A/HRC/22/57 Republic of Korea, without a vote, reflecting the overwhelming and the steadily growing number of countries concerned about the human rights situation in the country. 6 Also for the first time, on 20 December 2012, the General Assembly adopted its resolution on the Democratic People‟s Republic of Korea, without a vote, expressing its deep concern at the significant persistent deterioration of the human rights situation in the Democratic People‟s Republic of Korea despite the succession of leadership. 7 13. Both Special Rapporteurs who have held this mandate have recognized the systematic nature of the violations inflicted upon the population in the Democratic People‟s Republic of Korea. In 2012, in his report to the General Assembly, the Special Rapporteur was “disconcerted by the recent declaration by Kim Jong Un that his first, second and third priorities were to strengthen the military” and noted that “slow economic growth coupled with a “military first” policy will be detrimental to the welfare of the people of the Democratic People‟s Republic of Korea”.8 The former Special Rapporteur had expressed similar concerns. In 2005, he underlined that “the non-democratic nature of the power base in the Democratic People‟s Republic of Korea impedes the enjoyment of human rights substantially, while the State-centric focus of the national authorities aimed at ensuring survival of the regime at the top under the umbrella of the so-called “collective” rights and national sovereignty, hampers the realization of human rights”.9 In 2010, he noted, “the human rights situation in the Democratic People‟s Republic of Korea can be described as sui generis (in its own category), given the multiple particularities and anomalies that abound. Simply put, there are many instances of human rights violations which are both harrowing and horrific”.10 14. Both Special Rapporteurs have also raised the question of whether crimes against humanity are being committed in the Democratic People‟s Republic of Korea. In 2007, the Special Rapporteur flagged a study that claimed that the “misdeeds of the authorities are tantamount to crimes against humanity, fulfilling the conditions of intent and widespread systematic attacks on civilian population”.11 He went on to suggest that beyond State responsibility, individual criminal responsibility “may ensue from the commission of crimes against humanity”.12 In 2008, the Special Rapporteur stated that “there may also be avenues for mobilizing action for individual criminal responsibility, inspired by the presence of the International Criminal Court, where the local system is unable or unwilling to act to make individuals accountable for individual crimes”.13 The Special Rapporteur concluded by affirming that “while much depends upon global-local political will to test the desire for transparency and responsibility ... it is important to underline the long-standing systematic natures of human rights transgressions in the country which are highly visible, substantial and exponential”.14 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 In 2008 Human Rights Council resolution 7/15 was adopted with 22 votes in favour, 7 against and 18 abstentions; in 2009 resolution 10/16 was adopted with 26 votes in favour, 6 against and 15 abstentions; in 2010 resolution 13/14 was adopted with 28 votes in favour, 5 against and 13 abstentions; in 2011 resolution 16/8 was adopted with 30 votes in favour, 3 against and 11 abstentions. General Assembly resolution 67/181. A/67/370, para. 50. A/60/306, para. 9. A/HRC/13/47, para. 86. A/HRC/4/15, para. 40 flagged a study entitled, “Failure to Protect: A Call for the UN Security Council to Act in North Korea”, United States Committee for Human Rights in North Korea, Washington, 2006. A/HRC/4/15, para. 41. A/HRC/7/20, para. 45. A/HRC/7/20, para 48. 7