United Nations
General Assembly
A/HRC/WGAD/2018/54
Distr.: General
23 October 2018
Original: English
Human Rights Council
Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
Opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention at its eighty-second session, 20–24 August 2018
Opinion No. 54/2018 concerning Kyeong-Hee Kang, Seung Cheol Kim,
Keum Nam Lee and Myung-Ju Lee (China and the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea)*
1.
The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention was established in resolution 1991/42 of
the Commission on Human Rights. In its resolution 1997/50, the Commission extended and
clarified the mandate of the Working Group. Pursuant to General Assembly resolution
60/251 and Human Rights Council decision 1/102, the Council assumed the mandate of the
Commission. The Council most recently extended the mandate of the Working Group for a
three-year period in its resolution 33/30.
2.
In accordance with its methods of work (A/HRC/36/38), on 25 January 2018 the
Working Group transmitted to the Governments of China and the Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea a communication concerning Kyeong-Hee Kang, Seung Cheol Kim,
Keum Nam Lee and Myung-Ju Lee. The Government of China has not replied to the
communication, while the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
replied to it on 13 February 2018. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is a party to
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, while China is not.
3.
The Working Group regards deprivation of liberty as arbitrary in the following
cases:
(a)
When it is clearly impossible to invoke any legal basis justifying the
deprivation of liberty (as when a person is kept in detention after the completion of his or
her sentence or despite an amnesty law applicable to him or her) (category I);
(b)
When the deprivation of liberty results from the exercise of the rights or
freedoms guaranteed by articles 7, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20 and 21 of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and, insofar as States parties are concerned, by articles 12, 18, 19, 21, 22,
25, 26 and 27 of the Covenant (category II);
(c)
When the total or partial non-observance of the international norms relating
to the right to a fair trial, established in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in
the relevant international instruments accepted by the States concerned, is of such gravity
as to give the deprivation of liberty an arbitrary character (category III);
* In accordance with paragraph 5 of the Working Group’s methods of work, Seong-Phil Hong did not
participate in the discussion of the present case.
GE.18-17642(E)