위한 국제사회의 노력도 강화되어야 할 것입니다. 


2009년 9월 바로 이 회의장에서 오바마 대통령이 핵테러 방지를 위한 핵안보정상회의를 제안한 것을 기억합니다. 

그 결과 지난 5년간 워싱턴, 서울, 헤이그 핵안보정상회의를 통해 국제 핵안보체제가 강화되고 있습니다. 


마찬가지로 이번 안보리 정상회의가 FTF 라고 하는 전대미문의 도전에 단호히 대응하는 국제사회의 정치적 의지를 결집하고 구체적으로 이행해 나가는 국제공조의 출발점이 되길 기대합니다. 


얼굴을 알 수 없고, 국경을 넘나들며 활동하는 익명의 FTF와의 싸움이 쉽지는 않을 것입니다. 그러나, 공포 전략(Strategy of Terror)을 앞세워 인간의 존엄성과 인도주의를 위협하는 어떠한 시도도 결코 성공할 수 없습니다. 


70년 전 유엔의 창설자들은 제2차 대전을 일으킨 전체주의와의 싸움을 이겨내고, 인권과 인도주의 가치 아래 사람이 중심이 되는 평화로운 세계를 구상하였습니다. 


안보리는 인권과 인도주의의 수호자로서 폭력적 극단주의와 FTF의 도전에 단호하게 대처해 나가야 합니다. 

대한민국은 이러한 반문명적 위협을 제거하려는 국제사회의 노력에 적극 동참할 것입니다. 감사합니다.


[Chong Wa Dae - Briefing]

 

The President Attends UN Security Council Summit

President Park Geun-hye attended the UN Security Council Summit in the afternoon. She is the first Korean head of state to take part in such a summit.


The summit was presided over by President Barack Obama of the United States, which is assuming the September presidency of the Security Council. The participating leaders discussed the issue of foreign terrorist fighters (FTF), who have emerged as severe threats to global peace and security. The summit began with a briefing on the current situation by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, which was followed by remarks by the heads of state and government of the Council’s member countries.


The UN Security Council Summit this time was attended by the heads of 13 countries, excepting China and Russia, which sent their foreign ministers.


President Park highlighted the fact that ISIL, which is at the center of chaotic disruption in Iraq and Syria, and foreign terrorist fighters, who have been mobilized from around the world, pose threats not only to a single country or region but also to the international community as a whole. She stressed the necessity for nations of the world to jointly take speedy, effective and thorough action to confront these threats.

 
The President underscored the fact that any attempts to threaten civilizations, human dignity and humanitarianism with a strategy of terror were doomed to fail. The President also emphatically said that the Korean Government would commit itself to international endeavors to tackle threats against humanity posed by foreign terrorist fighters by capitalizing on its experience in spearheading the efforts to adopt anti-terrorism resolutions as President of the 56th session of the UN General Assembly in 2001 in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

 
The President went on to stress that a fundamental approach had to be taken to deal with conditions conducive to spawning foreign terrorist fighters together with measures for strict law enforcement and effective blocking of funding sources. If we are to address the root cause of terrorism, the President said, it would be necessary to get rid of poverty, make development sustainable and establish effective governance.

 
On top of this, the President put emphasis on the need for the international community to remain ever vigilant against the use of cyberterrorism and nuclear weapons by extreme foreign terrorist fighters to prevent the utter chaos and destruction they could unleash.   


The Security Council adopted a resolution on measures to formulate a more effective international response to the threat of foreign terrorist fighters, including increased sharing of information, strengthened border controls, enhanced efforts to counter violent extremism, greater bilateral cooperation for effective law enforcement and stronger multilateral cooperation at the UN level.


The majority of the countries represented at the summit, including Korea, stressed the importance of preventing terrorist involvement by their own citizens, sharing information, strengthening domestic laws and regulations, and cooperating to prevent exploitation of information and communications technology for terrorist acts such as cyberterrorism. 


The Security Council is the UN organ with primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. Alongside the 14 other leaders who attended the high-level summit, President Park proposed measures to address the issue of foreign terrorist fighters and demonstrated Korea’s commitment to actively partaking in the international efforts to combat this threat and to safeguard international peace and safety.


[청와대 뉴스]

 

대통령, 유엔 안보리 정상회의 참석

 



박근혜 대통령은 24일 오후 우리나라 정상으로는 처음으로 유엔 안전보장이사회(안보리) 정상회의에 참석했습니다. 

※ 우리나라는 현재 안보리 비상임이사국으로 활동 중(2013-14년 임기)

- 상임이사국 : 중국, 프랑스, 러시아, 영국, 미국

- 비상임이사국 : 우리나라, 요르단, 리투아니아, 룩셈부르크, 호주, 나이지리아, 르완다, 차드, 아르헨티나, 칠레


9월 안보리 의장국인 미국의 오바마 대통령 주재로 진행된 금일 안보리 정상회의에서는 최근 국제평화와 안전에 심각한 위협으로 부상한 외국인 테러전투원(FTF) 문제를 논의하였으며, 반기문 유엔 사무총장의 현황 설명에 이어 안보리 이사국 정상들의 발언이 있었습니다. 


금번 안보리 정상회의에는 13개 국가의 국가원수 또는 총리가 참석(중국과 러시아에서는 외교장관 참석)했습니다.

※ 의제 : 국제평화와 안전유지 - 외국인 테러전투원(Foreign Terrorist Fighters, FTF) 문제 대처

※ 외국인 테러전투원 : 해외 테러 집단의 활동에 자발적으로 참여하는 외국 국적을 가진 개인을 의미하며, 특히 시리아, 이라크 등을 중심으로 활동하는 ISIL(Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant)에는 총 1만 5천명의 FTF가 참여 중인 것으로 파악(NYT 기사(9.12))


박 대통령은 최근 이라크와 시리아에서 준동하고 있는 ISIL과 전 세계로부터 모집된 FTF는 더 이상 한 국가나 지역만의 문제가 아니라 국제사회 전체의 문제가 되었다는 점을 강조하고, FTF의 위협에 대해 신속하고, 효과적이며, 철저한 국제사회의 공동대응의 필요성을 강조했습니다.


공포 전략(Strategy of Terror)을 앞세워 문명과 인간의 존엄성 그리고 인도주의를 위협하는 어떠한 시도도 결코 성공할 수 없음을 강조하고 2001년 9·11 테러 당시 우리나라가 유엔총회 의장국으로서 대테러 결의채택을 주도한 경험을 살려 금번에도 반문명적인 FTF 위협에 대처하는 국제사회의 노력에 적극 동참 예정임을 강조했습니다.


박 대통령은 아울러 엄격한 법 집행과 효과적인 자금출처 차단 등의 조치와 함께 FTF를 배양하는 환경과 토양에 대한 보다 근본적인 대처가 필요하다고 강조하고 테러의 근원적 원인(root cause)을 해소하기 위해 빈곤퇴치, 지속 가능한 개발과 효율적인 거버넌스(governance) 구축 등의 과제를 제시했습니다.


아울러, 극단주의에 물든 FTF들이 사이버 및 핵 테러로 가공할 파괴와 혼란을 초래하지 못하도록 국제사회가 경계를 늦추지 말아야 할 필요성을 강조했습니다.


한편, 금번 안보리 정상회의에서는 FTF 위협에 대한 국제사회의 효과적 대응을 위해 △ 정보공유와 국경통제, △ 폭력적 극단주의 대응, △ 효율적 법 집행을 위한 국가간 협력 강화, △ 유엔 차원에서의 다자적 노력 강화 등을 내용으로 하는 결의안이 채택되었습니다. 


우리나라 포함, 안보리 이사국 대다수가 △ 자국민의 테러전투원 참여 방지 △ 회원국간 관련정보 공유, △ 국내사법체제 강화 △ FTF의 정보통신기술 악용(사이버 테러 등)에 대한 효과적 대처 필요성을 강조했습니다.


박 대통령이 국제평화와 안전문제에 대한 1차적 책임을 갖고 있는 안보리 정상회의에 여타 14개국 정상급 인사들과 나란히 참석하여 FTF 문제에 대한 해결방안을 제시하고, 국제사회의 노력에 적극 동참해 나갈 의사를 표명함으로써 국제사회내 평화안전에 기여하는 나라로서의 대한민국의 위상을 크게 높이는 계기가 된 것으로 평가됩니다.


[UN News]

Security Council high-level summit tackles growing threat of foreign terrorist fighters

 

안보리 정상급회의, 점증하는 외국인테러전투원에 대처

 

Wide view of the Security Council at its summit held at the level of Heads of Government to address the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters. UN Photo/Mark Garten

 

24 September 2014 – Responding to an unprecedented flow of foreign terrorist fighters and the growth of facilitation networks fuelling conflicts around the world, the United Nations Security Council today adopted a resolution to resolutely address this growing threat to international peace and security.

During a high-level summit chaired by Barack Obama, President of the United States, which holds the Council’s rotating presidency this month, the 15-member body voted unanimously to adopt the text, which calls on Member States to cooperate in efforts to address the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters.

The resolution decided that Member States shall “prevent and suppress the recruiting, organizing, transporting or equipping of individuals who travel to a State other than their State of residence or nationality for the purpose of the perpetration, planning or preparation of, or participation in, terrorist acts or the providing or receiving of terrorist training, and the financing of their travel and of their activities…”

It underscored “the particular and urgent need to implement this resolution with respect to those foreign terrorist fighters who are associated with ISIL [Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant], ANF [Al-Nusrah Front] and other cells, affiliates, splinter groups or derivatives of Al-Qaida…”

Among its other provisions, the text urged Member States to intensify and accelerate the exchange of operational information regarding actions or movements of terrorists or terrorist networks, including foreign terrorist fighters.

Opening the meeting, which was scheduled to hear from around 50 speakers, many of them represented at the level of head of State or government, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called those who carry out terrorist attacks “enemies of the faith.”

“As Muslim leaders around the world have said, groups like ISIL – or Da’ish – have nothing to do with Islam, and they certainly do not represent a state,” he stated. “They should more fittingly be called the ‘Un-Islamic Non-State.’”

He added that the growing phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters is a consequence – not a cause – of the conflict in Syria.

“A long period of upheaval and, until recently, unresponsive leadership in Iraq – coupled with outrageous human rights abuses in Syria – have created a hothouse of horrors,” he said, as he highlighted the need for a “creative and comprehensive” political strategy in Syria and beyond to stem the flow of foreign terrorist fighters.

“Terrorists must be defeated, but we must do so in a way that avoids the deliberate acts of provocation that they set for us – victimization, further radicalization and more civilian deaths.”

While immediate security issues must be addressed, said the Secretary-General, the biggest threat to terrorists over the longer term is not the power of missiles, but the politics of inclusion.

“It’s peaceful societies and respect for human rights. It’s education, jobs and real opportunity. It’s leaders who listen to their people and uphold the rule of law. Missiles may kill terrorists. But good governance kills terrorism. Free and independent societies – free from suffering, oppression and occupation – this is what will kill terrorism.”

Speaking in his national capacity, Mr. Obama said that the tactic of terrorism is not new. “So many nations represented here today, including my own, have seen our citizens killed by terrorists who target innocents,” he said, while also noting the murder today of French citizen Hervé Gourdel by terrorists in Algeria.

“Resolutions alone will not be enough,” he added. “Promises on paper cannot keep us safe. Lofty rhetoric and good intentions will not stop a single terrorist attack.

“The words spoken here today must be matched and translated into action, into deeds – concrete action, within nations and between them, not just in the days ahead, but for years to come. For if there was ever a challenge in our interconnected world that cannot be met by any one nation alone, it is this: terrorists crossing borders and threatening to unleash unspeakable violence.

“These terrorists believe our countries will be unable to stop them. The safety of our citizens demands that we do.”

In a statement issued to the press, the Council strongly condemned the “heinous and cowardly murder” Mr. Gourdel, saying the killing once again demonstrates the barbaric brutality of those who declare themselves affiliated to ISIL.

Council members stressed that those responsible for the killing must be held accountable, and demanded the immediate, safe and unconditional release of all those who are kept hostage by ISIL, Al-Nusrah Front and all other individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with Al-Qaida.


 

 

United Nations

 

S/RES/2178 (2014)

 

 

Security Council

 

Distr.: General

24 September 2014

 

 

 


 

                  Resolution 2178 (2014)

 

 

                     Adopted by the Security Council at its 7272nd meeting, on 24 September 2014

 

 

          The Security Council,

          Reaffirming that terrorism in all forms and manifestations constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security and that any acts of terrorism are criminal and unjustifiable regardless of their motivations, whenever and by whomsoever committed, and remaining determined to contribute further to enhancing the effectiveness of the overall effort to fight this scourge on a global level,

          Noting with concern that the terrorism threat has become more diffuse, with an increase, in various regions of the world, of terrorist acts including those motivated by intolerance or extremism, and expressing its determination to combat this threat,

          Bearing in mind the need to address the conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism, and affirming Member States’ determination to continue to do all they can to resolve conflict and to deny terrorist groups the ability to put down roots and establish safe havens to address better the growing threat posed by terrorism,

          Emphasizing that terrorism cannot and should not be associated with any religion, nationality or civilization,

          Recognizing that international cooperation and any measures taken by Member States to prevent and combat terrorism must comply fully with the Charter of the United Nations,

          Reaffirming its respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of all States in accordance with the Charter,

          Reaffirming that Member States must ensure that any measures taken to counter terrorism comply with all their obligations under international law, in particular international human rights law, international refugee law, and international humanitarian law, underscoring that respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and the rule of law are complementary and mutually reinforcing with effective counter-terrorism measures, and are an essential part of a successful counter-terrorism effort and notes the importance of respect for the rule of law so as to effectively prevent and combat terrorism, and noting that failure to comply with these and other international obligations, including under the Charter of the United Nations, is one of the factors contributing to increased radicalization and fosters a sense of impunity,

          Expressing grave concern over the acute and growing threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters, namely individuals who travel to a State other than their States of residence or nationality for the purpose of the perpetration, planning, or preparation of, or participation in, terrorist acts or the providing or receiving of terrorist training, including in connection with armed conflict, and resolving to address this threat,

          Expressing grave concern about those who attempt to travel to become foreign terrorist fighters,

          Concerned that foreign terrorist fighters increase the intensity, duration and intractability of conflicts, and also may pose a serious threat to their States of origin, the States they transit and the States to which they travel, as well as States neighbouring zones of armed conflict in which foreign terrorist fighters are active and that are affected by serious security burdens, and noting that the threat of foreign terrorist fighters may affect all regions and Member States, even those far from conflict zones, and expressing grave concern that foreign terrorist fighters are using their extremist ideology to promote terrorism,

          Expressing concern that international networks have been established by terrorists and terrorist entities among States of origin, transit and destination through which foreign terrorist fighters and the resources to support them have been channelled back and forth,

          Expressing particular concern that foreign terrorist fighters are being recruited by and are joining entities such as the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), the Al-Nusrah Front (ANF) and other cells, affiliates, splinter groups or derivatives of Al-Qaida, as designated by the Committee established pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011), recognizing that the foreign terrorist fighter threat includes, among others, individuals supporting acts or activities of Al-Qaida and its cells, affiliates, splinter groups, and derivative entities, including by recruiting for or otherwise supporting acts or activities of such entities, and stressing the urgent need to address this particular threat,

          Recognizing that addressing the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters requires comprehensively addressing underlying factors, including by preventing radicalization to terrorism, stemming recruitment, inhibiting foreign terrorist fighter travel, disrupting financial support to foreign terrorist fighters, countering violent extremism, which can be conducive to terrorism, countering incitement to terrorist acts motivated by extremism or intolerance, promoting political and religious tolerance, economic development and social cohesion and inclusiveness, ending and resolving armed conflicts, and facilitating reintegration and rehabilitation,

          Recognizing also that terrorism will not be defeated by military force, law enforcement measures, and intelligence operations alone, and underlining the need to address the conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism, as outlined in Pillar I of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy (A/RES/60/288),

          Expressing concern over the increased use by terrorists and their supporters of communications technology for the purpose of radicalizing to terrorism, recruiting and inciting others to commit terrorist acts, including through the internet, and financing and facilitating the travel and subsequent activities of foreign terrorist fighters, and underlining the need for Member States to act cooperatively to prevent terrorists from exploiting technology, communications and resources to incite support for terrorist acts, while respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms and in compliance with other obligations under international law,

          Noting with appreciation the activities undertaken in the area of capacity building by United Nations entities, in particular entities of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF), including the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the United Nations Centre for Counter-Terrorism (UNCCT), and also the efforts of the Counter Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED) to facilitate technical assistance, specifically by promoting engagement between providers of capacity-building assistance and recipients, in coordination with other relevant international, regional and subregional organizations, to assist Member States, upon their request, in implementation of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy,

          Noting recent developments and initiatives at the international, regional and subregional levels to prevent and suppress international terrorism, and noting the work of the Global Counterterrorism Forum (GCTF), in particular its recent adoption of a comprehensive set of good practices to address the foreign terrorist fighter phenomenon, and its publication of several other framework documents and good practices, including in the areas of countering violent extremism, criminal justice, prisons, kidnapping for ransom, providing support to victims of terrorism, and community-oriented policing, to assist interested States with the practical implementation of the United Nations counter-terrorism legal and policy framework and to complement the work of the relevant United Nations counter-terrorism entities in these areas,

          Noting with appreciation the efforts of INTERPOL to address the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters, including through global law enforcement information sharing enabled by the use of its secure communications network, databases, and system of advisory notices, procedures to track stolen, forged identity papers and travel documents, and INTERPOL’s counter-terrorism fora and foreign terrorist fighter programme,

          Having regard to and highlighting the situation of individuals of more than one nationality who travel to their states of nationality for the purpose of the perpetration, planning, preparation of, or participation in, terrorist acts or the providing or receiving of terrorist training, and urging States to take action, as appropriate, in compliance with their obligations under their domestic law and international law, including international human rights law,

          Calling upon States to ensure, in conformity with international law, in particular international human rights law and international refugee law, that refugee status is not abused by the perpetrators, organizers or facilitators of terrorist acts, including by foreign terrorist fighters,

          Reaffirming its call upon all States to become party to the international counter-terrorism conventions and protocols as soon as possible, whether or not they are a party to regional conventions on the matter, and to fully implement their obligations under those to which they are a party,

          Noting the continued threat to international peace and security posed by terrorism, and affirming the need to combat by all means, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts, including those perpetrated by foreign terrorist fighters,

          Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,

          1.       Condemns the violent extremism, which can be conducive to terrorism, sectarian violence, and the commission of terrorist acts by foreign terrorist fighters, and demands that all foreign terrorist fighters disarm and cease all terrorist acts and participation in armed conflict;

          2.       Reaffirms that all States shall prevent the movement of terrorists or terrorist groups by effective border controls and controls on issuance of identity papers and travel documents, and through measures for preventing counterfeiting, forgery or fraudulent use of identity papers and travel documents, underscores, in this regard, the importance of addressing, in accordance with their relevant international obligations, the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters, and encourages Member States to employ evidence-based traveller risk assessment and screening procedures including collection and analysis of travel data, without resorting to profiling based on stereotypes founded on grounds of discrimination prohibited by international law;

          3.       Urges Member States, in accordance with domestic and international law, to intensify and accelerate the exchange of operational information regarding actions or movements of terrorists or terrorist networks, including foreign terrorist fighters, especially with their States of residence or nationality, through bilateral or multilateral mechanisms, in particular the United Nations;

          4.       Calls upon all Member States, in accordance with their obligations under international law, to cooperate in efforts to address the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters, including by preventing the radicalization to terrorism and recruitment of foreign terrorist fighters, including children, preventing foreign terrorist fighters from crossing their borders, disrupting and preventing financial support to foreign terrorist fighters, and developing and implementing prosecution, rehabilitation and reintegration strategies for returning foreign terrorist fighters;

          5.       Decides that Member States shall, consistent with international human rights law, international refugee law, and international humanitarian law, prevent and suppress the recruiting, organizing, transporting or equipping of individuals who travel to a State other than their States of residence or nationality for the purpose of the perpetration, planning, or preparation of, or participation in, terrorist acts or the providing or receiving of terrorist training, and the financing of their travel and of their activities;

          6.       Recalls its decision, in resolution 1373 (2001), that all Member States shall ensure that any person who participates in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or in supporting terrorist acts is brought to justice, and decides that all States shall ensure that their domestic laws and regulations establish serious criminal offenses sufficient to provide the ability to prosecute and to penalize in a manner duly reflecting the seriousness of the offense:

          (a)     their nationals who travel or attempt to travel to a State other than their States of residence or nationality, and other individuals who travel or attempt to travel from their territories to a State other than their States of residence or nationality, for the purpose of the perpetration, planning, or preparation of, or participation in, terrorist acts, or the providing or receiving of terrorist training;

          (b)     the wilful provision or collection, by any means, directly or indirectly, of funds by their nationals or in their territories with the intention that the funds should be used, or in the knowledge that they are to be used, in order to finance the travel of individuals who travel to a State other than their States of residence or nationality for the purpose of the perpetration, planning, or preparation of, or participation in, terrorist acts or the providing or receiving of terrorist training; and,

          (c)     the wilful organization, or other facilitation, including acts of recruitment, by their nationals or in their territories, of the travel of individuals who travel to a State other than their States of residence or nationality for the purpose of the perpetration, planning, or preparation of, or participation in, terrorist acts or the providing or receiving of terrorist training;

          7.       Expresses its strong determination to consider listing pursuant to resolution 2161 (2014) individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with Al-Qaida who are financing, arming, planning, or recruiting for them, or otherwise supporting their acts or activities, including through information and communications technologies, such as the internet, social media, or any other means;

          8.       Decides that, without prejudice to entry or transit necessary in the furtherance of a judicial process, including in furtherance of such a process related to arrest or detention of a foreign terrorist fighter, Member States shall prevent the entry into or transit through their territories of any individual about whom that State has credible information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that he or she is seeking entry into or transit through their territory for the purpose of participating in the acts described in paragraph 6, including any acts or activities indicating that an individual, group, undertaking or entity is associated with Al-Qaida, as set out in paragraph 2 of resolution 2161 (2014), provided that nothing in this paragraph shall oblige any State to deny entry or require the departure from its territories of its own nationals or permanent residents;

          9.       Calls upon Member States to require that airlines operating in their territories provide advance passenger information to the appropriate national authorities in order to detect the departure from their territories, or attempted entry into or transit through their territories, by means of civil aircraft, of individuals designated by the Committee established pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011) (“the Committee”), and further calls upon Member States to report any such departure from their territories, or such attempted entry into or transit through their territories, of such individuals to the Committee, as well as sharing this information with the State of residence or nationality, as appropriate and in accordance with domestic law and international obligations;

          10.     Stresses the urgent need to implement fully and immediately this resolution with respect to foreign terrorist fighters, underscores the particular and urgent need to implement this resolution with respect to those foreign terrorist fighters who are associated with ISIL, ANF and other cells, affiliates, splinter groups or derivatives of Al-Qaida, as designated by the Committee, and expresses its readiness to consider designating, under resolution 2161 (2014), individuals associated with Al-Qaida who commit the acts specified in paragraph 6 above;

 

                           International Cooperation

 

          11.     Calls upon Member States to improve international, regional, and subregional cooperation, if appropriate through bilateral agreements, to prevent the travel of foreign terrorist fighters from or through their territories, including through increased sharing of information for the purpose of identifying foreign terrorist fighters, the sharing and adoption of best practices, and improved understanding of the patterns of travel by foreign terrorist fighters, and for Member States to act cooperatively when taking national measures to prevent terrorists from exploiting technology, communications and resources to incite support for terrorist acts, while respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms and in compliance with other obligations under international law;

          12.     Recalls its decision in resolution 1373 (2001) that Member States shall afford one another the greatest measure of assistance in connection with criminal investigations or proceedings relating to the financing or support of terrorist acts, including assistance in obtaining evidence in their possession necessary for the proceedings, and underlines the importance of fulfilling this obligation with respect to such investigations or proceedings involving foreign terrorist fighters;

          13.     Encourages Interpol to intensify its efforts with respect to the foreign terrorist fighter threat and to recommend or put in place additional resources to support and encourage national, regional and international measures to monitor and prevent the transit of foreign terrorist fighters, such as expanding the use of INTERPOL Special Notices to include foreign terrorist fighters;

          14.     Calls upon States to help build the capacity of States to address the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters, including to prevent and interdict foreign terrorist fighter travel across land and maritime borders, in particular the States neighbouring zones of armed conflict where there are foreign terrorist fighters, and welcomes and encourages bilateral assistance by Member States to help build such national capacity;

 

                           Countering Violent Extremism in Order to Prevent Terrorism

 

          15.     Underscores that countering violent extremism, which can be conducive to terrorism, including preventing radicalization, recruitment, and mobilization of individuals into terrorist groups and becoming foreign terrorist fighters is an essential element of addressing the threat to international peace and security posed by foreign terrorist fighters, and calls upon Member States to enhance efforts to counter this kind of violent extremism;

          16.     Encourages Member States to engage relevant local communities and non-governmental actors in developing strategies to counter the violent extremist narrative that can incite terrorist acts, address the conditions conducive to the spread of violent extremism, which can be conducive to terrorism, including by empowering youth, families, women, religious, cultural and education leaders, and all other concerned groups of civil society and adopt tailored approaches to countering recruitment to this kind of violent extremism and promoting social inclusion and cohesion;

          17.     Recalls its decision in paragraph 14 of resolution 2161 (2014) with respect to improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with Al-Qaida, and urges Member States, in this context, to act cooperatively when taking national measures to prevent terrorists from exploiting technology, communications and resources, including audio and video, to incite support for terrorist acts, while respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms and in compliance with other obligations under international law;

          18.     Calls upon Member States to cooperate and consistently support each other’s efforts to counter violent extremism, which can be conducive to terrorism, including through capacity building, coordination of plans and efforts, and sharing lessons learned;

          19.     Emphasizes in this regard the importance of Member States’ efforts to develop non-violent alternative avenues for conflict prevention and resolution by affected individuals and local communities to decrease the risk of radicalization to terrorism, and of efforts to promote peaceful alternatives to violent narratives espoused by foreign terrorist fighters, and underscores the role education can play in countering terrorist narratives;

 

                           United Nations Engagement on the Foreign Terrorist Fighter Threat

 

          20.     Notes that foreign terrorist fighters and those who finance or otherwise facilitate their travel and subsequent activities may be eligible for inclusion on the Al-Qaida Sanctions List maintained by the Committee pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011) where they participate in the financing, planning, facilitating, preparing, or perpetrating of acts or activities by, in conjunction with, under the name of, on behalf of, or in support of, Al-Qaida, supplying, selling or transferring arms and related materiel to, or recruiting for, or otherwise supporting acts or activities of Al-Qaida or any cell, affiliate, splinter group or derivative thereof, and calls upon States to propose such foreign terrorist fighters and those who facilitate or finance their travel and subsequent activities for possible designation;

          21.     Directs the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011) and the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team, in close cooperation with all relevant United Nations counter-terrorism bodies, in particular CTED, to devote special focus to the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters recruited by or joining ISIL, ANF and all groups, undertakings and entities associated with Al-Qaida;

          22.     Encourages the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team to coordinate its efforts to monitor and respond to the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters with other United Nations counter-terrorism bodies, in particular the CTITF;

          23.     Requests the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team, in close cooperation with other United Nations counter-terrorism bodies, to report to the Committee established pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011) within 180 days, and provide a preliminary oral update to the Committee within 60 days, on the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters recruited by or joining ISIL, ANF and all groups, undertakings and entities associated with Al-Qaida, including:

          (a)     a comprehensive assessment of the threat posed by these foreign terrorist fighters, including their facilitators, the most affected regions and trends in radicalization to terrorism, facilitation, recruitment, demographics, and financing; and

          (b)     recommendations for actions that can be taken to enhance the response to the threat posed by these foreign terrorist fighters;

          24.     Requests the Counter-Terrorism Committee, within its existing mandate and with the support of CTED, to identify principal gaps in Member States’ capacities to implement Security Council resolutions 1373 (2001) and 1624 (2005) that may hinder States’ abilities to stem the flow of foreign terrorist fighters, as well as to identify good practices to stem the flow of foreign terrorist fighters in the implementation of resolutions 1373 (2001) and 1624 (2005), and to facilitate technical assistance, specifically by promoting engagement between providers of capacity-building assistance and recipients, especially those in the most affected regions, including through the development, upon their request, of comprehensive counter-terrorism strategies that encompass countering violent radicalization and the flow of foreign terrorist fighters, recalling the roles of other relevant actors, for example the Global Counterterrorism Forum;

          25.     Underlines that the increasing threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters is part of the emerging issues, trends and developments related to resolutions 1373 (2001) and 1624 (2005), that, in paragraph 5 of resolution 2129 (2013), the Security Council directed CTED to identify, and therefore merits close attention by the Counter-Terrorism Committee, consistent with its mandate;

          26.     Requests the Committee established pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011) and the Counter-Terrorism Committee to update the Security Council on their respective efforts pursuant to this resolution;

          27.     Decides to remain seized of the matter.


 [Start1]<<ODS JOB NO>>N1454798E<<ODS JOB NO>>

<<ODS DOC SYMBOL1>>S/RES/2178 (2014)<<ODS DOC SYMBOL1>>

<<ODS DOC SYMBOL2>><<ODS DOC SYMBOL2>>


Source:

http://www.un.org/sg/STATEMENTS/index.asp?nid=8040

http://english1.president.go.kr/activity/briefing.php?srh%5Bboard_no%5D=21&srh%5Bpage%5D=8&srh%5Bview_mode%5D=detail&srh%5Bseq%5D=7503&srh%5Bdetail_no%5D=218#sthash.fXqIWbR1.dpuf

http://english1.president.go.kr/activity/briefing.php?srh%5Bboard_no%5D=21&srh%5Bpage%5D=8&srh%5Bview_mode%5D=detail&srh%5Bseq%5D=7511&srh%5Bdetail_no%5D=217#sthash.g3tgg51e.dpuf

http://www1.president.go.kr/news/newsList.php?srh%5Byear%5D=2014&srh%5Bmonth%5D=9&srh%5Bview_mode%5D=detail&srh%5Bseq%5D=7515

http://www1.president.go.kr/news/newsList.php?srh%5Byear%5D=2014&srh%5Bmonth%5D=9&srh%5Bview_mode%5D=detail&srh%5Bseq%5D=7457

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=48824#.VQbdT5B01Ic

http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2178 (2014)