유엔 안전보장이사회와 북한 인권

Abstract

UN Security Council and North Korean Human Rights Kim, Boo-Chan* / Oh, Seung-Jin** Human rights NGOs, the UN, various human rights treaty bodies and individual states have all been engaged in improving the North Korean human rights situations. Human rights NGOs have played a key role in enhancing the international awareness of the severity of the North Korean human rights situations. The UN Human Rights Commission and the UN General Assembly passed human rights resolutions on North Korea. Human Rights bodies such as ICCPR have tried to address the issue, however, North Korea has refused to follow international human rights norms recognized by the international community. This study is to review the basis and types of the Security Council's intervention on North Korean human rights. Resolutions by the UN Security Council on international security and peace have mandating power and therefore, if they are adopted for promoting human rights, can play a important role for international human rights. It is possible for the UN Security Council to intervene in case where gross human rights violations occur in North Korea because of the collapse of the North Korean regime or internal power conflicts. Before World War II, international human rights systems did not exist, and state sovereignty was absolute. Human rights systems have been developing through NGOs continuous activities, international efforts at the UN level, and the adoptions of various human rights treaties. The notion of traditional state sovereignty has been re-defined by the development of international human rights. The UN Security Council has been reluctant to intervene in internal affairs based on human rights. During the period of the Cold War, the types of human rights violations were from the conflicts of ideology, and oppression on political opponents. After the dissolution of the Cold War, gross human rights violations have been caused by the conflicts between religious or racial groups. The Security Council allowed the use of force, defining the gross human rights violations in Somalia as threats to international peace and security. The Security Council made it clear that the continuous and systematic human rights violations by the illegal regime in Somalia were threats to international peace and security, and therefore Chapter VII under the UN Charter could be applied. However, the Security Council is under the influence of internal political situations of member states or diplomatic interests between member states and human rights violators. The attitude of individual states toward international human rights norms, and diplomatic interests of the international community toward human rights violators determine the level and type of measures by the international community to address gross human rights violations. In dealing with gross human rights violations, the Security Council may adopt economic sanctions and use 'direct use of force'. It is hard to change the human rights policy of the target country by applying economic sanctions because gross human rights violations in a country show that the political structure of the country is not based on democracy. Economic hardships from the economic sanctions may cause great harms to ordinary people who are not responsible for the human rights situations. When it comes to applying economic sanctions, the economic hardship of the oppressed people should be taken into account. The Security Council has allowed the use of force to prevent gross human rights violations. The Security Resolution on Haiti, noting the human rights violations by the regime, allowed the use of force to prevent human rights violations in Haiti. However, the Security Council only allows the least use of force to stop human rights violations by adopting the principle of proportionality. The purpose of the international criminal court is to prevent human rights violations by punishing those who are responsible for the international crime. The Security Council established the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. It is possible for the Security Council to establish an international criminal court and try those responsible for human rights violations in North Korea. The human rights violations in North Korea are based on the Cold War, both China and the US have critical interests on North Korea. Therefore, economic sanctions or even the use of force are not likely to be adopted. The Cold War still remains on the Korean peninsula. Because of various political interests, states have difficulties in reaching an agreement on what is an effective tool to promote the North Korean human rights. Further, it should be noted that states lack a practical tool to promote the North Korean human rights. It should be first questioned why international human rights norms have not been effective on North Korea and what would be an effective and practical way to promote the North Korean human rights.