Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on June 9th, 2015

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you.

Professor Cotler, please.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

I'd like to begin, Justice Kirby, if I may, not only by commending you for your testimony today and your comprehensive report, but really also for a lifetime of commitment to human rights and the rule of law.

In your commission's final report, in which you document the wide array of crimes against humanity, you conclude by saying that the gravity, scale, and nature of these violations reveal a state that does not have any parallel in the contemporary world.

Now this is, as you pointed out clearly, an R2P situation, but if it is an R2P situation, the question arises how can the international community now on the 10th anniversary of R2P best give expression to this imperative in the case of North Korea.

Of course, a reference by the UN Security Council to the ICC would be the best example, and it's always possible this may happen, but I'm not unmindful of the fact that with regard to Syria we were prevented from invoking the R2P there because China and Russia again and again exercised their veto.

My question is what can the international community do either to persuade China and Russia, or if that does not work, other initiatives that we might take, and in particular how may Canadian parliamentarians assist in this regard?

[Michael Kirby]

First of all, Professor Cotler, I pay my respects to you. In our respective earlier lives, you as an academic and me as a practising judge, we met on a number of occasions and I'm most respectful of your question.

I think the answer I would give is the answer I gave when I was asked a very similar question in the General Assembly: what can we do? The answer I gave at the time was that whenever you meet the representatives of DPRK in the corridors, you should tell them that this is not acceptable. Whenever you meet the representatives of China and the Russian Federation, you should give them the same message.

We are, after all, this month and next month celebrating the enormous sacrifices of the Red Army and the Russian people in bringing an end to the Second World War, in which they were close allies of Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, and the other P5 countries. They have an interest in securing peace and stability.

There will not be peace and stability on the Korean peninsula so long as there is a disrespect of fundamental human rights. This is a reality that I think needs to be brought home to them.

In the meantime, there's work to be done. Next month a field office will be established to continue to collect the testimony, and the greatest peril, as far as the follow-up of the report of the commission of inquiry goes, is that, because of other pressing international concerns, it will go off the agenda.

That is why I'm so grateful to this committee of the Canadian Parliament that you are signalling today that this is not off the agenda but that it is still on the agenda and it has not been repaired. I would hope that this committee will continue to operate and continue to remind people of the work of and the report by the commission of inquiry, but we should not give up on the work that the Security Council can do if it chooses to do so.

Somehow there needs to be a way for Russia and China to see, whatever their geopolitical concerns, that there are deep issues of human rights in a country that has the fifth-largest standing army in the whole world, with a population of 24 million, and which reportedly has 15 to 20 nuclear warheads and increasingly sophisticated missile-delivery systems, and which is now experimenting in submarine technology with the potential of spreading the power of the nuclear arsenal that it has.

This is an extremely serious issue for peace and security, and when you have countries with no respect for the fundamental human rights of their people, that is a very unstable situation. Therefore, it is of deep concern to Canada and people everywhere, and to the lives of people in the Korean peninsula. Accidents, mistakes, and risks are great, and we cannot simply put this into the “too hard” basket. We have to turn the intelligence and the unanimity of the human family to finding a solution to this problem.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Unfortunately, we've passed the allotted and have to go to the next questioner.

Mr. Devolin, go ahead, please.

[Barry Devolin, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Kirby, for being here today.

As someone with a long-standing interest in North Korea and these issues, I watched with great interest from a distance as you and your commission did your work. What I think many of us found most interesting is that most of what you found was already known; there really wasn't a lot of new information. But I think it was an example of how a formal process, under the auspices of something like the United Nations, and the gathering and coherent presentation of information actually did change the conversation. The process that you and your commission of inquiry went through did make a difference and actually pushed this debate to the next level. I thank you and your colleagues for having done that.

When we talk about North Korean human rights and violations of human rights, of course, there are those who are still in North Korea. Then there are the North Koreans who have escaped overland into China, where they are still under threat, because as we all know, if they are apprehended by Chinese authorities they will be forcibly repatriated. It would seem that China is choosing not to take seriously its own obligations to not forcibly repatriate those who have reason to fear for their safety if they're sent back to their homeland. Then there is that underground railway that many of them take, which can take several years to get through China. Thailand is usually the destination of choice. And then some have resettled in South Korea and elsewhere.

But I want to talk about China for a minute, not about North Korea specifically. I question whether the international community has the ability to apply moral suasion against the DPRK to compel or persuade them to follow some of these international norms. China is difficult, but I think China provides a better opportunity for the global community to somehow persuade China not to forcibly repatriate North Koreans who have escaped. Maybe China doesn't want those people to stay in China, but I've often wondered whether the international community could come together and essentially make an offer to China, saying, “If you apprehend North Koreans, bring them to us and we will relocate them; we will deal with them from that point forward”.

I'm curious about what your thoughts are on that. Would there be a way to approach China—maybe from the side, so to speak, rather than in a direct confrontation on this matter—to try to create a situation where the lives of North Koreans who have made it over the first wall into China, but not over the second wall out of China, could be improved and the possibility of their ending up somewhere safe would be improved?

[Michael Kirby]

It is true that the escape lines have been made more difficult in recent times. The usual mode of escape was across the rivers in the north of the Korean Peninsula during the winter when the rivers froze over.

But one of the duties that was assigned to Kim Jong-un by his father during his father's lifetime was to go up to the border area. Reportedly he was shocked by the porous nature of the border, which was so defensive of the escape of so many people from North Korea. Therefore, both DPRK and China have built barriers that make it much more difficult to escape in that manner.

But when they do make it across, as a continuing stream does, then they often have to seek refuge and help from faith-based organizations from South Korea, which then can put them on the escape lines, rather similar to the way Canadian, British, and other soldiers in the Second World War were shepherded through France, down to the Pyrenees, and out into freedom.

If they go to Thailand, they're reasonably safe. Thailand will not send people back to North Korea. Laos, on the other hand, sent a whole planeload of young people, after they'd gone through their escape, back to North Korea in contravention of international refugee law.

I thank you for thinking outside the square. I think this is exactly what we should all be doing, because if you keep hitting your head on the P5, and the veto, and action in the Security Council, you may simply do damage to yourself and not much good for the Korean people.

One of the points that has been made to me in recent days is that countries like Australia, Canada, and the United States could possibly do some good for people who have gone through this tremendous ordeal to escape and who for one reason or another do not have refuge in another country for asylum. There are such people and I think it's fair to say that the figures show that Canada, which has a famous story of receiving and protecting refugees, the United States likewise, and Australia to some extent too have not been generous in the way they have welcomed North Korean refugees. The United States I think has only taken something like 130—a very small number.

South Korea, of course, has a right of citizenship. If you arrive, if you can get there, you have a right to be a citizen. For various reasons some people don't want to go there or can't go there and therefore seek refuge elsewhere.

That is something that this committee might care to consider, along the lines that you have suggested. I think that's a good idea. We should be motivated by respect for the people.

I've come here from Salzburg, where we had a global seminar. In the course of the seminar one of the speakers, exceptionally, put on the screen photographs taken by her during her time in North Korea. Some of the photographs were of Pyongyang, which show a surprisingly modern looking city, though very empty streets. But other photographs showed young children from North Korea dressed in very cheap-looking Chinese, but warm, wind cheaters and garments against the terrible cold of the Korean winter. As one looked at them and at the school children shown in the photographs, staring straight at you, as a western person looking at these people who are victims, you realized you cannot hate the people of North Korea. You certainly cannot hate the children and the youth of North Korea. They are themselves victims of very great wrongs.

It's important that we never lose sight of the people who are behind the geopolitical and human rights issues in the great chambers of the United Nations and even in this Parliament. People out there in Korea don't know we are meeting today and don't know we are talking about them. But it is a sign of the world we live in that we have sufficient love of people in a faraway country with terrible weapons at their disposal who are still human beings and who deserve and would expect if they knew that the United Nations, the world, Canada, Australia, and other countries would do what they could to alleviate the suffering.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you.

We have one questioner left. Just before we go to him I want to be clear and mention that this comes out of discussions I've had with Mr. Devolin. My understanding is that there is a special and unique problem with regard to people who have left North Korea. In theory they can go to South Korea, but in practice South Korea is a destination they may wish to avoid for the safety of their families and themselves. Are you able to comment on that?

[Michael Kirby]

I can't comment in any way disrespectfully of the Republic of Korea, or South Korea. South Korea has absorbed 27,000 to 28,000 refugees. It gives them a passport. They are entitled to citizenship under the constitution of the Republic of Korea, because South Korea asserts that it is the legitimate government of the Korean peninsula.

But it is true that a proportion, not a big proportion I think, feel alienated from some aspects of life in South Korea. Normally North Korean citizens are significantly shorter than their confreres in South Korea. They therefore tend to stand out and getting through that process of vetting and getting into a job, getting opportunities, is not easy in South Korea. Some would wish to and could make a useful contribution to countries like Canada, Australia, the United States, but we take very few because we say they can go to South Korea. But what must not happen is refoulement , the sending back of people to North Korea, because even if they left North Korea as economic migrants seeking a better life, if they are sent back they are very severely punished, some reportedly even with execution. Therefore it is a very serious thing to send them back and it should not happen.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you.

Mr. Morin, you can ask one last question.

[Marc-André Morin, NDP, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for joining us, Mr. Kirby.

I don't know whether you have a lot of information on the situation in North Korea, on what is happening inside the country. I believe that repression always contains an economic aspect. For instance, it is easy to see that in the example of the Holocaust, when Germany's entire economy was tied in with the concentration camp activities. Moreover, the mass murder of millions of Jews in Europe was a source of revenue and funded their own repression.

According to what I have heard, in North Korea, there is a new privileged class of North Koreans who work in factories on the border that are often controlled by large international companies. The people who work there have absolutely amazing lifestyles compared to ordinary North Koreans who are starving. The source of the regime's collapse is probably the creation of a privileged class of North Koreans who are exploiting their peers. In addition, the funding mostly comes from factories operated by South Korean or Chinese companies.

What are your thoughts on that?

[Michael Kirby]

It's true that the economy in North Korea has, to some extent, been stimulated by areas that are often on the border, especially the border with China, which allow joint projects. The Economist magazine last week reported that the economy of North Korea grew by 7% last year. Whether or not that's true, it certainly has improved. But whether that gets into the pockets of all the people of North Korea is the point of your question.

The North Korean regime has a so-called songbun system, which divides people up in a kind of caste system. Actually there are 55 subcategories, but essentially there are three categories. There is the core class, who are the friends of the regime. There is the wavering class. And there is the hostile class. These are old-fashioned communist-type words. Most people are not in the core class. Most of the core class live in Pyongyang.

It is in the interests of all people in North Korea for the economy to improve. With improvement of the economy there will be a trickle-down effect to all people.

One of the most interesting people I met last week in Seoul is a young man who, outside of North Korea and Korea, has established a business through which he is engaging with some of the escapees. The point he made was that when they get the smell of the capitalist system, they are full of energy, ambition, and a desire to do as well as their cousins do in the south.

South Korea is an extremely successful economy. If the North Koreans can get some of the same attitude and success, their economic position will improve. But sharing it around is going to be very difficult.

[Marc-André Morin, NDP, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

A question came to me while you were talking.

If we see that there are indeed sources that supply the regime with capital, shouldn't we take some measures—for example, when we sign agreements with countries—to ensure that Canada is not doing business with companies that use slavery, in one way or another?

Shouldn't we impose penalties against companies or countries that take advantage of people working in slave labour conditions? Could that not be a way to deal with it?

[Michael Kirby]

This would take me into areas in which I am not an expert, but I think it's a legitimate question. It's a little bit analogous to the issue of trafficking and those who take advantage of the escapees. It's also analogous to the quite significant and increasing numbers of North Korean workers who go into neighbouring countries to work—and sometimes distant countries, like Gulf countries, to do particular jobs—and get only a small fraction of the money that is paid to the Government of North Korea for the work they perform.

I think you'd have to balance, on the one hand, the desirability of promoting economic improvement in North Korea and, on the other hand, the misuse of those zones of joint activity. That would require quite a lot of consideration before you could begin sanctioning economic development.

On the whole, economic development, as we've found in other countries, such as Cambodia, is often going to be a key to improving the life of ordinary people. To the extent that we can do that, we can save people from starving.

Never forget that in the 1990s, of a population of 24 million, according to our estimates, a million North Koreans starved to death. At the same time, North Korea was expending huge resources, which could have been devoted to their starving population, on nuclear armaments, on a huge army, and on missile-delivery systems.

It's a matter of trying to get them interested in economics rather than armaments. That is the integrated nature of human rights and also of peace and security.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you, Mr. Morin.

Mr. Kirby, thank you for taking the time to come here to provide us with your testimony. It has been very enlightening indeed, and we are grateful to you.

[Michael Kirby]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I pay my respects again to the Parliament and to the people of Canada for the support that Canada gave to the work of the commission of inquiry.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you.

Colleagues, we will be meeting in camera on Thursday. I look forward to seeing you then.

The meeting is adjourned.