Consideration of reports, comments and information submitted by States parties under article 9 of the Convention
Seventh periodic report of the Republic of Korea
World Conference on Human Rights
CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS, COMMENTS AND INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 9 OF THE CONVENTION (agenda item 4) (continued)
Seventh periodic report of the Republic of Korea (CERD/C/221/Add.1)
1. At the invitation of the Chairman, Mr Moon Bong Jo and Mr Cho Hyun Dong took places at the Committee table.
2. Mr MOON Bong Jo (Republic of Korea) introducing his country's seventh periodic report (CERD/C/221/Add.1), paid a tribute to the Committee's contribution to the international community's efforts to combat racism and racial discrimination. His Government would, he hoped, find encouragement at the current session to persist in its firm determination to eliminate all forms of racial discrimination and promote understanding among all races. He apologized for his country's request that consideration of the report, which had been scheduled for 1992, should be deferred to the current session.
3. The report dealt mainly with the developments since the sixth periodic report, considered by the Committee in August 1990, in which his Government had explained its policy for eliminating all forms of racial discrimination and had described the measures taken to give effect to the provisions of the Convention. The questions asked during the consideration of that report had been borne in mind in preparing the seventh report.
4. Part I of the report briefly reviewed the relevant provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, which provided explicit and comprehensive guarantees of human rights and fundamental freedoms and ensured that the Convention was given legal effect in domestic law. Updated figures for the number of foreign nationals resident in the country (para. 11 of the report) had been made available to the Committee. In view of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the Republic of Korea and the People's Republic of China, separate figures had been given for Chinese from Taipei and Chinese from the People's Republic of China.
5. Part II of the report provided information on the measures taken by the Government of the Republic of Korea to implement articles 2 to 7 of the Convention.
6. With regard to article 3, the Government of the Republic of Korea had pursued its anti-apartheid policy through enhanced involvement in the efforts of the international community, and the United Nations in particular, to dismantle apartheid in South Africa. It had, together with the international community, endeavoured to respond appropriately to the South African political process by applying a phased lifting of sanctions in accordance with progress made towards a non-racial, democratic South Africa. It had established diplomatic relations with the Republic of South Africa on 1 December 1992, but that implied no weakening of the Republic of Korea's anti-apartheid policy, rather its Government's attempt to reinforce contacts with political parties and organizations representing the black majority in South Africa.
7. With regard to article 5, the Republic of Korea had joined the International Labour Organisation as a full member on 9 December 1991. Its Government had strengthened its commitment to protect fundamental rights, as prescribed in the Convention.
8. With regard to article 6, the report indicated the numerous remedies available under domestic law to an individual claiming an infringement of his fundamental human rights through an act of racial discrimination.
9. Turning to developments since the submission of the seventh report, paragraph 14 of which referred to the accession of the Republic of Korea in July 1990 to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Optional Protocol to the Covenant, he said that the Republic's initial report under the Covenant had been considered by the Human Rights Committee in July 1992. That had been a valuable experience and an important step for the Government in terms of its commitment to protect and promote universal human rights.
10. In December 1992, the Republic of Korea had also acceded to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol, thereby consolidating the legal foundation of its policy to protect refugees and its readiness to participate more actively in international humanitarian relief operations, particularly in cooperation with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
11. At the World Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna in June 1993, the elimination of racism and racial discrimination had been declared to be a primary objective of the international community. The Government of the Republic of Korea welcomed that declaration and reaffirmed its full support for and commitment to international efforts ultimately to eradicate all forms of racial discrimination.
12. Mr SONG Shuhua, Country Rapporteur, welcoming the statement by the representative of the Republic of Korea as a useful addition to the report, said that the seventh report, like the sixth, had been drafted in accordance with the general guidelines for the preparation of reports and dealt with a wide range of issues. The Government of the Republic of Korea had by the timely submission of its reports demonstrated its serious attitude towards its obligations under the Convention.
13. In comparison with previous reports, the present one displayed a sustained approach to the subject that made the sequence of policy measures clearer to the reader. Despite its succinctness, it was substantive in content, including new information leading to a better understanding of recent developments. Furthermore, it answered a number of questions asked by the Committee in its review of previous reports and further efforts had been made to overcome past inadequacies. Clarification was, however, still needed on some issues.
14. Paragraphs 10-12 in part I, of the report described recent demographic changes. As the table in paragraph 11 showed, Chinese accounted for the highest proportion of the foreign population, followed by Americans and Japanese. When comparison was made with the figures given in the fifth and sixth reports, the Chinese share was clearly declining and that of Americans and Japanese rising. The 1993 figures just provided showed that trend to be continuing. He asked whether government policy accounted for the change or whether other factors were at work. Had the situation been modified since diplomatic relations had been established with the People's Republic of China? Although the resident foreign population in the Republic of Korea was quite small, it was of interest, since it was made up of a high and increasing proportion of Americans and Chinese, instead of immigrants from third world countries as had occurred elsewhere. Although the Americans and Chinese might never fall victim to discrimination themselves, their presence might lead to discrimination against others.
15. The population data included a figure for "other nationalities". Did such nationalities include the refugees from Indochina who had been housed in refugee camps? Had such refugees been resettled in other countries or had some been naturalized as Korean citizens? Although the fifth and sixth reports had given figures for stateless persons, the present report did not mention them. What had happened to them?
16. Paragraph 8 of the report stated that, like other international conventions ratified by the Government with the consent of the National Assembly, the Convention had become part of domestic law and could be invoked before the courts. That, however, did not exempt the Government from reviewing domestic legislation under article 2 (c) of the Convention. The need to incorporate provisions against racial discrimination in domestic law was particularly pressing at a time when a mounting tide of immigrants and refugees was giving rise to widespread xenophobia and discrimination in some countries. Perhaps the Republic of Korea might reassess its position in that light.
17. With regard to article 3 of the Convention, the Government of the Republic of Korea had to its credit adopted a clear stance against apartheid. In recent years there had been positive moves in South Africa towards the removal of apartheid. Had the Republic of Korea made any change in the measures set out in paragraph 19 of the report?
18. The report referred only briefly to article 4 of the Convention. The sixth report had merely stated that the principle of that article had already been embodied in various domestic laws without giving any details. It was to be hoped that particulars of the relevant legislation could be provided to show how article 4 was being implemented. Legislation was very important from the standpoint not only of penalizing but also of deterring racial discrimination. No country could guarantee that it would never experience racial discrimination. Although the Republic of Korea was ethnically homogenous to a degree found in few other countries, discrimination could still arise from differences in economic and social status or from differences between urban and rural areas. The point was therefore worthy of consideration.
19. Referring to article 5 of the Convention, the report listed the international instruments to which the Republic of Korea had recently become a party. Its accession to the International Labour Organisation and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights was especially significant in view of the ethnic homogeneity of the country and the small number of people of other races and nationalities.
20. A number of points remained to be clarified with regard to article 5. What was the minimum period of residence required of foreigners applying for naturalization and under what conditions could they apply? Were they subject to the same laws as Korean nationals and did they benefit from the same provisions with regard to inheritance and other factors? The increase in the number of trade unions had been mentioned in paragraph 27 of the report. Were foreigners eligible for membership, did the trade unions safeguard their legitimate rights and could they form their own trade unions? The minimum wage system had been mentioned in paragraph 28 of the report. Were the wages of foreign manual workers in accord with that system? Did foreign workers receive equal pay for equal work? Did they enjoy the same rights to medical and other social services as Korean nationals?
21. Paragraphs 30-31 of the report gave a clear description of the remedies and compensation available to victims of discrimination, as required under article 6 of the Convention. It was to be hoped that the principal articles of the Civil and Criminal Codes and the Codes of Civil and Criminal Procedure could be incorporated in the next report to give a better understanding of the position. Some indication as to the frequency of recourse to such remedies would be welcome, as would particulars of specific cases.
22. With regard to article 7 of the Convention, paragraph 33 of the report gave the numbers of schools for foreigners and the number of students registered in such schools. What were the respective numbers of primary and secondary schools? Were decisions relating to funding and selection of teaching materials made independently of the Government? Did the certificates issued by such schools have the same validity as those issued by others? Did the schools listed belong to expatriate communities or to individual foreigners? Since the Convention also had a preventive as well as a coercive function, it was imperative that it should be made known as widely as possible. Did the textbooks of schools at different levels contain such information? Close attention needed to be given to educating government officials and police at grass roots level, in view of their role in law enforcement. Were any such training schools or training courses available?
23. In conclusion, the political changes experienced by the Republic of Korea in recent years might well lead to the introduction of new legislation. It was hoped that the next report would provide information on the subject.
24. Mr WOLFRUM said that article 11 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea prohibited discrimination. However it did not specifically prohibit discrimination on racial grounds. Why was that so? Questions had been asked at earlier sessions as to the possibility of declaring a state of emergency. Since the Constitution and other provisions provided for the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms, it would be of interest to know under what conditions a state of emergency could be declared.
25. With regard to article 6 of the Convention, in addition to the information given in the report, he would like details of the structure of the judiciary and of the legal and administrative provisions governing the tenure of office, dismissal and disciplining of its members. How was the independence and impartiality of the judiciary guaranteed? Were there any free legal aid or advisory schemes and, if so, how did they operate? What was the status of the prosecutor? Was he subject to executive or judicial authority? What was his role and what guarantees were there of his independence? According to his information, freedom to communicate with a lawyer was somewhat restricted, a situation not strictly in conformity with article 6 of the Convention; he would be glad if that point could be clarified.
26. Paragraph 8 of the report stated that the Convention had the same effect as domestic law. He would like to know the exact significance of that statement. Did the rule of lex posteriori apply, namely, that a law made later in time might modify the effect of one made earlier? The same paragraph stated that the Convention could be invoked before the courts; some examples of cases would be helpful.
27. Paragraph 21 implied that there were no provisions against racial discrimination in the criminal law, presumably because the homogeneity of the population was felt to make such provisions unnecessary. However, a general recommendation of the Committee states that penal legislation under article 4 served a number of purposes. As Mr Song Shuhua had said, no State could assume it would escape discrimination. It should not be forgotten that such legislation often serves a preventive purpose. Although, as had been frequently mentioned, the Republic of Korea had a very homogenous population, it was dominated by regional influences. According to his information, most State officials came from the south-east of the country and complaints of discrimination had been made by the inhabitants of the south-western regions. He would like more details on that point, although he was fully aware that it was the present President's policy to attempt to eliminate such regionalism.
28. Mr de GOUTTES said the report contained some interesting information, although there were some inadequacies and some matters had been reported too briefly. No mention had been made of any new law to put the Convention into effect, nor of any complaint of racial discrimination. However, the Human Rights Committee, in considering the report of the Republic of Korea in July 1992, had expressed concern regarding violations of human rights, some of which were of interest to the present Committee. Admittedly, the Human Rights Committee had taken into account the state of relations with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, questions of national security and the fight against subversion, all of which continued to have a negative impact on human rights in the Republic of Korea.
29. He shared Mr. Wolfrum's concern regarding the absence of a specific reference to racial discrimination in article 11 of the Constitution and regarding the status and independence of the judiciary and the prosecutor, and the place of the Convention in domestic law. Article 6 (1) of the Constitution rendered the Convention equal but not superior to domestic law, thus opening up the possibility of conflict between the two instruments.
30. Paragraph 9 of the report stated that no complaint of racial discrimination had been brought before the court or the administrative authorities. Did that mean that no acts of racial discrimination occurred, or were citizens perhaps poorly informed of their rights or mistrusted the authorities to the point of being reluctant to complain? Was there any refusal on the part of the police, for example, to register complaints?
31. According to paragraph 31 of the report, complaints or legal proceedings could be brought against individuals for infringements of the law. It was not clear why the same did not apply to infringements committed by government agencies, which were dealt with in paragraph 30. The measures set out in that paragraph did not appear to have the same force as recourse to the courts.
32. As the Human Rights Committee had requested in 1992, he would like some information on the legal provisions governing the admission or expulsion of boat people. According to his information, persons from the south-western and less developed part of the country suffered from some discrimination, as did foreign workers from countries such as Bangladesh, China, Nepal, Pakistan and the Philippines. Difficulties and discrimination were also said to be experienced by some Chinese residents and Amerasian children.
33. In conclusion, he asked for information on the progress being made on the declaration under article 14 of the Convention mentioned in paragraph 20 of the report.
34. Mr. LECHUGA HEVIA, associating himself with the comments made by previous speakers, drew attention to reports that broad use was made of the National Security Law against the political opposition and, especially, against foreign workers. There were also indications that discrimination against Chinese workers had led to large-scale emigration of Chinese residents from the Republic of Korea. Did the reported decline in the number of Chinese residents refer to Taiwanese as well as Chinese workers from the People's Republic of China, and was any official distinction made between them, his impression being that the latter were less well treated.
35. Mr. GARVALOV expressed concern about the omission from the Constitution of any specific reference to racial and ethnic discrimination, and about the unclear status of the Convention vis-à-vis domestic law. He noted that the seventh periodic report differed from the sixth report in that it provided detailed information on the implementation of article 6 of the Convention but was less explicit in regard to articles 2, 4 and 5. With reference to paragraph 29 of the report, he would welcome information on judicial and administrative practices as opposed to constitutional and legislative provisions, which did not always provide adequate safeguards for the protection of individual human rights in practice. The question of the infringement of rights by government agencies should be clarified.
36. Reports of xenophobia in the Republic of Korea, an ethnically homogeneous society, prompted him to ask about the official position in that regard. In the context of the comments by other members about discrimination against foreigners and foreign workers, he asked whether, given the reportedly conservative tradition whereby women were economically, socially and legally subordinate to men, foreign women might not be more particularly subject to discrimination. In conclusion, he commended the Korean Government's continued cooperation with the Committee.
37. Mr. DIACONU said that, despite the Republic of Korea's ethnically homogeneous composition, its remarkable economic development threw it open to extensive exchanges with people of other origins and races, exposing it, if only potentially, to the dangers of racial discrimination and xenophobia. That explained the Committee's insistence on positive measures, particularly under article 4 of the Convention, to prevent discrimination, even if there was no apparent evidence of such phenomena. He further stressed the importance of clarifying the relationship between the status of the Convention in relation to domestic law, in order to ensure that the former prevailed whatever might be the provisions of domestic legislation.
38. On the subject of article 6 of the Convention, there seemed to be a different conception of remedies in the event of violations by public agencies and by individuals. Paragraph 31 (b) relating to civil lawsuits for compensation, for instance, referred only to individuals. The case of discriminatory administrative measures required clarification, especially in regard to the action taken by courts. Paragraph 30 (d) referred to a review procedure to determine the "constitutionality or legality" of such measures, but not to the practical consequences for the individuals involved.
39. Mr. FERRERO COSTA said that the Republic of Korea was a special case, having an ethnically homogeneous population with only a relatively small number of foreign residents; there were, however, some causes for concern. The conclusions of the Human Rights Committee on the report submitted by the Republic of Korea were equally applicable to the report submitted to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, i.e. it did not provide sufficient information on the practical implementation of the Convention or on the difficulties impeding implementation. The Government of that country should adopt political and legislative measures to ensure full implementation of the Convention and provide further information on the subject in its next report.
40. Certain concerns expressed by other Committee members were worth reiterating, namely, the omission of any reference to racial discrimination in article 11 of the Constitution; the need to clarify the status of the Convention in relation to domestic legislation; the necessity for the Republic of Korea, like all States parties, to implement article 4 of the Convention in full and to report on the matter; and the request for information on specific steps taken to give effect to the Government's reported intention to make the declaration provided for in under article 14 of the Convention.
41. He asked whether there was any national administrative institution competent to consider human rights questions, and, further, what was the current status and scope of implementation of the National Security Law. Information was also requested on alleged discrimination against Korean nationals from the south-western region of the country.
42. Although Japan was not a party to the Convention, there were reports of discrimination against Korean citizens in Japan, and he asked what treatment was accorded to Japanese nationals in the Republic of Korea. Finally, he would recommend that the Republic of Korea should consider submitting a core document on the implementation of human rights instruments.
43. Mr. BANTON said that, while the Republic of Korea was to be commended for its apparent resolve to assume its responsibilities under the Convention, further information was required. He hoped, for instance, that the next report would contain a description of the social position of children of Korean mothers and non-Korean fathers. Social attitudes or prejudices towards "anomalous" groups, however small those groups might be, were important in assessing the predisposition of a society to discrimination. Referring to the derogatory connotation of such words as "half-caste", he asked what specific terms were used to refer to children of mixed parentage and to their position in society.
44. In regard to paragraph 31 of the report and endorsing the remarks by Mr. de Gouttes on paragraph 31 (a), he said he hoped that the next report would provide further information on effective remedies. In order to avail themselves of a remedy, individuals must go through official channels; experience showed, however, that officials were often reluctant to record complaints, thus rendering the remedy ineffective. The remedy of filing a civil lawsuit for compensation, referred to in paragraph 31 (b), might similarly fail to be effective, since the cumbersome and expensive procedure involved might discourage individuals claiming to be victims of such incidents as being refused admission to a restaurant.
45. Mrs. SADIQ ALI, welcoming the dialogue with the Republic of Korea, asked what budgetary appropriation was set aside for measures to mitigate regional rivalries in the south-western region, especially in regard to employment, education and medical care. With reference to reports of discrimination against Amerasian children and foreign workers, she requested information on the status of foreign workers, and specifically whether they enjoyed official temporary residence status or whether they were illegally in the country as cheap labour. Was there any social discrimination or distinction between Chinese workers from Taipei and from the Peoples' Republic of China? Reports that social discrimination had caused many Chinese residents - presumably from the People's Republic of China - to emigrate since the 1970s suggested that a distinction was made between the two groups. In conclusion, she associated herself with the questions asked by other members.
46. Mr. van BOVEN, endorsing the comments made by previous speakers, placed particular emphasis on the apparent inadequacy of anti-discrimination legislation. He drew attention, in particular, to the mandatory character of article 4 of the Convention and to the Committee's General Recommendations VII and XV in that regard. Legislative measures were needed, even where there was no immediate problem of racial discrimination, for preventive as well as punitive purposes.
47. The Committee's General Recommendation XIII on the training of law enforcement officials was of particular relevance to the Republic of Korea because of the wide powers enjoyed by officials under the National Security Law and the potential danger of abuse of those powers. He hoped that the Korean Government would provide further information on those aspects of implementation in its next report.
48. At its previous session, the Committee had made a recommendation on creating national institutions to facilitate implementation of the Convention. States parties should be reminded by the Committee of the importance of doing so.
49. He joined other members of the Committee in welcoming the progress being made by the Government of the Republic of Korea towards making a declaration under article 14. He hoped that the declaration would be issued soon. He also noted with satisfaction that the Republic of Korea had ratified the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
50. He would like more information concerning discrimination against children of Korean mothers and foreign fathers, especially Amerasian children, and against foreign workers. He also hoped that in its next report, the Republic of Korea would provide more information on actual practice in ensuring adequate reparation under article 6 for damages suffered.
51. Mr. SHAHI said that, although the Republic of Korea had a large homogeneous population of some 43 million people, and only some 50,000 foreigners, there was nevertheless the possibility of racial discrimination against foreigners. He wondered how the Government would deal with instances of racial friction should they arise. Legislation to implement article 4 of the Convention was needed, and he hoped that it would be reflected in the country's next report.
52. He wished to emphasize the importance of national human rights commissions and ombudsmen in providing a remedy in cases of racial discrimination and in monitoring implementation of the Convention and other human rights treaties. He therefore hoped that the Government of the Republic of Korea would set up a national human rights commission.
53. He looked forward to seeing the declaration under article 14 of the Convention. The making of that declaration should not present any difficulties for the Republic of Korea, given the homogeneity of its population. It would provide better protection for foreigners.
54. He supported Mr. Banton's remarks on children of mixed marriages, and would like to know whether they were ostracized or regarded as having a lower status, particularly as they might be in lower-paid employment.
55. The CHAIRMAN said he welcomed the statement in paragraph 22 of the report that a declaration under article 14 was being prepared. That would help to fulfil the requirements of the Convention, particularly in regard to the protection of foreign workers. With regard to paragraph 31 (c) of the report, he asked how the provisions for State aid for victims of crime would apply in cases of racial discrimination. More information was needed on the implementation of article 7, particularly in relation to promotion of human rights, understanding and tolerance.
56. Mr. MOON Bong Joo (Republic of Korea), replying to questions asked by members of the Committee, said that the decrease in the number of Chinese in the Republic of Korea between 1987 and 1991, to which the Country Rapporteur had referred, related to the period prior to the normalization of relations with the People's Republic of China. The Chinese in question had been citizens of what was now called Taipei. The decrease was minor and had been partly due to 74 people of Chinese origin being naturalized in 1991. Since 1992, the number of Chinese from Taipei had increased slightly. Since normalization of relations with the People's Republic of China in August 1992, 5,000 citizens of that country had come to Korea, a number that was expected to increase with the expansion in cultural and economic relations. The Government of the Republic of Korea had never made any distinction between Chinese from the People's Republic of China and Chinese from Taipei.
57. On the question of Indo-Chinese refugees, the Government had been cooperating with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to provide humanitarian aid in the form of temporary landing permits, food and shelter until they could be resettled in their country of final destination or a third country. Of the 1,400 refugees in temporary shelter in recent years, almost all had now been resettled, and it was expected that the process would be completed by the end of 1993.
58. The category of "other nationalities" in the list of foreign nationals residing in Korea currently consisted of 909 Canadians, 770 British, 710 Germans, 573 Thais, 520 Australians, 503 French, 488 Indonesians, 413 Indians and less than 300 people of other nationalities.
59. The Government's opposition to apartheid did not need to be reiterated. In the previous year, it had donated $200,000 to the Africa Fund for the purpose of abolishing apartheid, bringing its total contribution to $1 million. Recognizing the progress of the South African Government in eliminating apartheid, the Republic of Korea had lifted economic sanctions against South Africa except for the ban on arms, nuclear technology and oil.
60. With regard to article 4 of the Convention, as stated in paragraphs 8 and 9 of the report, the Government of the Republic of Korea had incorporated the Convention in Korean law, so that it was directly applicable and could be invoked in Korean courts. In the absence of any complaints of racial discrimination, the measures taken would seem to be working satisfactorily. He assured the Committee that in the event of problems of racial discrimination arising, the Government would strengthen protective measures as necessary.
61. He was unable to say when the declaration under article 14 would be made, since the Government was still deliberating on the matter.
62. With regard to naturalization requirements, under the Korean Nationality Act, foreigners could become citizens of the Republic of Korea if they had resided in the country for five years, were over 20 years of age, had a record of good behaviour, were economically self-sufficient and were willing to renounce their previous nationality within six months of being granted Korean citizenship. Those requirements could be reduced or waived where either the mother or father of the applicant was a Korean citizen, or where the applicant married a Korean citizen or had rendered special service to the Republic of Korea. Naturalized citizens had the same rights and obligations as other Korean citizens, including the requirement for men to do military service.
63. On the question of property rights, a foreigner marrying a national of the Republic of Korea could own property on the same basis as other nationals of the Republic. A person who was not a Korean national might own property, subject to the existence of a policy of reciprocity in the State of which he was a national. Foreign workers had the same rights as Korean workers, provided that they were legally entitled to work, i.e. were registered in accordance with immigration laws. Those rights included the right to membership of a trade union and to a minimum wage, health care and social services.
64. Concerning schools for foreign nationals, he did not have a breakdown between primary and secondary schools, but as many such schools were comprehensive, they covered both primary and secondary levels. Under Korean law, foreign communities could establish their own schools, but the Government did not provide funding. There was no discrimination against foreign schools in relation to diplomas awarded, since all schools were evaluated in accordance with uniform standards.
65. Schools played an important role in promoting human rights and educating people about those rights. For example, each year in December, they observed human rights week. The Government of the Republic of Korea recognized the importance of educating law enforcement officers in human rights standards and a training programme for police and other law enforcement officers was in operation.
66. The fact that most officials came from south-eastern Korea reflected the fact that the population of that region was three times greater than that of the south-western region. There was no discrimination in the country on the basis of regionalism.
67. While it was true that article 11 of the Constitution did not specifically mention racial discrimination, the point was covered by article 37 of the Constitution, which stated that the freedoms and rights of citizens "shall not be neglected on the grounds that they are not enumerated in the Constitution".
68. He would transmit the Committee's comments to his Government, particularly those relating to article 4, to national human rights institutions and to the incorporation of the prohibition of racial discrimination in the Constitution.
69. The Republic of Korea was irrevocably committed to the cause of human rights. Its new President was an ardent champion of human rights, firmly believing that respect for the dignity of individuals was necessary for the betterment of society as a whole. To that end, new goals were being set and new programmes developed. The next report would reflect those developments.
70. Mr. GARVALOV said he was grateful to the representative of the Republic of Korea for his explanations, and looked forward to receiving the next report. However, he found it difficult to accept the explanation for the lack of any specific provision on racial discrimination in the Constitution. He was not sure that article 37 would cover the omission.
71. Mr. van BOVEN said he was also grateful to the representative of the Republic of Korea. The information provided was not yet complete, but he was confident that the Government of the Republic of Korea would examine the issues raised and reflect them in the next report. On the question of the declaration under article 14, he hoped that when the representative of the Republic of Korea had said the matter was being deliberated, he had meant that the Government was still in the process of making the decision, as indicated in paragraph 22 of the report. In other words, the Government had already taken a decision of principle to make a declaration.
72. Mr. WOLFRUM, said that while he was grateful for the information given by the representative of the Republic of Korea, he did not find the explanation relating to article 4 satisfactory, since it fell short of the requirements of the Convention, the enactment of specific legislation being mandatory under that article. The incorporation of the Convention in domestic law was not sufficient.
73. Mr. RECHETOV commended the presentation of the report by the representative of the Republic of Korea. He was convinced that there was no serious racial intolerance in Korea, since there were no ethnic minorities and the problem did not therefore arise. The Committee's aim should, however, be to ensure that measures were taken in advance to prevent the emergence of problems. It was, therefore, mandatory for the basic requirements of the Convention to be reflected in domestic law, with a view to preventing the occurrence of conflicts.
74. The CHAIRMAN said that, in the absence of any further comments, the Committee had concluded the first part of its consideration of the report of the Republic of Korea. He thanked the representatives of that country for their cooperation during the consideration of its report.
75. Mr. Moon Bong Joo and Mr. Cho Hyun Dong (Republic of Korea) withdrew.
WORLD CONFERENCE ON HUMAN RIGHTS (agenda item 8) (A/CONF.157/23)
76. Mr. SHAHI, reporting on the World Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna from 14 to 25 June 1993, drew attention to the text of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (A/CONF.157/23). The Conference had been so large as to be somewhat unwieldy, and it had been difficult to follow all the different debates on human rights issues that had been taking place simultaneously. The difficulty over arriving at a final text had been the result of contradictions between the three basic documents adopted by the three regional meetings, namely the Tunis Declaration by the African group, the San José Declaration by the Latin American group and the Bangkok Declaration by the Asian group. The Bangkok Declaration had given rise to considerable controversy, since it argued that concern for individual rights should be balanced by concern for the collective rights of the community and society, and that in evaluating a country's situation, historical, social and cultural factors should be taken into account. That argument had given rise to fears that acceptance of human rights instruments generally might be eroded if States were permitted to qualify their obligations by taking account of such factors. Fortunately, those fears had proved groundless, and a compromise had been reached to the effect that no State could invoke cultural differences as grounds for derogating from its responsibilities for fulfilling obligations undertaken. That strong reaffirmation of the duty of States to fulfil their treaty obligations had served to clear the air.
77. With regard to matters specifically of concern to the Committee, he drew attention to the section of the text dealing with racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and other forms of intolerance (section II, paras. 19 to 24).
78. There had been unanimous agreement at the Conference that the resources of the Centre for Human Rights should be greatly increased. It had even been proposed that the Centre's budget should be doubled, but that proposal had been opposed, particularly by the Asian group, which had feared that such a step would reduce the level of United Nations funding available for other activities. The question had therefore been referred for consideration by the General Assembly at its forty-eighth session. It had also been proposed that a United Nations high commissioner for human rights should be appointed, but that too had been opposed by the Asian group, on the grounds that it might lead to undue interference in the internal affairs of States. A mandate for the commissioner had been proposed, but that in turn had aroused misgivings, and in the end the matter had been referred to the General Assembly.
79. Many delegations had stressed that implementation of treaty obligations should be impartial and non-selective: that concern was reflected in section I, paragraph 32, of the text. The importance of setting up international human rights institutions, and the vital role of non-governmental organizations in promoting and protecting human rights at national, regional and international levels had also been emphasized. The Conference had condemned torture, cruel and unusual punishment, and arbitrary executions, but no concrete suggestions had emerged as to how existing machinery could be strengthened to eliminate such practices. While it had been suggested that the proposed commissioner for human rights would coordinate the activities of the various United Nations mechanisms, the question of how he would be able to act in cases of massive human rights violations had not been touched on.
80. He paid a tribute to the Secretary-General of the Conference and his team for their success in the formidable task of synthesizing three very disparate texts. The Declaration had been a landmark in human rights, and representatives of treaty bodies concerned with the rights of the child, torture, and discrimination against women, had expressed great satisfaction at what had been achieved.
81. He recalled that, at the fourth meeting of the Preparatory Committee, representatives of treaty bodies had recommended that grave and massive violations of human rights should be brought to the attention of the Security Council through the Secretary-General. Attempts to include such a recommendation in the final text of the Declaration, had been unsuccessful, due to the suspicion on the part of some countries that Security Council action would constitute interference and would be applied selectively. That question therefore remained unsolved: so far the Security Council had shown itself reluctant to address the question of how to deal with genocide and ethnic cleansing, and no machinery yet existed to punish those responsible. Many delegations had been averse to investing any human rights organ of the United Nations with powers to intervene in human rights situations.
82. There had at one point been fears that the Conference would be wrecked by the insistence of several delegations, particularly those of the Islamic Conference, that there should be a special declaration on Bosnia. Such a declaration had been adamantly opposed by the western nations, on the grounds that it had already been agreed that no country's specific situation should be discussed, and that a declaration on Bosnia would lead to similar declarations on Angola and Palestine. However, a declaration on Bosnia had eventually been adopted by 88 votes to 1, and the Conference had ended on a positive note.
83. In retrospect, he felt that the Conference had been a worthwhile exercise. Although expectations had initially not been high, the final outcome had been constructive, with non-governmental organizations in particular playing a very active role.
84. Mr. BANTON, drawing attention to a paper containing comments on the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action which he had prepared and circulated, said it was his impression that some treaty bodies had more occasion than others to be satisfied with the outcome of the Conference. He would have liked to see in the Declaration a statement of the need for coordinated policies making use of indicators relevant to all treaty bodies, and not merely economic and social indicators. He would also have liked to have seen a statement of the need for legislation prohibiting anything which had a discriminatory effect.
85. He suggested that the Committee might wish to consider his paper at a later stage, when it took up the question of the second and third decades.
86. Mr. SHAHI pointed out that representatives of treaty bodies had been handicapped at the Conference because they had been relegated to observer status, and hence could not introduce their own amendments to the text of the Declaration. At crucial moments, when they could have intervened effectively, they had been prevented from making any contribution. That problem was something which should be borne in mind for the future.
87. Mr. GARVALOV, while thanking Mr. Shahi for his useful explanation, said he fully shared the concerns expressed by Mr. Banton. Although it was stated in paragraph 19 of section II of the document that the elimination of racism and racial discrimination was a primary objective for the international community, no mention was made anywhere of the Committee. Although there were references in the text to other conventions, notably the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, the only reference to the convention with which the Committee was concerned was in paragraph 21, and then only in regard to the declaration under article 14.
88. The Conference had lost a valuable opportunity of defining its objectives in regard to the status of minorities. While the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities was indeed an important document, there was now a definite trend in European regional organizations towards recognizing rights other than those covered by that declaration, specifically collective rights. That question, which involved a clash of political interests, was an important one and should be tackled.
89. He drew particular attention to paragraph 4 of section II, which recommended that the Secretary-General, in consultation with treaty bodies, should consider opening a dialogue with States not having acceded to human rights treaties. He himself had often made that recommendation to the Committee, noting that there were a few very conspicuous absences among States parties to the Convention.
90. Mr. DIACONU also thanked Mr. Shahi for giving the Committee an inside view of proceedings at the Conference, and for explaining how it had come about that the text finally adopted represented something of a compromise.
91. A number of valuable points were made in the document. Paragraph 7 of section I made clear that the protection of human rights should be seen in the context of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and international law, and paragraph 2 emphasized that self-determination should not be construed as encouraging any action which would impair the territorial integrity of sovereign States. At the same time, the text stressed that protection of human rights was a legitimate concern of the international community. Paragraph 8 stated that democracy, development and respect for human rights were interdependent.
92. He did not share the dissatisfaction of earlier speakers with what the document had to say on racism and racial discrimination: in fact, paragraph 19 of section II declared that the elimination of those evils should be a primary objective of the international community, and paragraph 20 urged Governments to take immediate measures to prevent and combat manifestations of them. Particular importance was also attached to intolerance based on religion, and the Committee should return to that issue, as well as to measures for combating ethnic cleansing.
93. It was true that where minorities were concerned, paragraph 26 of section II focused attention on the Declaration. However, that was currently the most advanced statement on the issue, and other instruments, notably the Document of the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE, did not go any further into political aspects such as the matter of collective rights. The text, in particular, the section relating to indigenous people (paras. 28 to 32 of section II) and that relating to migrant workers (paras. 33 to 35) should therefore serve as a basic document for the Committee's work.