A/HRC/16/58 117 recommendations, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea will inevitably be seen as failing to use the opportunity of the universal periodic review to address the serious human rights violations occurring in the country. Irrespective of the stance of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Special Rapporteur will continue to look into some of the key recommendations and conclusions of the universal periodic review and the possibilities for follow-up. 43. The Special Rapporteur joins a number of actors in calling on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to become a signatory to the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and its Optional Protocol, the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. E. Legal reforms within the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea 44. With regards to reform of the country’s legal framework, the Special Rapporteur suggests that a good way forward would be to begin identifying some of the provisions in the legal instruments of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea that need to be aligned with the international human rights instruments. For instance, the legal provision under the Penal Code allowing capital punishment for many ordinary criminal offences, in addition to the previous five major categories in the Penal Code, is one such area where the legal reform process could begin. Currently, after the revision of the Penal Code in 2007, there are 28 articles that stipulate capital punishment for crimes, many of which are ordinary crimes.21 In addition to this, the Government should abolish public execution in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The Special Rapporteur has read with interest the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s response to concerns raised during the universal periodic review regarding public execution. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has tried to justify public execution by stating that such executions are carried out upon request from family members. The Special Rapporteur would like to make it clear at the outset that there is no justification for public execution, be it with or without request from families concerned. 45. The conclusions and recommendations of the universal periodic review have pointed to different provisions of the law that need amendment to meet international standards. These are some of the measures that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea could commence by adopting, which would demonstrate genuine interest on its part to address the human rights situation in the country. It is also an apt opportunity for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to allow both the Special Rapporteur and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to engage and provide expert assistance and advice in the reform process. F. Freedom of opinion and expression 46. The Special Rapporteur notes with concern that there seems to be continued Government imposition of restrictions on the media and punishment of any form of association and expression that is deemed hostile towards the Government. There are no known independent opposition political parties or NGOs in the country. Independent media, the liberty to run NGOs and access to international reporters, which are currently nonexistent in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, are all essential in an open society. 21 White Paper on Human Rights in North Korea, p. 72. 11