ASEAN and human rights - it’s a slow burner

These two factors - the growth of civil society and the increasing interconnectedness between the states - have had a strong impact on the “ASEAN Way” - a framework to enhance regional security first popularised in the 1990s by former Prime Ministers Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore and former Mahathir bin Mohamad of Malaysia.

The principles of non-interference in the domestic affairs of other states and a purely consensus-based style of decision-making are being eroded. Yet non-interference remains the bedrock of ASEAN. It is stated again and again in virtually every significant ASEAN document, including the ASEAN Charter, and involves refraining from criticising other member governments in public.

This “consensus style of decision-making” depends on extensive consultation: negotiators do not try to coerce others into consent but rather seek to find a compromise that all can agree on. It is thus easy to see why there was such resistance among ASEAN members to include investigating, monitoring and reporting provisions within the ASEAN human rights body’s terms of reference.

There is evidence that some countries are breaking away from the consensus, “softly, softly” approach and speaking out unilaterally. Examples of this include Indonesia’s public criticism this year of the detention of Aung San Suu Kyi. The Philippines government has also been vocal about Burma. In 2007, President Gloria Arroyo told the UN General Assembly, “This is the time for Myanmar to return to the path of democracy and to release Daw Aung San Suu Kyi - now - and to involve all the parties including the National League for Democracy in the democratisation and the constitutional process.”

The strict interpretation of the “ASEAN Way” was also challenged when ASEAN successfully paved the way for international aid to reach the victims of the May 2008 Cyclone Nargis in Burma after the military junta refused repeated offers of help from the West. Even back in 1999, the then Indonesian President B.J. Habibie attempted to generate a regional intervention force in East Timor. Neighbouring states were eager to assist but they lacked the capacity to do so.

The repressive regime in Burma, the political and ethnic persecutions in Vietnam and Laos respectively, and accusations of abuses by Thai and Indonesian security forces are all clear signs for the need for a greater commitment to human rights in the region.

Continued pressure from South-East Asian human rights groups, support from ASEAN’s dialogue partners along with a greater willingness of South-East Asian leaders to honour universal human rights standards suggests that the body in question would be more than a “toothless tiger”. The outcome of Aung San Suu Kyi’s trial will be another important test for of ASEAN leaders’ commitment to human rights.