Muhammad Muzahidul Islam :
It is all-accepted fact that limiting someone’s access to the internet means that limiting someone’s access to information. And it does ultimately mean the limiting of someone’s freedom of expression.
Are North Koreans free to express their personal views on political or other sensitive topics under the state-run intranet without fear of surveillance? Are they allowed to access toglobal internet? Do the North Korean legislative and administrative measures comply with the international human rights instruments?
We live in a global village where we are, through the global internet, supposed to impart and gather all useful information without the unreasonable restrictions of governments. This position is, unfortunately, not true in some authoritarian countries.
And North Korea is a country where people are not, freely, allowed to the global internet. Internet access is available in North Korea; it is, however, subject to special authorization. Unlike the global internet, most individuals in North Korea are provided online services through a free domestic-only network known as Kwangmyong.
Let me share with you the relevant part of the report of “Freedom House” (Freedom in the World 2024, North Korea). On the question of whether individuals, in North Korea, are free to express their personal views on political or other sensitive topics without fear of surveillance or retribution, the said report provides that “Nearly all forms of private communication are monitored by a huge network of informants. Domestic third-generation (3G) mobile service, available since 2008, may serve at least 6.5 million subscribers. Ordinary mobile users can connect to a state-run intranet but not the global internet.
Mobile phones operating on this network function as state surveillance tools, which can review individuals’ application usage and browsing history and take screenshots of activity. Newer mobile phones include measures to prevent the consumption of contraband media, with some resorting to hacking to circumvent them.Only a few elites have internet access, reaching it through their own service.
Domestic and international mobile services are kept strictly separate. Individuals using Chinese-origin phones have faced crackdowns, while officials sent to China must install surveillance software on their devices. People returning from foreign postings or trips abroad are heavily monitored”.
According to this report, North Korea scored 0 out of 4.
According to the 2023 World Press Freedom Index (Reporters Without Borders), “The last three places are occupied solely by Asian countries: Vietnam (178th), which has almost completed its hunt of independent reporters and commentators; China (down 4 at 179th), the world’s biggest jailer of journalists and one of the biggest exporters of propaganda content; and, to no great surprise, North Korea (180th)”.
On the ‘political context’ the said index further provides that “Kim Jong-un, son and grandson of late dictators Kim Jong-il and Kim Il-sung, is the supreme leader of a totalitarian regime that bases its power on surveillance, repression, censorship and propaganda. He personally ensures that the media only imparts content that praises the party, the military, and himself”.
I would like to share with you a relevant portion of an article published in CSIS (Center for Strategic & International Studies). The article (North Koreans want external information, But Kim Jong-Un seeks to limit access) was authored by Robert R. King.
It was published on May 15, 2019. According to this article, “Access to the internet is simply not available to North Korean citizens, though a very few trusted individuals and security agencies have access to the international internet. For North Koreans, there is only an intranet whose content is carefully monitored and controlled by the regime.
(For an update on recent wireless access in North Korea, see Martyn Williams on 38 North) cell phones are available, but North Korean cell phones cannot make international calls (meaning no ability to call friends or relatives in South Korea or Northeast China).
Furthermore, cell phone usage in the North is heavily monitored by the security services. Cell phones are so carefully controlled that even diplomats and foreign business people working in the North are only able to get “foreigner-only” North Korean cell phones, meaning they cannot get a cell phone that allows them to call North Korean citizens.
The foreigner-only cell phones can be used to call other foreigners in the North, and these phones are capable of making international calls for a hefty fee. But a foreigner-only phone does not permit the British ambassador in Pyongyang to call his North Korean driver, who has a “North Korean-only” phone.
Chinese cell phones are frequently smuggled across the border, and North Koreans within a short distance of the Chinese border can make calls on the Chinese network. Border guards and State Security personnel are always on the lookout for illegal cell phones, and expensive illegal foreign mobile phones are immediately confiscated.
Frequently, owners of illegal cell phones are sent to reeducation camps for a period”.
To find the answers to the questions posed above, one could cite some relevant provisions of the international and domestic legal instruments. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) are relevant here.
ICCPR is an international human rights legal instrument to which North Korea is a party. Further, article 67 of North Korea’s constitution also confirms the freedom of the press; it is, however, limited in the book. Perusing the ongoing realsituations with these legal instruments, one could conclude that North Korean people are isolated, and far away from the rights they are supposed to enjoy. And North Korean domestic measures are not compliant with international human rights obligations.
(The writer is a barrister-at-law, human rights activist and an advocate at the Supreme Court of Bangladesh).
