Volume 11 Number 4 Winter 1999

 

The Status of North Korean Escapees:
In Search of Solutions

SON Chu-Whan

INTRODUCTION

      The problem of North Korean escapees1) has become an international issue. The number of North Koreans who have fled to China and Russia is presumably in the tens of thousands, and possibly up to 100 thousand. While, South Korean Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Hong Soon-young, recently revealed that the number of North Korean escapees in China is estimated at approximately ten to twenty thousand, press sources and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) estimate between 100 and 300 thousand people. Such a large discrepancy between the two estimates points to the gravity of the North Korean escapee problem, since the lack of accurate figures hinders basic preparedness.
The number of North Korean escapees to Russia, mostly lumberjacks, is relatively small. Most have fled to China, to avoid the recent food crisis, and the press reports that the number is on the increase. Most escapees, however, are not protected by the international community or the South Korean government. Nevertheless, there are signs of progress, as NGOs are now mobilizing cooperative efforts to protect North Korean escapees. The South Korean government has also started to discuss it openly.
The 1999 Seoul International Conference of NGOs, held in October, established the Commission to Help North Korean Refugees hosted by the South Korea Campaigning Center for UN Refugee Recognition of North Korean. This move is considered a turning point in coordinating international efforts to protect the North Korean refugees. Also on a positive note, while the South Korean government had been procrastinating on taking an official position regarding the North Korean refugees, it recently raised the issue at the ministerial level. In parliamentary inquiries, minister Hong answered that he would accept any North Korean refugee who wanted to live in South Korea. The South Korean government's public statements on the refugees are stimulated by domestic and international appeals, however, so the resolution to the refugee problem has just begun to just take off.
According to an Amnesty International report issued2) in October 1993, the North Korean escapees in China and Russia face a dire situation mainly due to their illegal status. What is worse, North Korean escapees have not been protected by international laws either because they could not get refugee status. In China, they have been arrested by North Korean informants or intelligence agencies and then repatriated based on the criminal extradition treaty between China and North Korea.3)
Firstly, the issue of whether North Korean escapees should be given treaty-defined refugee status will be discussed. Then the principles regarding refugee protection will be proposed. Finally, the South Korean policies toward each country of refuge will be examined. Methods for inducing international cooperation for preventing China and Russia from dealing with the North Korean escapees at their own discretion will also be discussed.

THE REFUGEE STATUS OF THE NORTH KOREAN ESCAPEES

The Expansion of the Refugee Concept

The definition, according to international laws, of the term refugee has been expanded as the characteristics of the origins of refuge have changed and as the necessity for international protection has been raised.
The changes in the definition of the term refugee, are as follows: First, "the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees"and its 1967 Protocol, adopted by the United Nations, are basic agreements, demanding signatory countries to adopt legal and administrative regulations to protect refugees. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)4) has urged the member states of the UN to adopt the Convention and its Protocol. Furthermore, it has directed and supported the signatory countries to fulfill their obligation. According to the UNHCR regulations adopted in December 1950 by the United Nations General Assembly resolution, the UNHCR is "to lead and coordinate international action for world-wide protection of refugees and resolution of refugee problems."5) The 1951 Convention has legally-binding force as it is one of the basic international refugee laws.
According to the Convention,6) the term "refugee"shall apply to any person who, owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or holding a political opinion, is outside his country of nationality and is unable, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.7) In sum, the 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol have defined the term, refugee as "anyone who is under persecution."
Second, the Organization of African Unity (OAU) Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugees Problems in Africa was adopted in 1969 as a regional refugee treaty. This Convention is noteworthy, since it expands the concept of the refugee: The term "refugee"shall also apply to every person who, owing to external aggression, occupation, foreign domination or events seriously disturbing public order, is compelled to leave his place of habitual residence.
Third, in 1966, the Asian African Legal Consultative Committee (AALCC) newly added "skin color"as a cause of persecution.
Fourth, South American countries including Mexico and Panama extended the refugee concept, adding "the massive violations of human rights"to the criteria of refugee, through the Cartagena Declaration in 1984. With the OAU Convention and the Cartagena Declaration, the expanded definition of the term refugee enables us to provide international protection to many more people who could not stay in their countries because of violations of human rights, armed conflicts, and violence in general, which were not included in the 1951 Convention. Even though refugee definitions by the OAU Convention, the AALCC and the Cartagena Declaration do not have international legally-binding force, the UN has now adopted the new concept of refugee in the corresponding areas.8)
Fifth, since the collapse of the Cold War, internally-displaced persons (IDP) have also been included in the category of refugee and thus qualify for protection.9)
Sixth, The plight of environmental refugees has become more and more crucial. As the situation of environmental refugees deteriorates when ecological factors, including natural disasters, combine with political problems, environmental refugees should also be placed under refugee status. Now, related international organizations as well as the UNHCR are voicing concerns about this issue, which is, in fact, directly related to the North Korean escapee issue.10)

The Status of the North Korean Escapees

The term refugee has been expanded over time. Based upon the changed concept of "refugee,"the status of North Korean escapees must be redefined. First, they should be protected as environmental refugees. The UNHCR and relevant neighboring states take a position that while starving North Koreans cannot be considered treaty-defined refugees by a strict definition, the UNHCR is responsible for the refugee issues caused by environmental as well as political factors, and therefore the North Korean escapees should be protected as treaty-defined refugees because a combination of both factors forced them to flee. The issue of North Korean escapees has resulted from consecutive natural disasters, including floods in 1995 and 1996, a severe drought in 1997, and the floods in 1998. Political factors, including the regime's huge military expenditures11) and socialist policy failures have exacerbated the situation.
Second, the North Korean refugee issue should be approached according to the human rights perspective. In an interview, Hwang Jang-yup, the highest ranking defector, said, "Kim Jong-il could have resolved the famine, if he had reduced military expenses or stopped the building of Kim Il-sung's memorial palace. When the state controls everything including food production, starvation is certainly a human rights issue."Hwang also stated that Kim Jong-il has failed to prioritize the needs of his country, spending 890 million US dollars on construction of his father's tomb, money that could have bought enough corn to feed his people for three years. The North Korean regime is not only responsible, but also capable of feeding its people. Nevertheless, it has abandoned its responsibility and allowed North Koreans to starve, a direct violation of human rights. Therefore, since the issue of North Korean escapees has resulted from such massive violations of human rights, North Korean escapees should be protected as treaty-defined refugees.
When a combined research group of the World Food Programme (WFP), the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), and the European Union (EU) randomly selected 18 hundred North Korean children under seven years of age, to determine their nutritive conditions, they found that 62% of them were physically underdeveloped and 16% of them were suffering from severe malnutrition. What is more, the North Korean famine has caused many deaths. The Unification Ministry of South Korea has estimated that the death toll from malnutrition has been 500 to 800 thousand per year during the last two years. Kim Dong-su, former third secretary of the North Korean mission to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), who fled to South Korea, testified that 2 to 3 million people may have starved to death, because of the failure of its public food rationing system. As the food crisis worsens, North Korean human relations have deteriorated and family systems have disintegrated. Social problems such as homelessness, high divorce rates and a reluctance on the part of many young North Koreans to marry have rapidly increased in North Korea.12) Since the North Korean people suffer not only from natural disasters but also because of the ruling system, the international community should consider the situation "a massive violation of human rights."As a matter of course, relevant neighboring states as well as the international community must acknowledge the North Korean escapees as treaty-defined refugees.
Third, "the Principle of non-refoulement"stipulated by the 1951 Convention, should be applied to North Korean escapees.
North Korean people cannot move or change residences, emigration also prohibited. According to testimonies by the North Korean exiles and reports by international human rights organizations such as Amnesty International, North Korean repatriates are known to have suffered from all types of persecutions. Once repatriated, they are subject to harsh punishment according to North Korean criminal law, with many of them facing death sentences. Article 47 of the North Korean Criminal Law stipulates that the act of crossing the border or attempting to flee the country are crimes against the state. Based on these facts, it is clear that country that does not permit freedom of emigration certainly would not be expected to guarantee a citizen's fundamental rights. Thus, in order that North Korean escapees not be repatriated, they must be granted refugee status according to the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits the expulsion or forcible return of a person to a country where he or she may have reason to fear prosecution. This principle has become a basic pillar of international protection as a conventional international law, having broad binding force, regardless of each countries acceptance.
The concept of refugees encompasses massive violations of human rights, violations which North Korean repatriates face constantly. There need be no further justification as to why North Korean escapees should be granted the status of treaty-defined refugees, and at the same time be protected by the principle of non-refoulement. It should be emphasized further, that China and Russia have an obligation to observe the principle of non-refoulement, since they are signatory countries of the 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol. Therefore, it is their responsibility to follow the international laws protecting the North Korean escapees.

THE PRINCIPLES FOR THE NORTH KOREAN REFUGEES

Since the end of World War II, the mass exodus of refugees has escaped liberated colonies, political conflicts, racial or national conflicts, famine and environmental problems in the Third World. In spite of the end of the Cold War, these conflicts have failed to disappear. In fact, according to the reports by the UNHCR and the International Labour Organization (ILO), the number of refugees has increased from 2.5 million people in the 1970s to 20 million people in the 1990s.13) Recent research by the UNHCR shows that the number of refugees was 22.4 million people as of January, 1998.14) Considering the huge number of refugees, it is urgent for the international community to take measures regarding the refugee issue. The UNHCR has taken the lead in granting protection and has suggested various humanitarian approaches to deal with them. The UNHCR's three-step measures are an early warning system for prevention, emergency response, and finally, solutions.15)

Early Warning System

An early warning system refers to preemptive efforts aimed at preventing refugee situations or reacting quickly and appropriately, based on through research and investigation of a possible massive refuge situation.16) Because factors involved in refugee situations are extremely diversified and complex, early warning is a very difficult task. Procedures to establish an efficient early warning system include: First, determine root causes and relevant proximate events directly inducing the exodus. Then, analyze groups and persons who are in danger as well as examine intervening factors which foment the worsening of the situation.17) Based upon the above analyses, it is important to focus on the triggering event among those intervening factors, and to evaluate for changing the situation.
The intervening factors which determine number of refugees, period of time they take refuge, and conditions of the refugees can be classified into following five categories18); (a) displaced persons's alternative choices, (b) obstructions to migration, (c) the attitude of recipient states, (d) types of decision-making of the refugees, and (e) seasonal factors.

Adaptive Emergency Responses to Adjustments Refugees

Prompt responses to the refugees should be focused upon their safety and reserving protective asylum. In the provision of efficient emergency rescue operations and aid for the refugees, the following measures are taken into consideration19): First of all, a needs assessment must be conducted. Then, there should be an assessment of the physical conditions of the refugees, as well as an evaluation of the necessity of social services.20)
Establishment of efficient organizations to deal with the refugees is crucial. In the first stage, the countries concerned are responsible for establishing organizations to deal with the issue. However, when there is a request from the countries concerned, the UNHCR steps in to direct and coordinate governments, NGOs, and other international organizations to deal with the refugee issue. Many international organizations including the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the World Food Programme (WFP), the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), as well as over 200 NGOs such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Medicins Sans Frontieres (MSF) have cooperated with the UNHCR. Recently, the cooperation between NGOs and the UNHCR has consolidated.21)

Solutions

Generally, there are three ways to resolve refugee problems following conventional international laws; voluntary repatriation in the event that the threats disappear, local settlement, and third country resettlement. With regard to voluntary repatriation, the UNHCR regulations22) Article 1 stipulates that the most desirable solution for the refugees is to repatriate with the help of the UNHCR when the circumstances in connection with which they have been recognized as refugees have ceased to exist.23) the UNHCR has declared that refugees should not be forced or coerced to repatriate but are able to make a voluntary decision, free of physical or mental pressures.24) Moreover, the UNHCR emphasizes the role of the relevant neighboring states to create favorable conditions and promote voluntary repatriation. Obviously, minimum safeguards are required in the country of origin. The UNHCR and its partners need to address the rebuilding and economic development of the home country of refugees.
Local settlement and third-country resettlement has political outcomes that can lead to a great number of international relations issues. For one thing, countries that accept refugee settlement must bear the resulting social burdens. For another, although humanitarian principles should be followed, that is, refugees should have the right to choose for themselves either local resettlement or third-country resettlement,25) it is rather difficult to consider only humanitarian principles. There is a delicate relationships between countries of asylum and the home countries of refugees, as well as consideration of economic burdens, and the possibility of disturbing public order in the country of refugee settlement. In spite of those difficulties, the UNHCR has been able to successfully implement its refugee policies.26)

SUPPORTING POLICIES FOR NORTH KOREAN REFUGEES

Supporting Principle

To establish a policy on North Korean escapees, South Korea should clarify basic principles, policy objectives, and aid directions. South Korea's policy needs to be established in line with the perspective of human rights protection and humanitarianism. It must also be in accordance with a long-term unification policy.27) Supporting principles for the North Korean escapees are as follows: First, the North Korean escapees should be protected and helped as treaty-defined refugees. Second, they should be allowed to come to South Korea from any country at any time, since they are considered South Korean people according to the South Korean Constitution Article 2 (1) People, Article 3 Land, and the South Korean Nationality Act. Third, international cooperation is important in resolving refugee issues. Thus, besides the countries concerned, participation by international organizations including the UNHCR and the ICRC should be guaranteed to induce a speedy resolution of the issue. Finally, an early warning system should be established to prepare the country for massive migration of refugees. This scenario could result from a contingency such as the collapse of the North Korean regime.

Supporting Policies according to Each Country

There are several types of the North Korean escapees: First, escapees to South Korea by sea or across the demilitarized zone. Second, escapees to China or Russia, countries that border North Korea (countries with which both Koreas have diplomatic relationships). Third, escapees to Japan by sea (countries with which only South Korea has a diplomatic relationship).

a. Escapees to South Korea

There is no procedural problem in acceptance of escapees to South Korea because the North Korean people are also South Korean according to the South Korean Constitution. In other words, North Korean escapees in South Korea can receive the same legal protection as South Korean do.

b. Escapees to countries with diplomatic relationships with both Koreas

Escapees to China or Russia pose many complicated problems stemming from the nationality of North Korean escapees. While on one hand, they are North Koreans, at the same time, they could be recognized as overseas South Korean, according to South Korean domestic laws. Moreover, North Korea's special diplomatic relationship with China and Russia, a socialist alliance, works against South Korean diplomatic efforts to resolve the North Korean escapee issue. In line with the agreement on extradition of illegal aliens between China and North Korea, secretly signed in 1960, and the Administrative Agreement on Borders of 1986, China has regarded the escapees as "illegal aliens."Thus, to preserve internal security and relations with the North, China has arrested and repatriated escapees at the request of the North Korean authorities. Such repatriations by the public safety police has dramatically increased since "the Gilin Municipal Ordinance on Border Management"was signed in November 1993.28)
On the other hand, Russia signed an agreement on mutual travel with North Korea on January 24, 1997, which operates somewhat differently from previous practices. The agreement has eliminated the provisions related to enforced repatriation of North Koreans in Russia, and on travel limitations to third-countries. When the UNHCR grants refugees status to North Korean escapees, the elimination of those provisions thus allows for international engagement.29) Escapees to Russia are still in personal danger, however, since several Russian local governments have treated arbitrarily the escapees, despite the agreement on mutual travel.
The South Korean government has tried to resolve every individual issue relating to the North Korean escapees in China or Russia (e.g., the case of Hwang Jang-yup's defection to China). Currently, it has been recommended that the South Korean government coordinate with the UN and other international institutions for more efficient and humanitarian resolution of the North Korean refugee issue. Furthermore, South Korea has been asked to negotiate directly with the relevant neighboring states. Measures to resolve the North Korean refugee issue through international organizations are as follows: First, the issue must be viewed from the human rights perspective, one of the main concerns of the international community. Inducing international cooperation is essential, so as to prevent China or Russia from treating the North Korean escapees at its own discretion. The United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) supervises the country of refuge.30) It intervenes in any country where sustained and massive violations of human rights seem to exist, whether or not the country has signed human rights treaties. First of all, if there is sufficient evidence of massive violations of human rights, the UNCHR begins an internal investigation following "the 1503 procedure."On the other hand, the UNCHR investigates according to "the 1235 procedure"when there is a need to investigate openly.31) It is possible for the South Korean government to ask the United Nations Secretary-General to investigate and to take measures on human rights status of the North Korean escapees, citing "the Special Investigation System on the Massive Exodus."The South Korean government should induce NGOs, concerned with human rights to submit a petition for investigation on human rights violations, since individual states cannot present a petition directly to the UNCHR. Specifically, the 1503 procedure can begin only with a petition presented by individuals or private associations, while the 1235 procedure begins only with an internal decision by the UNCHR.
Second, diplomatic efforts are important to induce cooperation from the UNHCR to protect the North Korean escapees in China or Russia. In September 1982 and in October 1993, China and Russia respectively, signed the 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol. According to the Convention, they are obliged to protect the refugees, granting them the status of refugees. The decision to grant refugee status is usually made by relevant states or by the UNHCR with the consent from the country of refuge. It is, however, generally accepted that the country of the refugees has priority in granting the status of refugee, based on sovereignty. Thus, to resolve the North Korean refugees issue, the South Korean government must focus on diplomatic negotiations with China and Russia. Political realities have rendered the UNHCR incapable of resolving the issue, since China has officially denied even the existence of the North Korean refugees. Furthermore, China has also allowed no defections, based on its diplomatic relationship with North Korea. In addition, the UNHCR is reluctant to intervene in the North Korean escapee issue in China, given its traditional friendship with North Korea.
Under the circumstances, the following measures should be taken to persuade the UNHCR to protect the North Korean escapees: First, the South Korean government must verify to the UNHCR that the North Korean escapees are in personal danger, that they could face extreme violations of human rights if they are repatriated. The verification could induce the international community to treat the North Korean escapees as treaty-defined refugees who deserve humanitarian protection and aid.
In additon, the South Korean government should convince the UNHCR of South Korea's positive stance toward accepting refugees. South Korea must show that it has accepted North Korean escapees as its own people, and has treated them without discrimination. Because South Korea's past negative attitude has led to UNHCR reluctance to protect the North Korean escapees in China, the South Korean government must now show its determination to resolve the issue, persuading the UNHCR to demand that China observe the principle of non-refoulement stipulated in the 1951 Convention, as well as emphasizing the extreme violations of human rights that the North Korean escapees would face if repatriated under the North Korean Criminal Law.
Third, the South Korean government needs international cooperation to establish refugee accommodations in border areas where there are North Korean escapees. With regard to China and Russia, it is recommended that refugee accommodations be established in areas where ethnic Korean Chinese reside.32) These areas would then be developed into a special refugee district with help from the countries concerned. Since it is impossible to establish and operate such refugee centers without cooperation from the countries where they are located, the South Korean government should seek diplomatic cooperation with China and Russia as well as with international organizations including NGOs. The most desirable option would be for the UNHCR to take a lead in establishing and operating refugee accommodations. This would minimize diplomatic conflicts for all concerned between North Korea and the country operating refugee districts, as well as conflicts between South Korea and that same country. Moreover, South Korea would not need to intervene directly in the matter. Yanbian or Liaoning Providence in China, Posiet in Russia, the Tumen River area, and Habarovsk are appropriate places for establishment of refugee accommodations, taking into account employment factors and the cost of living, as well as their relationship with residents in the country of refugee. There is also another way in which the refugee issue could be resolved. South Korean businesses in the countries concerned or joint ventures with overseas Korean residents could employ the North Korean escapees. However, China and Russia have reacted negatively to the establishment of refugee accommodations, because they are concerned about their relationship with North Korea as well as the possibility that such moves could trigger a massive influx of North Korean escapees. In the event of a massive influx, China or Russia would be forced to ask international organizations such as the UNHCR to help lessen their economic burden in dealing with the escapees. Nevertheless, North Korean escapees face a hazardous situation that calls for speedy establishment of refugee accommodations. Thus it is up to the South Korean government to hasten diplomatic efforts to assure the cooperation of relevant neighboring states as well as the international community.

c. Escapees to countries with which only South Korea has a diplomatic relationship

When the North Korean people escaped to the countries with which only South Korea has diplomatic relationship, such as Japan, it is much easier to protect them as South Korean overseas residents. Although North Korea is a sovereign country and a member of the United Nations, there will be no problem for the South Korean government to help the North Korean escapees to reside in South Korea.33) Since South Korea has such a special relationship with North Korea, North Korean escapees can be granted South Korean citizenship under South Korean domestic law. Japan is supposed to protect the North Korean escapees arriving in Japan by sea, according to the Refugee Acknowledging Law stipulated by the refugee treatment principles of international laws or conventional international laws. Moreover, Japan has the capability to deal effectively with the issue. It has prior experience with Vietnamese refugees and has the economic ability to protect refugees. Further, since Japan is in an international position to fulfill its obligation regarding refugees, there would be no conflict between South Korea and Japan regarding protection. With regard to countries with which only South Korea has a diplomatic relationship, there are various alternatives for dealing with escapees: They can rescue them and send them to South Korea following due legal process, or they can expel them into the open sea and then guarantee their safe passage to South Korea. In any event, the South Korean government needs to prepare for the complex process facing refugees, ranging from their escape to their final settlement in South Korea.

CONCLUSION

The international community should protect the North Korean escapees from the perspective of human rights and humanitarianism, in spite of various obstacles. Realistically, the sovereignty of the relevant neighboring states is superior to anything else dealing with the refugees in that states, and current international laws relating to refugees cannot satisfactorily deal with current issues and the complex situations in Northeast Asia. From the perspective of law and justice, it is very clear that North Korean escapees in the Northeastern area in China and the Far-eastern area in Russia should be granted the status of treaty-defined refugees. Considering that hundreds of thousands of North Korean escapees are living in uncertainty and peril, the sensitivity and vulnerability of the North Korean refugee issue should be kept in mind.
The issue of North Korean escapees is not only a bilateral matter between North Korea and China or North Korea and Russia, but an issue of an international and humanitarian context that needs to be jointly tackled by Northeast Asian countries. Given the fact that the escapee issue was triggered by unabated food shortages and a repressive dictatorship in North Korea, arbitrary arrests and extradition of the escapees by the Chinese authorities will not contribute to solving the issue until the internal situation in the North is ameliorated. Therefore those countries concerned must assess the issue from different perspectives and take measures to protect vulnerable North Korean escapees whose very lives are in danger. International efforts, especially UNHCR, can be vital in solving the issue. Based on their mission to uphold international human rights and humanitarian laws, international organizations must carry out on-site investigations of the conditions of the North Koreans, and should then grant them the status of treaty-defined refugees. In addition, the international community ought to cooperate to establish refugee accommodations to rescue and to protect the escapees. International organizations including NGOs could play an intermediate role in lessening the conflicts between China or Russia and North Korea regarding the refugee issue. When the escapees are granted refugees status, not only it will consolidate their protection in a harsh situation, but it will grant human rights a strong foothold in Northeast Asia.
 
  1. There has been confusion about the legal term regarding the North Korean people who escaped from North Korea. In particular, the legal term, "North Korean defector,"is problematic. This study uses the term "North Korean escapees,"adopted in the Law on the protection of and support for the resettlement of the North Korean escapees, stipulated in 1997.
  2. Amnesty International, North Korea: Summary of Amnesty International's Concerns (London: International Secretariat of Amnesty International, 1993), pp. 1-19.
  3. IHRLK, A Report on the North Korean Refugees (Seoul: International Human Rights League of Korea, 1994), p.3.
  4. United Nations High Commissioner of Refugees was established by the United Nations General Assembly resolution 319A(IV) of 3 December 1949, and entered into work on 1 January 1951. Chang Bok-hee, "The UNHCR,"Practices of International Human Rights Law (Seoul: Pakyoungsa, 1998), pp. 39-74.
  5. The UNHCR regulations Article 1.
  6. Convention relating to the Status of Refugees in 1951, Article 1, A(2).
  7. On 1 January 1997, 128 countries are the signatory countries of Convention relating to the Status of Refugees in 1951 and the same number of countries are the signatory countries of Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees in 1967. 124 countries signed in both. Among them, 132 countries signed in more than one. South Korea signed in both on December 3, 1992.
  8. UNHCR, The State of the World's Refugees: The Challenge of Protection (Geneva: UNHCR, 1993), pp.163-165; Chang Bok-hee, op. cit., pp. 48-49.
  9. UNHCR, Protection Aspects of UNHCR Activities on Behalf of Internally Displaced Persons (Geneva: UNHCR, 1994), p. 54.
  10. References on the environmental refugees are as follows: Essam El-Hinnawi, Environmental Refugees (Nairobi: UN Environment Programme, 1985); Jodi Jacobson, Environmental Refugees: A Yardstick of Habitability (Washington, D. C.: Worldwatch Institute, 1988); David Lazarus, "Environmental Refugees: New Strangers at the Door?" Refugees (December, 1990); Lee Shin-wha, Environmental Change, Refugees, and Conflict in the Third World: A Framework for Inquiry Applied to Case Studies of Sudan and Bangladesh, University of Maryland, Ph.D Dissertation, 1994; Anthony H. Richmond, "Environmental Refugees," Global Apartheid: Refugees, Racism, and the New World Order (1994), pp. 75-97; Jon Martin Trolldalen, Nina M. Birkeland, JanBorgen, Preston T. Scott, "Environmental Refugees,"A Discussion Paper, World Foundation for Environment & Development in Cooperation With the Norwegian Refugee Council, 1992.
  11. North Korea has developed long-range missiles, in spite of a severe economic crisis and famine.
  12. Korea Institute for National Unification, White Paper on Human Rights in North Korea 1999 (Seoul : Korea Institute for National Unification, 1999), pp.1-3.
  13. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and UNHCR, The Refugee Issue and Humanitarian Rescue Activities , UNHCR Workshop on the Refugee Issue (Seoul: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 1995), p. 3.
  14. UNHCR & Refugees, UNHCR by Numbers, Table 1 (Estimated number of persons of who fall under the mandate of UNHCR by region) in "Populations of Concern: Who Does UNHCR Help?"(http://www.unhcr.ch/ un&ref/number/ tableq.htm), P. 1.
  15. SON Chu-Whan, "A study of North Korean Refugees: Problems and Policy Considerations,"Graduate School of Political Science, Kyung-nam University, Ph.D Dissertation, 1988, pp. 25~35, pp. 152~164.
  16. Clark, Lance, Conducting an Early Warning Analysis (Washington D. C.: Refugee Policy Group, 1988), p. 126.
  17. Lee Keum-soon, The North Korean Escapees : Centered on the Overseas Cases (Seoul: Korea Institute for National Unification, 1995), pp. 28~29.
  18. UNHCR, Introduction to International Protection (Geneva: UNHCR, 1994), p. 46; UNHCR, Protection Aspects of UNHCR Activities on Behalf of Internally Displaced Persons (Geneva: UNHCR, 1994), pp. 97~98.
  19. UNHCR, Protection (Madison: University of Wisconsin Disaster Management Center, 1993), p. 59.
  20. UNHCR, Refugee Children: Guidelines on Protection and Care (Geneva: UNHCR, 1994).
  21. UNHCR, Refugees, Focus: NGOs & UNHCR (Geneva: UNHCR, 1994), p. 132, p. 186.
  22. UNHCR Regulations were adopted by the United Nations General Assembly resolutions 319A(IV) of 3 December 1949 and 428(V) of 14 December 1950.
  23. UNHCR, Repatriation: Back to Mozambique (Geneva: UNHCR, 1994); UNHCR, UNHCR in Cambodia: A Model for Success (Geneva: UNHCR 1994).
  24. UNHCR, UNHCR Handbook, Voluntary Repatriation:International Protection (Geneva: UNHCR, 1996), pp. 10-11.
  25. Third-country resettlement is desirable to eliminate the danger to the legal or physical security of the person concerned, when he is repatriated. The number of people who resettled in third countries is relatively small. In 1992, the number was only 34 thousands among the total 19 million refugees. The major resettlement countries are Australia, Canada, U.S., Sweden, and Norway, etc. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Korea, and UNHCR, The Refugee Issue and Humanitarian Rescue Activities , p. 6.
  26. Chang Bok-hee, UNHCR, Practices of International Human Rights Law (Seoul: Pakyoungsa, 1998), pp. 55-67; UNHCR, "What is UNHCR? Resolutions,"(http://www.unhcr.or.kr), p.1.
  27. The South Korean policy for the escapees is based on a humanitarian efforts. However, when the policy is politically abused, it will easily damage relations between the South and the North.
  28. In two years, between 1994 and 1995, one hundred forty North Korean escapees to China have been repatriated to North Korea by the Chinese public safetypolice. The Dong-A Ilbo , December 26, 1996.
  29. On February 24, 1994, Russia and North Korea signed a new forestry agreement to guarantee the human rights of North Korean lumberjacks.
  30. In the 49th UN Commission on Human Rights held in Geneva in March 1993, Russia argued that international community should take care of the situation of human rights in North Korea, Institute for National Unification, The Current North Korea monthly , No. 144 (June 1993), p. 59.
  31. Kim Byong-ro, Human Rights Issue in North Korea and International Cooperation (Seoul: Korea Institute for National Unification, 1997), pp. 12-13, 82.
  32. Je Seong-ho,"Establishment and Operations of Special District for the North Korean Escapees," The Unification , Central Committee for National Unification (November 1994).
  33. South and North Koreas are internationally recognized as separate and independent countries, however, according to South Korean constitution, the South is the only legitimate government on the Korean peninsula. Je Seong-ho, The Legal Character and Operation of the Special Relation between South and North Koreas (Seoul: Korea Institute for National Unification, 1994).