Politics Of Human Rights In Southeast Asia

The divide between the West and Southeast Asia seems to be nowhere more apparent than in debates about human rights. Within these diverse geographical, political and cultural climates, human rights seem to have become relative, and the quest for absolutes seems unattainable. In this new book Philip J Eldridge seeks to question this stalemate. He argues that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations' inclusion in United Nations' human rights treaties could be the common ground that bridges the gap between East and West. Eldridge uses topical case studies and primary research from Malaysia, Indonesia, East Timor and Australia, to compare the effectiveness of United Nations' human rights directives on local democracies. This study presents insightful research into a hotly debated topic. As such it will be a thought-provoking resource for students of human rights, politics and international relations.

The Asian Values Discourse

In Human Rights and Participatory Politics in Southeast Asia, Catherine Renshaw recounts an extraordinary period of human rights institution-building in Southeast Asia. She begins her account in 2007, when the ten members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) signed the ASEAN charter, committing members for the first time to principles of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. In 2009, the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights was established with a mandate to uphold internationally recognized human rights standards. In 2013, the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration was adopted as a framework for human rights cooperation in the region and a mechanisim for ASEAN community building. Renshaw explains why these developments emerged when they did and assesses the impact of these institutions in the first decade of their existence. In her examination of ASEAN, Renshaw asks how human rights can be implemented in and between states that are politically diverse—Vietnam and Laos are Communist; Brunei Darussalam is an Islamic sultanate; Myanmar is in transition from a military dictatorship; the Philippines and Indonesia are established multiparty democracies; while the remaining members are less easily defined. Renshaw cautions that ASEAN is limited in its ability to shape the practices of its members because it lacks a preponderance of democratic states. However, she concludes that, in the absence of a global legalized human rights order, the most significant practical advancements in the promotion of human rights have emerged from regional institutions such as the ASEAN.

Includes statistics.

Critically examines ASEAN's human rights system in the context of Southeast Asian political-legal developments and the global human rights discourse

This book proposes a selective approach for states with more advanced human rights protection to establish a human rights court for Southeast Asia. It argues the inclusive approach currently employed by ASEAN to set up a human rights body covering all member states cannot produce a strong regional human rights mechanism. The mosaic of Southeast Asia reveals great diversity and high complexity in political regimes, human rights practice and participation by regional states in the global legal human rights framework. Cooperation among ASEAN members to protect and promote human rights remains limited. The time-honored principle of non-interference and the “ASEAN Way” still predominate in relations within ASEAN. These factors combine to explain why the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights is unlikely to be strong and effective in changing and promoting regional human rights protection. This book suggests a selective approach to establish a human rights court for Southeast Asia. It posits that a group of nations within Southeast Asia may be more willing to consider the possibility of a stronger human rights mechanism. It investigates the challenges to and the feasibility of such a proposal. Furthermore, it examines the design of the three existing regional human rights courts in Europe, the Americas, and Africa, and compares the rationales for those institutional designs with the specific context of Southeast Asia. A human rights court for all ASEAN members may not be possible at this time, but a court for some nations in the region is feasible and worth exploring. The path towards this goal is never an easy one; however, the region possesses the necessary conditions to gradually translate that goal into reality.

This book reviews Southeast Asia’s National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) as part of an emerging assessment of a nascent regional human rights architecture that is facing significant challenges in protecting human rights. The book asks, can NHRIs overcome its weaknesses and provide protection, including remedies, to victims of human rights abuses? Assessing NHRIs’ capacity to do so is vital as the future of human rights protection lies at the national level, and other parts of the architecture—the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), and the international mechanism of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR)—though helpful, also have their limitations. The critical question the book addresses is whether NHRIs individually or collaboratively provide protection of fundamental human rights. The body of work offered in this book showcases the progress of the NHRIs in Southeast Asia where they also act as a barometer for the fluid political climate of their respective countries. Specifically, the book examines the NHRIs’ capacity to provide protection, notably through the pursuit of quasi-judicial functions, and concludes that this function has either been eroded due to political developments post-establishment or has not been included in the first place. The book’s findings point to the need for NHRIs to increase their effectiveness in the protection of human rights and invites readers and stakeholders to find ways of addressing this gap.