The North Korea Human Rights Act (NKHRA) has been the subject of much controversy within Korea. Caught up in a whirl of political opposition, the act had been in stasis for over a decade. Even now, contention surrounds it. Conservatives and liberals have each claimed a side; the latter is generally opposed, their reasoning being that passing NKHRA would aggravate the North Korean government and that the act itself would not have much impact. The former positioned themselves as the North Korean citizens’ keeper and took all opportunities to declaim the liberals for not supporting the act. 

The intention of the act is to protect the rights of North Korean citizens. The major points of this act are as follows: setting up talks between the North and the South concerning human rights issues; setting up an archive, an advisory committee and a foundation concerned with North Korean human rights; and endeavoring to reunite separated families, retrieving those forcibly taken to the north and accepting defectors from North Korea. 

Is NKHRA truly ineffectual as some claim it to be? According to Professor Soh Changrok (International Studies) of Korea University (KU), it is not. “The act itself is well made; it addresses both the crimes of the North Korean government and the needs of the people who have suffered under it,” he opined. 

 

Human rights archives are needed in order to document the people involved in the various acts of cruelty inflicted on North Korean citizens. Besides providing reference for future punishment, Professor Soh explained, officially archiving the cruelties of the North will act as a deterrent for current and potential perpetrators. 

There have always been monetary issues when supporting North Korean citizens—the bulk of it was done on the part of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and they had few options for gaining funds besides reaching out to human rights foundations based in other countries such as the United States (U.S.). If the Korean government sets up a foundation of its own to deal with North Korea, efforts to provide humanitarian assistance would progress much more smoothly. 

Potential problems with the archive, the foundation and also the advisory committee arise from politics and bureaucracy. Both the Ministry of Unification and the Ministry of Justice handle the archive, which may bring inefficiency and departmental selfishness into the mix. Three-quarters of the advisory committee members are to be recommended from the conservatives and the liberals equally—ostensibly a reasonable approach. However, Professor Soh predicted that “both sides may choose the most vociferous people to serve on the committee,” turning it from a collaboration to protect human rights into yet another political battlefield.

Bringing North Korea to the table for talks will also prove to be difficult. The South-North relationship, as well as North Korea’s relationship with the rest of the world is as chilly as ever, especially with its nuclear experiments and missile launchings. One silver lining is that North Korea is not as closed off as it once was. The principles of free market have crept into the nation, and more of its inhabitants continue to leave North Korea—evidence that its citizens are aware of the prosperity its neighbors enjoy. Professor Soh is of the opinion that this is as good a time as any to reach out to North Korea while joining hands with more countries. 

Cooperation is essential if the situation in North Korea is to improve for its citizens. The world is not short of human rights NGOs—it is up to South Korea to contact them. “European NGOs in particular are free from the political constraints many NGOs in Korea are subject to,” Professor Soh commented. The European Alliance on Human Rights in North Korea (EAHRNK) and Human Rights Without Frontiers are two of the organizations passionate about human rights issues in North Korea, and reaching out to such NGOs may prove to be a crucial step.

Professor Soh also suggested another idea: to form a network of NGOs specifically in Asia to combat human rights issues in North Korea and elsewhere. “There are those who denounce groups that try to support North Korean citizens as lackeys of the U.S. since that was the nation we have relied on most for funds. Cooperating more with NGOs of nations within our own continent, and dealing with serious human rights issues in those nations will lend weight to our efforts to combat the cruelty going on in North Korea.” 

Of course, no effort would be successful without people who truly care about the welfare of North Koreans. As important as enlisting help worldwide is, it is equally imperative that the people of South Korea open their eyes to the plight of their northern brethren and look at the issue with eyes unclouded by politics. It is especially important for students to act. The passionate voices of the younger generation have been the ones to bring about progress throughout Korea’s history; the same is needed if the winds of change are also to blow over the barren nation called North Korea. 

Over 60 years Korea has spent cleaved in two—over 60 years have the citizens of the North borne their suffering in silence. Although this new act brings with it shining promises of change and goodwill, whether it delivers them relies solely upon the people of this land. The act itself is not enough; those who truly weep for North Korea need to stand up and keep the debilitating influences of political conflict from entering the issue.