Recently, a media information service official of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) has reportedly clarified via U.S. media its stand that if the DPRK launches a satellite without prior notice, it can adopt a resolution of denunciation as it did in the past.

Such stand of IMO runs completely counter to its existing stand that prior notice on satellite launch is not needed in the light of the requirements of its convention and custom. Therefore, we cannot but express strong regret and displeasure at the fickle attitude of the organization.

As regards the fact that IMO has taken a very unfair and prejudiced stand on the DPRK's satellite launch, its just and legitimate exercise of sovereignty, the Maritime Administration of the DPRK clarifies the truth once again in order to help the international community correctly understand and recognize the issue concerning the DPRK's prior notice on the satellite launch.

On May 30, the DPRK e-mailed a prior report on satellite launch to IMO in the name of its Maritime Administration and the director of the IMO maritime security bureau replied that it is not obligatory to inform the organization of the satellite launch according to the requirements of convention and custom.

On the same day, IMO told Reuters that the DPRK had already sent advance notice on satellite launch and that the notice is just a formal measure and not a requirement as the navigational warning is directly reported to vessels via the world navigational warning system.

This means that the IMO side made it clear that no country has an obligation under international law to exclusively inform IMO of planned satellite launch, with the exception of issuing a navigational warning through the world navigational warning system.

In actuality, the DPRK sent navigational warning data, ahead of its satellite launch, to the Maritime Safety Agency of Japan, a regional trouble-shooting body, as required by the regulations of IMO. And although it was not obligatory, we informed IMO of this with good intent in consideration of the usage that we had made prior notice to the IMO side.

Nevertheless, on the very day the DPRK launched a satellite, IMO adopted a resolution full of unreasonable contents saying that it strongly denounces the DPRK for launching missile without any prior notice and urges the DPRK to strictly observe the prior notice regulations concerning the world navigational warning system.

Most deplorable is the illogical and senseless stand and attitude shown by IMO, a professional UN organization which should regard equity and specialty as its basic principle as it is not a maritime supervisory organ of an individual country or a non-governmental body.

We cannot but take issue with IMO over the fact that it brands the DPRK's just exercise of the right to self defence for coping with the military threats by the U.S. and its vassal forces as an illegal activity going contrary to the UNSC "resolution".

IMO is just a professional UN organization with a mission to promote the technical cooperation among UN member states in the international maritime security field. It is by no means an affiliated body for supervising the implementation of the UNSC resolutions.

If it is the stand of IMO that the resolution criticizing the DPRK is only a document reflecting the standpoint of and response from its member states and IMO has nothing to do with it, we urge IMO to make clear its specific attitude and position before us and the international community.

We take into consideration the fact that the secretary general of IMO visited the DPRK delegation on the day, when an anti-DPRK resolution was adopted at a meeting of the Maritime Security Committee of IMO, to ask about our stand, and the standpoint expressed by its media information service official that if the IMO council is informed of the DPRK side's concern, it will be handled appropriately.

Availing itself of this opportunity, the Maritime Administration of the DPRK re-clarifies an official stand that it denounces and rejects and never recognizes IMO's unfair and illegal anti-DPRK resolution, and demands that the IMO side reflect our just viewpoint in its official document.

We will wait for IMO's official reply to this.