A/61/PV.105 General Assembly

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of sub-item (h) of agenda item 106.

If there is no proposal under rule 66 of the rules of procedure, I shall take it that the General Assembly decides not to discuss the report of the Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee) which is before the Assembly today. It was so decided.

Statements will therefore be limited to explanations of vote. The positions of delegations regarding the recommendations of the Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee) have been made clear in the Committee and are reflected in the relevant official records. May I remind members that, under paragraph 7 of decision 34/401, the General Assembly agreed that “When the same draft resolution is considered in a Main Committee and in plenary meeting, a delegation should, as far as possible, explain its vote only once, that is, either in the Committee or in plenary meeting unless that delegation’s vote in plenary meeting is different from its vote in the Committee.” May I also remind delegations that, also in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats. Before we begin to take action on the recommendations contained in the report of the Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee), I should like to advise representatives that we are going to proceed to take a decision in the same manner as was done in the Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee), unless notified otherwise in advance. The General Assembly has before it two draft resolutions recommended by the Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee) in paragraph 13 of its report. We will now take a decision on draft resolutions I and II. Draft resolution I is entitled “Comprehensive review of the whole question of peacekeeping operations in all their aspects”. The Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee) adopted draft resolution I without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

Draft resolution II is entitled “Comprehensive review of a strategy to eliminate future sexual exploitation and abuse in United Nations peacekeeping operations”. The Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee) adopted draft resolution II without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Before proceeding further, I should like to draw the attention of Members to paragraph 71 of the report of the Special Committee on Peacekeeping contained in document A/61/19 (Part II). In accordance with resolution 61/291 that was just adopted by the General Assembly, endorsing paragraphs 15 to 232 of the report, I have been invited to “to convene, at the earliest possible date during the sixty-first session of the General Assembly and with the participation of all Member States, an ad hoc open-ended working group on assistance and support to victims of sexual exploitation and abuse, to consider the draft United Nations policy statement and draft United Nations comprehensive strategy with a view to reporting, before the end of the sixty-first session, to the Assembly the results of the working group” (A/61/19 (Part II), para. 71). In that connection, I should like to inform members that details on the chairmanship and programme of work of the ad hoc Open-Ended Working Group will be communicated to them shortly. The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 33.

The delegation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had already made clear before the General Committee on 20 July the background of its request for the inclusion on the agenda of the General Assembly at its sixty-first session of an additional item entitled “Contemporary forms of xenophobia” to be discussed in the context of the maintenance of international peace and security. Nevertheless, as this issue has been brought to the attention of the General Assembly, my delegation would like to reiterate the background for the better understanding of other delegations present here. It is because the Japanese suppression of Koreans and their organization has become ever more intolerable and reckless that we could not but request the inclusion of an additional item at this late stage of the sixty-first session of the General Assembly. Today in Japan, evil-minded calls and e-mails have been directed one after another to Korean families, schools and their organization — the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan (Chongryon) — threatening that “we will strike you with Molotov cocktails and kill you all. Go back to Korea!” Korean students and vulnerable girls in national dress are constantly exposed to indiscriminate and harsh words, violence and terror on their way to and from school. Forced searches, intimidation, explosions, the use of terror, arrests and detentions of Koreans, their families and the Korean organization are daily occurrences. The inhuman acts of the Japanese authorities against Koreans and the Chongryon have become ever more intolerable and insidious this year. From the outset of this year, the Japanese authorities set their media in motion to float various kinds of false reports aimed at tarnishing the image of the Chongryon in a bid to frantically inspire bitterness towards the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Chongryon in its society. At the same time, the director of the Japanese national police agency sent its police officers into a wholesale repressive campaign, persecuting and arresting officials of the Chongryon and Koreans in Japan and undertaking other actions. Although those officers are under the obligation to protect the Koreans’ rights and activities, the police have been tasked with implementing stepped-up pressure on North Korea. It is the job of the national police agency of Japan to force North Korea to come out in favour of negotiations with Japan. The Japanese police authorities have conducted forced searches of numerous Chongryon-related facilities, including the headquarters of Chongryon and Korean schools, blindly assaulting and arresting Koreans with the support of heavily-armed police units and armed vehicles. They undertook four hours of forcible search of small office rooms of about 10 square metres in a Korean printing house, deploying a large force of more than 300 armed police officers, 15 large armoured buses and 42 patrol cars. Even more intolerable is that they arrested a businessman in hospital, who developed a cerebral infarction during the search before being carried there. The police officers took hold of Koreans protesting the forced search and threw them into the street like parcels. They rushed into ladies’ dressing rooms and confiscated all documents, including personal diaries. The Japanese authorities went even further, forcing Chongryon to sell the land and the building housing its headquarters in an evil-minded attempt to exterminate Chongryon at any cost. That represents nothing but wanton infringement upon the sovereignty of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, which no prior regime of Japan had ever dared to do. It is a move to physically annihilate the centre of activities of Korean residents in Japan and the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan, which defends the democratic national rights of Koreans in Japan, and to stamp out the activities of the General Association and Koreans in Japan. The Chongryon is a legitimate overseas compatriots’ organization of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea whose mission is to protect the democratic national rights of the direct victims of the criminal drafting of Koreans by Japan in the past and of Koreans in Japan today, their descendants. The Japanese authorities paint the criminal action taken against Chongryon as an execution of law and a mere business issue related to the collection of bonds, but this is a political plot and criminal move to deprive Chongryon of the centre of its activities and to destroy it at any cost. But nothing they do can negate these hard facts. Such repression of Korans by Japanese authorities is a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and all major international human rights instruments, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which stipulates universal respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion. Despite all those facts, Japan has attempted in every way to block the inclusion of the suggested additional item out of fear of having its crimes revealed before the international community. We will continue at the United Nations and all other international forums to call on and question Japan for its politically motivated suppression of Chongryon and Koreans in Japan, unless Japan puts an end to it.

I call on the representative of Japan.

Japan supports the outcome of the General Committee’s decision on 20 July not to include an item entitled “Contemporary forms of xenophobia” in the new agenda of the General Assembly. That decision was unanimous. I would like to state the following in reply to what was referred to by the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in order to make our stance and position clear. All the allegations made by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea distort the facts of events. The issues raised are by no means instances of xenophobia, as claimed by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, but are the internal judicial, economic and other affairs of Japan and do not in any way constitute a basis for deliberation in the General Assembly. With regard to the allegations made by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea concerning the measures taken by the Japanese side, I would like to state the following. On 25 April 2007, Japanese police conducted a search of a subsidiary organization of the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan, located in the Korean press hall, in order to collect evidence related to the suspected abduction case. Before the search was conducted, Japanese police obtained a search warrant from the appropriate court. Japanese police searched the building legally and properly. They took no illegal action of any kind and engaged in no violence or threats. Based on past experiences, riot police units, buses and patrol cars were deployed as necessary protection, since illegal physical obstructions that make appropriate searches impossible are sometimes encountered. The credit unions in Japan affiliated with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea are domestic financial institutions established under Japanese law for the purpose of providing banking services to Korean residents in Japan. Between 1997 and 2001, 16 of those credit unions declared bankruptcy due to a large number of non-performing loans that were made, inter alia, to the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan. In order to protect the bona fide depositories of those credit unions facing bankruptcy, the Japanese authorities spent more than 1.3 trillion yen — that is, approximately $11 billion — in Government funds on a non-discriminatory basis. As part of recovery measures, the Resolution and Collection Corporation (RCC), a corporation established by a public organization to collect non- performing loans of bankrupt financial institutions in Japan, purchased the non-performing assets of the bankrupt credit unions affiliated with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, using public funds. While other efforts were made to recover the enormous amount of Government funds that were injected into the credit unions affiliated with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, this was carried out in exactly the same manner as for any other bankrupt domestic financial institution. Among the non- performing assets of the bankrupt credit unions affiliated with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, there were loans to the General Association, which the General Association formally acknowledged as debt incurred by loan contracts in an amount totalling approximately 63 billion yen — that is, approximately $530 million. In November 2005, the RCC initiated a lawsuit against the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan, seeking repayment of loans in Tokyo district court in the context of its debt- recovery measures. In June 2007, the court handed down a judgement calling for the repayment of the approximately 63 billion yen in loans. The General Association did not appeal that judgement to a higher court. Up to the time that the judgement was delivered, the RCC continued consultations with the General Association regarding payment of the debts, but the General Association indicated its intention to pay only a very small part of the total. In the circumstances, the RCC had no choice but to file a petition to auction off the building and land belonging to the General Association, in accordance with the normal required legal procedures, on 25 June 2007. It is the regular practice of the RCC to file a petition to auction off real estate as a means of collecting non-performing loans that it has purchased from other bankrupt financial institutions in Japan. The petition to auction the building and land owned by the General Association was for the purpose of collecting debt and not for any political or diplomatic purpose. With regard to the other allegations made by the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, I would like to state the following. The Government of Japan has taken measures to ensure that Korean residents in Japan lead normal lives, including by granting them the appropriate legal status for remaining in Japan and improving conditions that affect their lives. The constitution of Japan guarantees equality before the law without discrimination of any kind. Based on that principle, Japan has striven to realize a society free from all forms of discrimination, including racial and ethnic discrimination, in the 60 years since the end of the Second World War. The Government of Japan has acceded to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and other major international human rights instruments and covenants and has been making sincere efforts for their implementation. The Government of Japan is proactively engaged in the activities of a variety of United Nations forums aimed at the elimination of racial discrimination. As mentioned previously, the statement made by the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is entirely groundless, and we cannot accept it. On the other hand, however, the head of the delegation to the Six-Party Talks held in Beijing from 18 to 20 July 2007 recognized the importance of achieving progress in all areas, and it was therefore decided that all five working groups, including one on the normalization of relations between Japan and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, should be convened before the end of August. During the meeting of the heads of the delegations of Japan and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, at the time of the Six-Party Talks, views were exchanged on the Talks and the relationship between Japan and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. While the two sides recognized that challenges remained in both areas, they agreed that further cooperative efforts should be made to overcome them. On the basis of that understanding, the Government of Japan would like to make sincere efforts to exchange views with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in the second meeting of the working group on the normalization of relations between Japan and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, to be convened before the end of August. Also, we strongly hope that relations between Japan and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea will move forward, and we believe this is possible if there is a sincere response from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to the questions that separate Japan and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea at present, including the matter of the abductions.

With respect to paragraph 1 of the report of the General Committee contained in document A/61/250/Add.4, the General Committee decided to recommend that an additional item entitled “Contemporary forms of xenophobia” not be included in the agenda of the sixty-first session. May I take it that the General Assembly approves that recommendation?

Two representatives have requested to speak in exercise of the right of reply. May I remind members that, in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, statements in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and to five minutes for the second intervention and should be made by delegations from their seats.

My delegation closely followed the statement made by the representative of Japan. He mentioned non-discrimination in dealing with forcing the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan to sell its building and land. I would simply like to cite one example of how there is discrimination against other nationals, in particular Koreans, in Japan. The Resolution and Collection Corporation bought bad bonds to the tune of 4,004.1 billion yen by spending 353.3 billion yen from 1999 to 2005. That means that Japanese businesses and enterprises redeemed those bonds at a rate as low as 8.8 per cent. The Corporation, however, pressured the Korean organization Chongryon to redeem 100 per cent of the debt of the hall of the headquarters of Chongryon to it — and to add annual interest of 5 per cent to the payments. No matter how nicely the Japanese representative tried to portray the criminal action of suppressing Koreans in Japan and their organization, and of usurping Chongryon’s headquarters building as carrying out the law or as a mere business matter related to the collection of bonds, Japan cannot deny the fact that the terrorism campaign sweeping Japan is the product of a premeditated plot and its direct instructions to realize its political ambitions.

I must take the floor once again because of the groundless allegations that have been made by the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. As I already stated in my intervention, this is a business issue. The bankruptcy of the Korean credit union affiliated with the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan did not involve discriminatory or different treatment or segregation, because the Japanese bank that went bankrupt during the same period had to pay back on the same conditions. That is exactly the economic basis upon which we are working in Japan and possibly elsewhere in the world. Moreover, we have asked the Japanese district court to rule on this issue, and we have received approval from the court. Therefore, economic activities in Japan have a non-discriminatory nature. If a bank, credit union, association or organization has a debt, it must be paid back. That was not the case, so legal measures were taken. That is a very simple fact. In addition, we cannot accept the words used by the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea characterizing this kind of action as terrorism. That cannot be tolerated. Such things should not be used in general remarks in the General Assembly without there being any grounds. I would like to draw attention to the fact that it is inappropriate for such a statement to be made repeatedly by the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, including in the General Committee. We cannot tolerate it. The fact is that the measures taken by the Japanese side to search the General Association for further evidence related to the abduction of Japanese citizens by persons affiliated with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea were necessary in order to save the lives of Japanese nationals. That is, of course, a country’s right and obligation. The second case is, as I stated, a matter of purely economic activities. I do not have to repeat that once again. It should be understood in that way and not interpreted in a distorted manner. I shall stop here. I hope that I have made myself, and the position of Japan, clear to all members.