국제사법재판소에 송환문제에 제소에 대한 관측
November 30, 1959
TO : His Excellency the President
FROM : Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs
SUBJECT : Observation of an idea of bringing the deportation issue before the international Court of Justice
By his cable dispatched on November 22, 1959, Minister Kim in Geneva suggested for Government consideration the possibility of bringing the deportation issue before the International Court of Justice at the Hague as a means of checking the Japanese attempt to unilaterally dispose of the problems on Korean residents in Japan by sending en masse Korean residents in Japan to the Communist north. According to his cable, Minister Kim suggested the said possibility to the Government after secret consultations with professor Guggenheim in Geneva, an eminent international lawyer.
The Ministry carefully studied Minister Kim's suggestion, and the details of the study is enclosed herewith, while the Ministry's observation is submitted for Your Excellency's consideration as follows:
1. Legally, our Government is able to file an application seeking judgment of the International Court of Justice for adjudicating that the Japanese Government violated the Agreed Minutes of December 31, 1957 because it unilaterally disposed of the problem which should be dealt with at the overall talks. This application can be filed by virtue of Article 35 of the Statuts of the I.C.J., and after depositing with the Registrar of the I.C.J. Particular Declaration provided for in the above Article.
2. At the same time, our Government is able to request an Interim Measure to be indicated by the Court to suspend the implementation of the Japanese scheme, and such interim measure can be obtained if Japan does not refuse judicial settlement of the issue.
3. In case that the Japanese Government agrees to appear before the Court for the case, there is a high possibility that an interim measure may be obtained and thus, the Japanese implementation of the deportation scheme may be temporarily suspended probably for several months. This would not necessarily mean that our Government will win the case ultimately when the Court makes judgment. The ultimate judgment is unpredictable. However, we would gain the following points: 1) even if the deportation scheme is temporarily suspended, we can gain more time and the Japanese Government would be obliged to be unusually embarrassed to encounter political turmoil which might be possibly caused by an unexpected impasse in the way of the implementation of the deportation scheme; 2) when the so-called Calcutta agreement is not to be implemented as scheduled, there might arise a hot dispute which would possibly shaken the Tokyo -Pyongyang "repatriation" conspiracy; 3) ICRC would reconsider its continued involvement in the scheme when it knows that the question is to be taken up at the I.C.J. ; 4) our Government would enjoy higher reputation as having employed ultimate but fair way of peaceful settlement of the international dispute.
4. In case that the Japanese Government refuses such judicial settlement at the I.C.J., we would be able to utilize this refusal for very effective propaganda to the world, If the Japanese Government still carried out the scheme after refusing this way of settlement, this would be considered application of physical force overriding moral or legal force. Even if the Japanese send a number of Koreans to the Communist north as they planned, we will not lose anything morally in the eyes of the world as well as our people in general, which would be tantamount to our spiritual winning of the case.
5. If the Government considers it appropriate to go to the International Court of Justice on the issue, our decision on this policy should be made at latest early this week. If necessary, we may sound very tactfully whether the Japanese Government is ready to meet us at the I.C.J. regarding the deportation issue. If the Japanese Government refuses our suggestion in Tokyo, we would be able to get a clue for very effectlve propaganda without doing anything vis-a-via the Court itself. If they accept it in Tokyo, we should not lose time in filing an application before the Court.
6. In case that the Government apply this method, the Government has first to deposit with the Registrar of the I.C.J. our particular declaration pursuant to the required formalities, and then to nominate our diplomatic representative and/or our agent out of eminent international lawyers.
7. In the Ministry's view, this is only and last means left for us to out the Japanese on the defensive in connection with the deportation scheme if we are to employ every means within the scope of our diplomatic efforts, and this means deserves a serious and top urgent consideration by the Government at this stage when the Japanese are presently preparing to send the first deportation vessel to the Communist north on December 14, 1959.
FROM : Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs
SUBJECT : Observation of an idea of bringing the deportation issue before the international Court of Justice
By his cable dispatched on November 22, 1959, Minister Kim in Geneva suggested for Government consideration the possibility of bringing the deportation issue before the International Court of Justice at the Hague as a means of checking the Japanese attempt to unilaterally dispose of the problems on Korean residents in Japan by sending en masse Korean residents in Japan to the Communist north. According to his cable, Minister Kim suggested the said possibility to the Government after secret consultations with professor Guggenheim in Geneva, an eminent international lawyer.
The Ministry carefully studied Minister Kim's suggestion, and the details of the study is enclosed herewith, while the Ministry's observation is submitted for Your Excellency's consideration as follows:
1. Legally, our Government is able to file an application seeking judgment of the International Court of Justice for adjudicating that the Japanese Government violated the Agreed Minutes of December 31, 1957 because it unilaterally disposed of the problem which should be dealt with at the overall talks. This application can be filed by virtue of Article 35 of the Statuts of the I.C.J., and after depositing with the Registrar of the I.C.J. Particular Declaration provided for in the above Article.
2. At the same time, our Government is able to request an Interim Measure to be indicated by the Court to suspend the implementation of the Japanese scheme, and such interim measure can be obtained if Japan does not refuse judicial settlement of the issue.
3. In case that the Japanese Government agrees to appear before the Court for the case, there is a high possibility that an interim measure may be obtained and thus, the Japanese implementation of the deportation scheme may be temporarily suspended probably for several months. This would not necessarily mean that our Government will win the case ultimately when the Court makes judgment. The ultimate judgment is unpredictable. However, we would gain the following points: 1) even if the deportation scheme is temporarily suspended, we can gain more time and the Japanese Government would be obliged to be unusually embarrassed to encounter political turmoil which might be possibly caused by an unexpected impasse in the way of the implementation of the deportation scheme; 2) when the so-called Calcutta agreement is not to be implemented as scheduled, there might arise a hot dispute which would possibly shaken the Tokyo -Pyongyang "repatriation" conspiracy; 3) ICRC would reconsider its continued involvement in the scheme when it knows that the question is to be taken up at the I.C.J. ; 4) our Government would enjoy higher reputation as having employed ultimate but fair way of peaceful settlement of the international dispute.
4. In case that the Japanese Government refuses such judicial settlement at the I.C.J., we would be able to utilize this refusal for very effective propaganda to the world, If the Japanese Government still carried out the scheme after refusing this way of settlement, this would be considered application of physical force overriding moral or legal force. Even if the Japanese send a number of Koreans to the Communist north as they planned, we will not lose anything morally in the eyes of the world as well as our people in general, which would be tantamount to our spiritual winning of the case.
5. If the Government considers it appropriate to go to the International Court of Justice on the issue, our decision on this policy should be made at latest early this week. If necessary, we may sound very tactfully whether the Japanese Government is ready to meet us at the I.C.J. regarding the deportation issue. If the Japanese Government refuses our suggestion in Tokyo, we would be able to get a clue for very effectlve propaganda without doing anything vis-a-via the Court itself. If they accept it in Tokyo, we should not lose time in filing an application before the Court.
6. In case that the Government apply this method, the Government has first to deposit with the Registrar of the I.C.J. our particular declaration pursuant to the required formalities, and then to nominate our diplomatic representative and/or our agent out of eminent international lawyers.
7. In the Ministry's view, this is only and last means left for us to out the Japanese on the defensive in connection with the deportation scheme if we are to employ every means within the scope of our diplomatic efforts, and this means deserves a serious and top urgent consideration by the Government at this stage when the Japanese are presently preparing to send the first deportation vessel to the Communist north on December 14, 1959.
Most respectfully,
Enclosure: 1. Study of Minister Kim's report on the possibility of submitting the deportation case to the I.C.J.
2. Succinct Statement of Facts of the Case
2. Succinct Statement of Facts of the Case
색인어
- 이름
- Guggenheim
- 지명
- Geneva, Hague, Japan, Japan, Geneva, Japan, Calcutta, Tokyo, Pyongyang, Tokyo, Tokyo
- 관서
- International Court of Justice, International Court of Justice, the Japanese Government, I.C.J., the Japanese Government, Japanese Government, I.C.J., the Japanese Government, I.C.J., Japanese Government, the International Court of Justice, the Japanese Government, I.C.J., the Japanese Government, I.C.J., I.C.J.
- 단체
- the I.C.J., ICRC
- 문서
- the Agreed Minutes
