Monthly Forecast May 2013
|
|  Yüklə 0.97 Mb.
|
HUMAN RIGHTS-RELATED DEVELOPMENTS In a 1 February 2013 report presented to the Human Rights Council (HRC) on 11 March, Marzuki Darusman, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the DPRK, provided a comprehensive review of UN documentation and resolutions on the situation of human rights in the DPRK since 2004 and identified nine patterns of human rights violations (A/HRC/22/57 of February 2013). He said many of these might amount to crimes against humanity and called for the establishment of an inquiry mechanism with adequate resources to produce a more complete picture, qualify and quantify the violations, attribute responsi- bility to particular perpetrators and suggest effective courses of international action. On 21 March, the HRC adopted a resolution establishing a commission of inquiry for a period of one year comprising three members, one of whom should be the Special Rapporteur (A/HRC/RES/22/13). The commission is mandated to investigate the systematic, widespread and grave violations of human rights in the DPRK. The resolution also extended the mandate of the Special Rapporteur.
A key issue for the Council is the DPRK’s continued defiance of all relevant resolutions. A related issue is the lack of prog- ress in the six-party talks. A broader issue is whether a continued tightening of sanctions against the DPRK is effective in changing Pyongyang’s behaviour. At the Committee level, a key issue is the effective implementation of the sanctions regime, in particular how to respond to violations and whether to make additional designations as directed in resolution 2094. Options In the Council, one option is to change the format of the briefing by the chair of the Committee from a closed to an open meeting, as is the case for the 1737 Iran Sanctions Committee. In the Committee, one option is to issue the implementation assistance notice called for by resolution 2094. Taking up some or all of the recommendations likely to be submitted by the PoE in May is another option, including possibly mak- ing additional designations.
Council members were united in their support for resolution 2094. As in the past, it was first negotiated between China and the US before being presented to other Council members. Although the US did not get all of what it wanted included in the resolution, the adopted text was seen as sending a strong message, even more so with the support by China. Coun- cil members are also united in their concern about the recent escalation on the Korean Peninsula but seem hopeful that tensions have peaked. It appears, however, that this unity does not necessarily translate into action in the DPRK Sanctions Committee. While the atmosphere in the Committee is described as constructive, recent discussions about how to respond to reports of vio- lations were still marked by divisions between more cautious Council members who want additional information before taking any action and others who are pushing for a more proactive approach. In the past the Committee has also been split in its response to the reports by the PoE. The 2011 report was never made public due to opposition from China. While the 2012 report was seen as more balanced, the Committee took up very few of its recommendations. It therefore remains to be seen how responsive the Committee will be to the upcoming report. The US is the penholder on the DPRK in the Council.
S/RES/2094 (7 March 2013) tightened sanctions against the DPRK and extended the mandate of the PoE until 7 April 2014. S/RES/2050 (12 June 2012) extended the mandate of the PoE until 12 July 2013. Security Council Letters S/2013/199 (28 March 2013) was a letter to the Council from the Secretary-General on the re-appointment of the PoE.
S/2013/162 (15 March 2013) was a letter to the Council from the DPRK regarding the Korean armistice agreement. S/2013/141 (9 March 2013) was a letter to the Council from the DPRK regarding resolution 2094. Security Council Press Statements SC/10912 (12 February 2013) was a Council press statement condemning the 12 February nuclear test. Other S/2013/91 (13 February 2013) was a note verbale from the DPRK on the 12 February nuclear test.  
Notable Dates for May Security Council Report Staff Bruno Stagno Executive Director Joanna Weschler Deputy Executive Director & Director of Research Amanda Roberts Coordinating Editor & Senior Research Analyst Shamala Kandiah Thompson What’s in Blue Editor & Senior Research Analyst
Research Analyst Charles Cater Research Analyst Nicole Rencoret Research Analyst Paul Romita Research Analyst Eran Sthoeger Research Analyst Robbin VanNewkirk Publications Coordinator Dahlia Morched Research Assistant Laura Coquard-Wallace Research Assistant James Reed Ball III Research Assistant Maritza Tenerelli Administrative Assistant Stevenson Swanson Editorial Consultant Security Council Report is a non-profit organization supported by the Governments of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sweden and Switzerland, the Ford Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, International Development Research Centre and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.
One Dag Hammarskjöld Plaza 885 2nd Ave at 48th St, 21st Floor New York NY 10017 Telephone +1 212 759 6394 Fax +1 212 759 4038 Web securitycouncilreport.org whatsinblue.org 
The material in this publication is subject to copyright ownership. Material in this publication may be freely used as in the public domain. You are free to copy, distribute, or make derivative works of the work under the following conditions: you must attribute the work to Security Council Report, Inc.; you may not use this work for commercial purposes; if you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under a license identical to this one. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||