By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
October 28, updated with video --
When the UN's special rapporteur on human rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea Marzuki Darusman spoke at the UN on October 28, he said "given the intrinsic links between peace and security and human rights in the Korean peninsula, in my view this Assembly
should also submit the report of the Commission of Inquiry to the
Security Council for its deliberations and appropriate action."
Inner City Press asked Darusman if, unlike his UN counterpart on Iran Ahmed Shaheed, he favored linking human rights to the nuclear issues, and if he considered the impact of sanctions on residents of North Korea.
Darusman's answer was that the goal of taking it to
the Security Council would be to seek a referral to the International
Criminal Court, and also to put human rights into the Security Council.
But human rights as an issue are already in the Security Council, as simply the most recent example in the October 27 discussion of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Darusman went on to say that the issues are linked because North Korea's spending on arms meant that people went hungry. Some would say, though to different degrees, this applies to some other countries, too.
Rough transcript: "The two
objectives of referring the report to the SC is to have the council
consider referral to accountability mechanisms, but also to finally
secure a place for discussions on human rights within the security
council. In the case of DPRK, the imagery we have is a country
chronically unable to secure food for its population, but at the same
time able to build up its military capability at the expense of denying
the fundamental right to food. It’s a direct link between human rights
denial and the security risks that come out of a military build up at
the expense of a population unable to feed itself."
After saying this, Darusman asked Inner City Press, does this answer your question? It didn't, particularly on the impact of sanctions -- but aware that other journalists wanted to ask questions, Inner City Press in the manner of the new Free UN Coalition for Access let other ask.
By contrast, the head of the old UN Correspondents Association had the first question set-aside, asked an obvious question -- does North Korea want the ICC language out of the draft? -- then insisted on similarly following up. FUNCA opposes this.
Update: FUNCA is also for transparency, and more rather than less. Scribes clustered around Darusman asking about possible changes to the draft of the co-sponsors, Japan and the European Union. Darusman referred to changes that would have the same consequences, but might be more acceptable. Video here.
Update: FUNCA is also for transparency, and more rather than less. Scribes clustered around Darusman asking about possible changes to the draft of the co-sponsors, Japan and the European Union. Darusman referred to changes that would have the same consequences, but might be more acceptable. Video here.
The mood of most of Darusman's press conference was that he and the journalists were part of a team, with Darusman recounting for scribes to re-type what reclusive North Koreans said. Darusman didn't even know who he'd met with, or only four of the two attendees, Deputy Ri and Counselor Kim.
He said he conveyed their comments to the General Assembly resolution's co-sponsors, contrary to Shaheed, who said he has no involvement in the draft resolution on Iran.
When Shaheed held his press conference at the UN on October 27, Inner City Press asked him for an update on what he had said about the effect of sanctions and banning of Iran from the SWIFT payments system which Inner City Press asked him about one year and three days earlier, 2013 here from
Minute 12:29.
On October 24, 2013, Shaheed
had acknowledged
that the
banning of
Iran from the
SWIFT payments
system
had had an
impact. On October 27, 2014, Shaheed said he believes Iran is still banned from SWIFT, but he had no update. Instead he said that humanitarian exemptions to sanctions are having successes. 2014 video here.
But banning from SWIFT or "de-SWIFT-ing" is not a targeted sanction at all, and he did not mention any exemptions to it.
Overall, Inner City Press asked Shaheed what impact he thought "the nuclear issue" and the P5 + 1 talks have on human rights in Iran. Shaheed said he doesn't like linkage, but added that when there's focus on the nuclear issue, it takes away from the focus on human rights.
Last year
Inner
City Press
obtained and
exclusively
published an
internal OHCHR
plan to take
over the "rule
of law"
functions of
the rest
of the UN
system,
and the
staffing of
the Special
Representatives
on
Children and
Armed
Conflict,
Sexual
Violence and
Conflict, R2P
and
the Prevention
of Genocide.What has happened on that? Are rapporteurs, like sanctions monitors, still not given any training or orientation by the UN?
Footnote: on October 27, the UN Correspondents Association which so often demands the first question be set-aside for it didn't even send anyone to Shaheed's press conference. One attendee said, it's defUNCA-ed, as in defunct, or de-UNCA-ed, like de-SWIFT-ed. The new Free UN Coalition for Access, present, did not try to brand the press conference, because there was no need. Watch this site.
Follow @innercitypress Follow @FUNCA_info
