1. T HE NHRCK, WHOSE ADVOCATOR ? - Korean House for International Solidarity

2. D ETERIORATING HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN K OREA

3. T HE P ARK G EUN - HYE ADMINISTARTION, SUPPRESSING POLITICAL RIGHTS AS WELL AS CIVIL RIGHTS The National Intelligence Service (NIS)’s illegal intervention in the presidential election The so-called an insurrection conspiracy case against members of the Unified Progressive Party The You Oh-seong espionage case and relevant scandals of fabricated documents by the NIS

4. T HE UN S PECIAL R APPORTEUR ON H UMAN R IGHTS D EFENDERS ’ REPORT ON K OREA The UN Special Rapporteur raised concerns on human rights situation in Korea, in particulary in terms of the right to freedom of expression The SR also showed concern for the lack of confidence and cooperation between the NHRCK and civil society in Korea. She also recommended the NHRCK to put their best effort into recovering the faith and to become a strong, independent institution

5. T HE NHRCK ISSUED A FABRICATED COMMUNICATION AT THE UN H UMAN R IGHTS C OUNCIL IN F EBRUARY The NHRCK denied every suggestion presented by the UN Special Rapporteur on HRDs In particular, the NHRCK wrongly accused the disability rights defenders for using physical power against the staff of the NHRCK during the sit-in protest, arguing that “since staging a sit-in protest in the office area of a state organ is an illegal act,” “partical restriction of the access sion of the sit-in protest was inevitable.”

6. R AGED CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS IN K OREA ON THE RESPONSE OF THE NHRCK The NHRCK Watch (a network of 86 Korean NGOs) along with other civil society organizations and human rights advocate organizations issued a statement condemning the NHRCK’s communication at the UN HR Council on March 11, 2014 “The National Human Rights Commission of Korea insults disability rights defenders with fabricated report at the UN Human Rights Council: in condemnation of the NHRCK that submitted a fabricated communication to the Human Rights Council”

7. T HE ICC-SCA’ S A CCREDITATION REVIEW OF THE NHRCK At the March 2014 session, the ICC-SCA recommended the deferral of the NHRCK’s re- accreditation. The reason for deferral was the lack of transparency in the staff’s selection and appointment process, lack of diversity guarantee, and lack of immunity provisions for the members of the NHRCK. The NHRCK had received Status A in 2004 and 2008.

8. T HE NHRCK’ S RESPONSE TO THE DECISION On April 5, the NHRCK posted its explanation on its official website. In the explanation, the NHRCK argued that “because all of these recommendations have to do with legal amendments, the NHRCK does not have the power to independently solve them,” while trying to underevaluate the significance of the deferral, saying the decision is just in line with the trend of the ICC-SCA, strengthening the re-accreditation process.

9. L ONG HISTORY OF THE DETERIORATING NHRCK SINCE THE APPOINTMENT OF M R. H YUN AS THE CHAIRPERSON IN 2009 The NHRCK Chairperson Hyun Byeong-cheol with no backgroud and experience in HR On January 6, 2008, the Presidential Transition Committee recommended to place the NHRCK under the direct control of the president –the UNHCHR Loise Arbour transmitted a letter to the Korean government, expressing her concern over this recommendation At the ICC-SCA’s 2008 accreditation, the NHRCK was recommended to improve the same factors such as transparency and diversity of its staff selection and appointment On July 31, 2009, the Asian Human Rights Commission asked the ICC-SCA to degrade the NHRCK’s status from A to B On May 17, 2010, the UN SR on Freedom of Expression criticized the selection and appointment process of the NHRCK’s staff

10. On July 15, 2012,the Amnesty International raised concerns on the independence and fairness of the NHRCK On June 6, 2013, the UN SR on HRDs made recommendations -The Special Rapporteur recommends that the Government of the Rep ublic of Korea: (i) Ensure the full independence and effectiveness of NHRCK, including by amending existing provisions to allow for public particip ation in the nomination and appointment process of Commissioners a nd to grant the Commission full autonomy in selecting its own staff; -The Special Rapporteur recommends that the National Human Right s Commission of Korea: (a) Implement the recommendations of the Sub-Committee on Accredi tation of the International Coordinating Committee of National Hum an Rights Institutions in order to strengthen its independence and eff ectiveness; (b) Raise awareness about the existence of a focal point for defenders within the Commission and ensure that the views of defenders are ta ken into account; (c) Ensure timely interventions, responsiveness and accessibility of th e institution to all citizens and actively engage with all groups of hum an rights defenders; (d) Remain seized of such situations as those in Miryang and Jeju Isla nd.

11. T HE NHRCK, WHOSE ADVOCATOR ? The history clearly shows that the NHRCK has continued to fail meeting expectations of civil society as well as its mandatory duties and roles as a national human rights institution Though the NHRCK denies, Korean civil society understands the ICC-SCA’s recent deferral of the NHRCK’s re-accreditation reflects these concerns