Human Rights Diffusion in North Korea: The Impact of Transnational Legal Mobilization

Abstract

This article asks how legal mechanisms are employed outside of North Korea to achieve human rights diffusion in the country; to what extent these result in human rights diffusion in North Korea; and whether measures beyond accountability can be pursued in tandem for more productive engagement. Specifically, it examines how the North Korean government has interacted with the globalized legal regime of human rights vis-à-vis the UN and details the legal processes and implications of the UN Commission of Inquiry report, including domestic legislation, and evidence collection. While transnational legal mobilization has gathered momentum on the accountability side, it is significantly weaker in terms of achieving human rights protection within North Korea given the government’s perception of current human rights discourse as part of an externally produced war repertoire. Thus, efforts to engage the North Korean population and government require concurrent reframing of human rights discourse into more localized and relatable contexts.

Introduction to the Research Handbook on Law, Movements and Social Change: On "legitimate political discourse" in the global twenty-first century

“…The dangers posed by conservative movements put a wider frame around a longstanding central concern of legal mobilization scholarship: how law functions as a strategy to advance movement goals. Primarily centered on formal legal institutions and actors such as courts, litigation, and lawyers, much law and social movement research has focused on outcomes and whether law was a useful strategy for movements (e.g., Dias et al, 2021;Goede, 2018;Handler, 1978;Madlingozi, 2014;Rosenberg, 2008;Sung et al, 2022;Vel et al, 2017). This line of scholarship often assumes a primarily rational actor framework and aims to understand why movements turn to the courts, what types of legal arguments work, and whether or not movements are able to achieve their desired outcome through litigation (Boutcher & McCammon, 2019).…”

The Security and Human Rights Nexus in North Korea: Is Self-Organizing Dynamics Feasible?

“…While HR 4011 has stood as separate legislation to promote North Korean human rights by being reauthorized every year, the North Korea Sanction and Policy Enhancement Act was passed in February 2016 to focus on trade sanctions due to continued North Korean missile and nuclear testing. The new law inextricably makes human rights improvement conditional to the lifting of US sanctions, permanently and effectively linking human rights to the security issue of North Korea (Goedde 2017). This linkage was further solidified by the US Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designation of North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un, ten officials, and five entities for ties to North Korea's notorious abuses of human rights (US Department of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control 2016).…”

“…This linkage was further solidified by the US Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designation of North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un, ten officials, and five entities for ties to North Korea's notorious abuses of human rights (US Department of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control 2016). Although the Treasury designation was more symbolic than practical, it signaled that human rights had been firmly incorporated as a priority in political dealings with North Korea (Goedde 2017).…”

“…The progressive opposition party fundamentally opposed its enactment as it proposed to instead negotiate with and provide further aid to North Korea. The law represents a certain degree of bipartisan concession that North Korean human rights needs to be addressed in a more formal and unified manner by the South Korean government (Goedde 2017). The Act created a North Korean human rights advisory committee under the Ministry of Unification; a North Korean Human Rights Foundation to help research, strategize, and fund human rights improvement in North Korea; a Human Rights Archive tasked with collecting and recording information pertaining to human rights and humanitarian assistance, and the appointment of a North Korean Human Rights Ambassador-at-large by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (ROK North Korean Human Rights Act 2016).…”

United Nations Contributions to Promoting Human Rights in the DPRK: Impetus for Change

“…This amounted to "naming and shaming" by UN agencies in order to effect change in the DPRK. This was a far more robust socialization initiative than had been attempted in the past, and not only did it succeed in drawing wider international attention to North Korean human rights violations, but also contributed to bring about changes in the target state as detailed below (Hosaniak 2018;Goedde 2018). Prior to 2014, there had been, in fact, little or no progress made in changing the DPRK's human rights norm-violating behavior.…”