42 years after the formation of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the regional grouping has recognised the importance of human rights. Or has it?
The 42nd ASEAN Ministerial Meeting adopted the Terms of Reference for the ASEAN human rights body which will be named, the ASEAN Inter-Governmental Commission on Human Rights. Perspectives from both sides indicate that this development can be viewed either as a glass half empty or half full.
What is most ironic is that ASEAN members have instituted a regional human rights mechanism when their own domestic records are questionable. Utilising any available evaluation for meeting human rights obligations and one finds ASEAN members’ faring miserably. The Freedom in the World publication by Freedom House which provides a comparative assessment of global political rights and civil liberties provides an indicator of how badly ASEAN member states perform. Only Indonesia is ranked as free. Brunei, Burma, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam are ranked as not free while Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand and Singapore are ranked as partly free. The same findings are evident in other reports such as Amnesty International’s Report or the U.S. Department of State’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices.
For the skeptics, this is ASEAN at its best — all form, no substance and gaining political mileage internationally. It may eventually replicate the United Nations Human Rights Council and its Universal Periodic Review. The United Nations Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review is a system of peer review where member countries –- often all perpetrators of human rights abuse –- provide glowing reports for each other. Imagine China, Sudan and Pakistan providing peer review of Burma/Myanmar. In the same breath, imagine, Singapore, Malaysia and Cambodia peer-reviewing Myanmar.
It took 42 years for ASEAN to formally recognise human rights. Let’s hope it does not take another 42 years for human rights to be implemented meaningfully in Southeast Asia.
Gregore, how is being futile about the prospects of the peer review process going to help the recognition of human rights in Southeast Asia? It just fuels the relativist fire that burns on the pile unjust incidents that go on here daily because this futility is not flexible with the paradigm of values we percieve a nation to have.
Even that it is a superficial recognition in this commission, it is a recognition. I would imagine the current leadership of many ASEAN states share your skepticism about implementing human rights themselves, albeit from a different perspective. However, perhaps future generations will not be so skeptical – and they shouldn’t be robbed the opportunity of liberal growth by those of us who find the current situation confrontational.
We’re often determined to see elites in Southeast Asia as unwavering standard bearers of injustice, but how many in those states know of the injustices committed? How many in Myanmar know? Was the commission mentioned in the New Light of Myanmar? Eventually citizens will find out and it will make the Junta that much more guilty.
So yes, at least the commission is there, recognised and ready to be talked about – and even if it’s all empty handshakes, those making future handshakes might be more disposed to universal value judgements. If that process takes 42 years, then it takes 42 years. There is no fast forward button… unless you want to interfere with a states sovereignty… But how dignified would that be?
The glass is definitely half full.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
some edits:
From the first block of text..
rather the futility is supportive of the rigid values we percieve a country to have. instead of ‘not flexible with the paradigm of values’
and from the third…
‘We’re often determined to see elites in Southeast Asia as unwavering standard bearers of injustice’… because they perpetrate human rights violations, but this perception does not allow for the growth of character that we associate with liberalism and universal human rights. In these apparent empty handshakes, maybe there is some evolution we might not wish to acknowledge. Sure in Myanmar, it is hard for a rock, the Junta, to evolve much more than being a rock.
But for the rest, slowly, slowly.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
… and by universal value judgements. Of course I mean, ‘our’ universal value judgements.
Jana needs a coffee.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
.. also worth mentioning here is the USA formally signing up to the TAC. What sort of influence will the USA have with ASEAN states once signed up regarding human rights? Could this be an accelerant, an inhibition or of little consequence to overall human rights acceptance in Southeast Asia?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Jana, also worth mentioning here would be the USA formally signing up to the Oslo Treaty (Dec.3rd 2008), The Convention on Cluster Munitions, which seeks to ban cluster bombs and assist the victims. But they haven’t – although 94 countries did. Until they do, & generally clean up their HR act, which will also involve cleaning up the ‘carpet’ they left in this region after the Vietnamese war & the ‘War that Never Happened,’ they may find that their ideas are indeed “of little consequence…”
“An estimated 76 million cluster bombs (bombies) remain from the ‘carpet bombing’ (260 million bombs, equivalent to one C130 planeload every 8 minutes for 9 years) of supply lines during the Vietnamese war, mostly in Laos but also in Vietnam and Cambodia, scattered like seeds, ready to explode. And they do. Every week. Handicap International estimates that 98% of the victims have been civilians, 27% children. Kids are attracted to them because they are often brightly coloured. Many look rather like toy pineapples ….. more numerous and insidious than landmines. On average, 10 children have died every month during the last 33 years. ”
http://www.geocities.com/project.pineapple/
http://www.clusterconvention.org/
http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/tellthemtosign
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Michael, as Hillary human rights defender number one would say: “God bless the USA!!!”
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Hi Jana, Michael,
Thanks for raising these issues.
The TAC is ASEAN’s way of maintaining neutrality. That is a good development for the region.
Often, ASEAN’s ability to maintain peace and stability is highlighted and used as a yardstick for its success. At the same time, human rights abuse committed within the borders of ASEAN member states are ignored under the principle of non-interference.
Personally, I am pleased that there is now a human rights mechanism at the regional level. The same with the ASEAN Charter.
We know these are weak instruments – but can be a starting point.
My concern is that these developments may provide legitimate reasons for ASEAN member states to stall on substantive reforms domestically citing these developments as achievements.
The case in Malaysia is a classic development, where despite the introduction of new human rights mechanism, human rights abuse has actually increased.
Therefore, it will be a glass half full only if citizens of ASEAN use these instruments to move for substantive reforms to strengthen the observation of human rights within borders of ASEAN member states.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Greg neutrality, balance or the middle way? White liberal relativist fascism What a-political planet are you on?
Either you are for emancipation and empowerment, which often means rejecting repressive Asian values cultures and traditions to help women and children, or you are a collaborator with forms of dictatorship and domination QED
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Hi there Leveller 6,
I’m probably on planet pragmatism – trying to find out the best way to balance idealism and progress without resorting to violence.
It is true that ASEAN is miles away from meeting international obligations on human rights. At the same time, my key concern is to move the agenda forward without much violence.
That’s the key dilema.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I have to agree with Greg’s espousal of “planet pragmatism.” Leveller 6′s #8 idea of “…rejecting repressive Asian values cultures and traditions to help women and children…” can’t work, at least as an ad hoc, point-blank strategy. Surely that’s obvious. The “you” which you mention twice in your 2nd paragraph is foreign observers, not the ASEAN constituency. We’re talking about a long, hard row here: it will take time, just as it did in the West. But the ball is already slowly rolling, in Thailand, at least.
The observations of foreigners, to whom certain modes of conduct seem quite obviously wrong, ultimately carry little weight.The problem is that complex issues of culture are complicated to an extraordinary degree by the fact that to those living in a culture the ‘logic’ of ‘right’ & ‘wrong’ is based on traditional & unquestioned beliefs.
For example: during the ‘coup’ period new laws against domestic violence, including marital rape, were brought in. It is now possible for a Thai woman to bring charges against her husband for physical abuse, including rape. In order to do so, she must, of course, be able to supply evidence from, e.g., doctors and neighbours, and get support from local police. In each of these cases, even when there is clear & undeniable evidence, those who could testify are usually unwilling to do so. Why? Because, no matter how brutal the acts, no matter how opposed to them witnesses may be, all of this is entirely undermined by the belief that outsiders do not interfere in other families’ affairs. This is added to by other possibilities, such as those of the complexity of networks in local societies, the resistance of bureaucrats, the ever-presence of corruption, & fear of retribution. Even the courts are hesitant. It is murky & embarrassing.
In a recent case, tried in ChiengMai, the first of its kind, a European wife brought charges against her Thai husband, who she alleged had repeatedly physically abused, indeed tortured, and raped her. The details are horrific, and she did have enough evidence to sway a Western court. The trial began after lots of delays, & proceeded in a stop-&-start fashion, with judges changing, lawyers changing (it was at one stage thought to be impossible to find a lawyer for the woman, & the first one was an absolute wimp, who would not follow instructions to present evidence), evidence having to be given again, etc. It was further complicated by the fact that the accused openly put curses on everyone (he has a reputation as a man with ‘spiritual powers’), and threatened them. In the end it reached a kind of stalemate. At the same time, the woman was suing for custody of their young (***male) child, a process which almost invariably goes against the foreign parent. To cut a long story short, in the end both cases were settled out of court, as a ‘face-saving’ bargain. The man agreed to assign custody to the woman if the charges in the criminal trial were withdrawn. Of course she complied…and fled as soon as the documents had been signed (a process which, at the last minute, also met with obstruction from the legal bureaucrats involved.)
The road to “emancipation and empowerment” is a long and crooked one, with many hurdles. The “dictatorship and domination” of governments in the region may be a problem, but the strong holds of culture are enormous forces to be reckoned with, and will take time as well as considerable ingenuity, not to mention education & consciousness-raising, to deal with. In any struggle, the most realistic starting-point is right where you are. Grab hold of whatever is available, & then start the changes, bit by bit. Every little mickle makes a muckle, as the Scots say.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
One thing I should have also mentioned re. the domestic violence trial I described in #10 is that it emerged that, in the opinion of the Thais involved, wife-beating is considered quite normal in Thailand, in fact most Thai husbands beat their wives.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Aren’t we all being just a trifle condescending here? It isn’t just academics who realize the different cultural perceptions involved. I am inclined to let locals work these things out in their own way and entirely on their own timescale – if they even wish to work them out at all. But as an outside observer, I am bound to have a slightly different perspective which I must work through on my own terms – albeit informed by the fact that I might be working with values that I might be taking for granted. (Not necessarily the case. In case you hadn’t noted, people do struggle with the values with which they were nurtured. Many of us would not be here at all if we fitted that seamlessly into the current economy and society of our native countries.) That said, these are all good reasons not to lend any overt or tacit support to either side in this conflict. (Not least of which because wifebeating is considered relatively normal here. But then again, it isn’t exactly unknown in East Cheam either.) Especially since neither side seem at all enamored with the lifestyle that I currently wish to pursue, as a result of my redundancy. Rather, the protagonists seem intent on repeating the follies of those same societies which have cast so many of us expats on the scrapheap.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Bogseptic #12: “Aren’t we all being just a trifle condescending here?” Speak for yourself.
“… wifebeating is considered relatively normal here. But then again, it isn’t exactly unknown in East Cheam either.” I’m sure everyone understands that, but do you understand the difference?
And do you understand the difference between the “scrapheap” you’ve been cast on, with all the options for a pretty luxurious lifestyle that have opened up, and its pre-scrapheap Thai equivalent?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
#13 Well said! There is a world of difference…I am all for pragmatic solutions and fully appreciate the seductive allure of local illusions idols of non-western values and virtues to people who are not on their receiving end. Clearly a military humantarian intervention regime change in Burma would have been appropriate. Thai FP will do nothing they have too much profit to lose from their favourite ‘enemy’ and are very busy exploiting illegal Burmese migrant workers, casting Rohingya refugees out to sea, conducting a slow genocide of Malay Muslims in the South…Human rights need to not just be imposed but enforced as does Western style democracy
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Leveller #6 – I strongly disagree with your final remarks: “Human rights need to not just be imposed but enforced as does Western style democracy.” What is “a military humantarian intervention regime change” ?
The “humanitarian” interventions of the West in Burma don’t seem to have achieved anything so far – quite the opposite, it could be argued, for the bulk of the people. A military one could very well end up in the usual scramble for their oil/gas resources (surely a major motivation for the Generals wanting to stay in power). Or, is that what you mean by “Western style democracy”?
re. “slow genocide of Malay Muslims in the South” of Thailand – see LSS’s post of today (http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/2009/08/07/review-of-tearing-apart-the-land/#comment-663169), & ask yourself why it may be convenient to ignore the intelligence reports of connexions to external terrorist organisations & keep the whole thing going, thereby continuing to increase budgets for the corrupt military.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Michael I mean the neo-cons should have gone to Burma not Iraq to really practice what they preach the best of the Wilsonian legacy: freedom and democracy promotion by force against true fascist tyrants whose deserve violent death not wishy washy liberal sentiments…
Quality comment or not?
0 
0