ASEAN Human Rights Declaration is Failing

Posted by AsiaViews | Nov 27, 2017 | 0 |

When ASEAN unveiled its Human Rights Declaration in 2012, it was met by well-founded criticism. The Declaration fails to include several basic rights and fundamental freedoms such as the right to freedom of association and the right to be free from enforced disappearance. Some of the clauses even suggest that human rights might be limited to preserve national security or narrowly defined public morality.

Despite these shortcomings, the Declaration is an important milestone in the history of the regional grouping. It is the first document to codify basic human rights and fundamental freedoms that all ASEAN member states have to respect, promote and protect. Considering the political diversity in the region, for ASEAN to even egg out a unified stance on human rights is already a remarkable achievement.

Five years on, the Declaration is facing its biggest test ever, the Rohingya crisis. And it is failing. ASEAN leaders gathered for the first time in Manila this month since all hell broke loose in Myanmar’s Rakhine state in August. In their joint statement, they made no mention of Myanmar’s brutal military crackdown that has been described by the UN and the US as ethnic cleansing.

As much as it was a disappointment, it was not unexpected. ASEAN has survived the last 50 years by following a strict adherence to the so-called ASEAN Way, namely the policy of non-interference, non-confrontational and consensus-based policy making. To be fair, the Summit, and the one before that, also failed to recognize the blatant human rights violations in the Philippines under Duterte’s relentless anti-drug war.

While harmony is attained through non-interference, the cost has been enormous. It has rendered the regional grouping ineffective in fulfilling the aspirations of its people. As an institution, ASEAN has produced a myriad of declarations without actually following up with implementations. It is no wonder that critics have long lambasted ASEAN as “a hopeless powwow, meandering from one headline meeting to another”.

Presented with the enormous sufferings of the Rohingyas, it has become increasingly impossible for members to maintain harmony. In September, Malaysia disassociated itself from a statement issued by ASEAN’s chairman at the UN General Assembly in New York for misrepresenting “the reality of the situation” in Rakhine and for omitting the Rohingyas as one of the affected communities.

As the world’s third largest democracy and the biggest military power in the region, Indonesia more-less shares Malaysia’s frustration with the regional grouping, as evident in President Joko Widodo’s recent statement, which called upon leaders to make real actions as opposed to simply condemning Myanmar. Meanwhile, as a country that shares borders with Myanmar, Thailand also demands a speedy recovery of the situation in Rakhine.

Unfortunately, there is no easy way for those who demand more meaningful actions from ASEAN.

Before anything else, ASEAN needs to provide a framework so that its Human Rights Declaration can transform into actions.

ASEAN can start by empowering its lame-duck Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), which, at present, has no authority to undertake investigations or to conduct a simple act of receiving complaints from individuals or groups. The absence of these powers has made it impossible for the AICHR to fulfill its mandate of promoting and protecting human rights.

An enabled AICHR can work side by side with other human rights institutions such as the UN Human Rights Council or the Human Rights Watch. If so desired, the AICHR can also work independently, devoid of outside influence. This should curb any suspicion of foreign influence, thus ensuring credibility in the eyes of member states.

Having an effective AICHR will do more than just improve ASEAN’s global standing on human rights, it may also serve as a way to minimize unilateral responses by individual member states that may jeopardize the ASEAN Way in the future.

About The Author

AsiaViews

Leave a reply Cancel reply

Neigborhood Watch

Subscribe To Newsletter

POINTS TO PONDER

EXTRICATING NDONESIAN CHILDREN FROM ISIS INFLUENCE ABROAD

Indonesia urgently needs to revisit the possibility of repatriating the neediest of its young citizens stranded abroad, whose families had earlier joined ISIS. Most of these children are in camps in northern Syria but there are also small numbers in the Philippines, Afghanistan and Iraq. “Extricating Indonesian Children from ISIS Influence Abroad”, the latest report from the Institute for Policy Analysis of Conflict (IPAC) argues that the government could begin by bringing back small groups of unaccompanied children under ten years of age, who pose minimal security risk and are most vulnerable to deteriorating conditions in the camps.“The problem is that health and security conditions are worsening by the day in the Syrian camps, and the children are growing older,” says Dyah Kartika, IPAC analyst. “They need access to schools, a nurturing environment, and medical attention. If the government waits too long, the children will be further exposed to ISIS ideology.” The new report examines a 2019 list of Indonesians in camps and prisons run by the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). The Indonesian government has been trying to verify their citizenship, but with pseudonyms, misspellings and bad transliterations, it is a daunting task. At the time the data was collected, between March and June 2019, there were 555 Indonesians in SDF camps and prisons, including 367 children. Among the children, approximately 277 were under the age of ten and 34 were unaccompanied. In June 2021, there are fewer than ten children who are both unaccompanied and under the age of ten that could be prioritized for return. Bringing back children of ISIS families is no easy task. The report analyses the main challenges faced by the Indonesian government. These include definitional issues, bureaucratic competition, the difficulty of verifying nationality, evaluating the toll of exposure to conflict, assessing security risk, and finding relatives or others willing to provide care once the children are returned. In addition, COVID has meant stringent restrictions on travel, placing further obstacles in the way of repatriation. There are several models for rehabilitation of children exposed to violent extremism in Indonesia that could be modified to accommodate the needs of children repatriated from abroad. The report examines these models and argues that the government does not need to have every detail of rehabilitation programs in place before it starts extricating children from ISIS influence. It can start by bringing back the most vulnerable children and then modify programs as needed.

“It’s important that the government see these children as victims” says Dyah. “They deserve a chance to be children again.”

ASEAN Human Rights Declaration is Failing