What ? Human Rights again ? Surely this Human Right is getting on someone’s nerve.

Certain refused-to-die old farter is sure to look forward for ASEAN Intergovernmental CommIssion for Dictatorship ( (AICID) if any, and will happily host it into Tiny Red Dot at all cost, and maybe turn Singapore into Dictator Hub . So who will be the Singapore representative ? Your guess is as good as mine.

Just imagine all the dictators over the world come to Singapore and plant the money here to grow the GDP here ! That’s Progress and golden period for Singapore !

TagLine for AICID: SHUT UP AND SIT DOWN

An ASEAN Human Rights Commission is an oxymoron ie a contradiction in terms.

The ASEAN constitution does not permit member countries to ‘interfere’ ie comment on one another’s internal affairs. So how is this commission going t do its job?

So far as the member countries themselves are concerned, who is going to police whether or not human rights are being respected? Pardon my cynicism but in Singapore, do we expect any individual, regardless of who it might be, to stand up to the government?

So far as I am concerned, this office (AIHCR) is as good as the proverbial tits on a bull. I hope I am proven wrong.

Hi Peter Sellers #2,

Because of the reasons you mentioned, it is very important who the persons are appointed to be the National Representatives. Their pioneering role will set the direction for the development of human rights in ASEAN. ASEAN is actually quite divided on the protection and promotion of human rights. Some ASEAN member states actually favour a Human Rights Court with ASEAN-wide jurisidiction.

Maruah has been working on the same track 2 process all along too…it’s plugged in/part of the Working Group on ASEAN Human Rights Mechanism @ the regional level.

Donaldson (#3),

The countries that favour the regional jurisdiction of the AHRC are few and in between. In fact, I remember that the only countries that support regional jurisdiction fully are Indonesia and the Philippines. Singapore – as always – follows the Middle Path. The more oppressive countries in SEA like Vietnam and Myanmar do not approve of the regional jurisdiction, for obvious reasons.

And even Indonesia and the Philippines have reservations on certain aspects of Civil and Political Rights. Indonesia is likely to have increasing problems in the years to come because of the Islamic Resurgence going on there. (To some degree, of course, there are legitimate problems with Civil and Political Rights that are over-extended e.g. to the sleaze industry, but Indonesia might be going too far the other way.)

Ted (#4),

Maruah needs the AHRC to be operative before it has formal validity in the regional political context, otherwise there will be always one or two ASEAN countries curbing its moves.

I don’t think Singapore is on any middle path with regards to human rights. Besides, I cannot call something middle path if it lacks the criticial component of transparency.

Donaldson, you don’t have to feel you need to respond to every public posting on your article. My posts are not intended to be criticisms of your article. Neither are they seeking clarifications from the writer. They are mainly intended as a dissemination of a point of view. I welcome comments from fellow readers.

With regard to the AIHRC, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. Time will tell whether the Singapore representative to the commission will stand up to the Singapore government on the many laws that restrict HR in Singapore, such as the ones on freedom of assembly, freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

For an HR commission to work, it must be supra-national ie nation-states must be subservient to it. Singapore cannot fall back to a position that says its national laws take precedence over those of the commissions’. If it does, the whole exercise will be reduced to a farce.

[...] Discourse – TOC: ASEAN Human Rights – Going Forward or Stalled? – ErniesUrn’s Xanga: My mom and her [...]

7) Peter Sellers on September 16th, 2009 5.10 pm

For an HR commission to work, it must be supra-national ie nation-states must be subservient to it. Singapore cannot fall back to a position that says its national laws take precedence over those of the commissions’.

I enjoy exchanging comments. I think the abovementioned will happen but under a complete different reason. The ASEAN Common Market will require a supranational economic regulation body across different industries and sectors in order for it to function.

My personal feeling about Human Rights among the ASEAN countries is a big talk and show to the world but in reality, no action at all. The methodology of the governance in ASEAN does very little in promoting human rights as it will probably put them out of power.

I can’t help but felt that ASEAN countries are cursed with a highly autocratic governmental environment where the citizens are being ruled with heavy iron hand, which can be the military, religious groups or even a power-thirsty ruling party which will not stop at anything to stop anyone who opposes them. Democracy is a myth in ASEAN and it is only used to make money from trading with the world. However, it can be stored in a corner storeroom away from the public when in practice.

Look at the recent example of Aung San Suu Kyi of Myanmar. What realistic contribution did the other ASEAN countries do to stand for human rights. They made statements, asking for dialogue between the 2 parties and when she was sentence they felt “disappointed”. It is shameful as countries far away, like UK, US, and many European countries are pressurizing the Myanmar military where here at our doorstep we only talk ….. ASEAN is not ready for honoring Human Rights unless their leaders and law makers start to believe and understand that they are there to serve and NOT TO RULE and LORD over it’s own people.

In my opinion, ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission for Human Rights (AICHR) is a waste of time and money…… maybe for NOW. We can make a better future though !!!!!

We should bear in mind the fact that ASEAN countries have had slower socio-economic and democratic developments compared to the countries that criticize them now regarding human rights and ASEAN’s overall effectiveness as a regional organisation. This issue of sovereignty versus interference when it comes to human rights violations, and the larger community getting involved in one state’s domestic issues is not a problem specific to this region. Neither is the issue of states refusing to give up a certain amount of their legitimacy to a supra-national governmental body. The United Nations itself is handicapped because even the most democratic of states are willing to break international laws and violate protocol in the name of state interests. The UN has been calling for more stringent human rights enforcements, but has only really managed to rename its human rights commission as a council, and continues to be beholden to the compliance of its member states. Very few states will effectively agree to terms that allow external troops to forcibly enter its territory.

It is difficult to get a consensus in any multi-party dialogue and I think ASEAN has been well-meaning to at least have come to an agreement regarding a human rights commission. I think its better to maintain dialogue than none at all. I do not foresee a huge change in the amount of action taken, but I believe that you have to give the process time, to allow for democratic developments to come in each of the ASEAN countries, and for the general public to become more enlightened and aware of human rights issues before we will see more substantive changes. These things do not happen overnight. It is important to keep engaging for NGOs to continue to put pressure on governments and ASEAN, in order to shape and expedite the process.

When it comes to Human Rights, it tends to come into conflict with state values and objectives, which is why we have such problems in the UN and ASEAN with committing to a legal framework to fight human rights abuses. This is where the general public has to play a bigger role. Sadly in Singapore, I find that a majority of people are none too interested in getting directly involved in NGOs and making fundamental changes to the current condition. Only 90 people turned up for the Maruah Workshop, and generally in the mainstream media or otherwise, there is very little discourse going on on such matters. It’s reflective of the true values we uphold and its worthwhile reflective on that rather than just clicking our tongues at governments for their inaction.

Hello tookie,

Thoughtful comments.

Your support of the gradualist approach gels with the establishment view on dealing with ASEAN related matters. However, ask yourself this: if no changes are made to ASEAN’s constitution, do you see an improvement, in even another 40 years time? Government’s, like individuals, need strong rules to make things work. That is why the EU is able to function effectively although, from time to time, individual countries do chafe on particular issues.

The Singapore government, certainly, has decided that ASEAN is not moving fast enough in at least one respect – trade, and that is why it has entered into so many “fast-track” bilateral agreements to move ahead on its own. This is a clear indication of the weakness of the ASEAN approach to things and ASEAN decision-making.

The fact that the UN is hobbled with similar issues is not a justification for not trying to do things better in ASEAN. What is needed is firm, clear-sighted, visionary leadership of the sort that set up ASEAN in the first place. The EU is a model for ASEAN to emulate.

One can only hope that bold leadership at some stage in the future will re-look at some of the clauses in the ASEAN constitution that hobble the organization and replace them with ones that work. Only then can human-rights have a fighting chance in this region.

Some NGOs in Singapore also stay away from human rights although their parent organisations are human rights advocates at an international level.

Hi Donaldson,

I completely agree with you, but I cannot see such bold leadership happening anytime soon, at least enough of it to rouse the 10 ASEAN members into consensus about taking stronger stands towards Human Rights. I’m not providing an alternative solution, frankly I think there is almost no alternative except for what you have already highlighted that needs to be done. My point about the UN is not to legitimise or accept how ASEAN currently works, but to underline certain political realities, especially in the current state-centred approach to global/regional issues. These are realities that we have to work with because of the current structure of governance in most ASEAN states. Until we can effectively get things going from bottom up, ASEAN governments are beholden to very little as far as human rights issues are concerned, and are free to pursue ‘national interests’ above all. It will however also take a long time before enough people are spurred into committed action. It is important for us to continue pushing for changes in the constitution and for sure the organisation does not work ideally, but is also should not be dismissed as a useless talkshop because it definitely has some mileage. I suppose it comes down to how we define our expectations for such organisations. I tend to ’sympathise’ with multilateral platforms, simply because given the diversity of interests that states are bound to have, it is difficult to come to consensus most of the time. Of course, there the fact that when we’re talking about human lives, we can’t just sit on our laurels, but realistically, there is not very much else we can do.

Regarding Singapore’s moving ahead with bilateral relationships as a sign of ASEAN weakness, I tend to see bilateral arrangements as complementary to multilateralism. ASEAN states have plenty of bilateral arrangements with each other, which I feel can help strengthen multilateral dialogues and form an important support structure for ASEAN. If I am not wrong, bilateral relationships have always been encouraged within ASEAN.

See this article for a discussion on multilateralism versus bilateral trade agreements:

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14363297

We can rationalise our actions but they don’t always stand up to objective scrutiny.

sorry I meant to direct that last comment to Peter Sellers. bit blind these days..haha Interesting article! I’m no expert of trade/economics per se, so I can’t really comment. When I was talking about bilateralism I referred to not just trade agreements, but military cooperation and other confidence building measures. I suppose anyway that there is more reading up to be done. :)

I think we are missing the point here. Human Rights are not just some ideas that some countries or organizations promote. It is the very basic respect for the rights of every human in this world. Why do we have to wait for the UN or the US to negotiate and call for dialogue for it to be more respected in ASEAN.

Human rights are for everyone, whether you live in USA, France, Malaysia or Singapore. We are all Humans!!

Of course the fact is that in ASEAN it is not really being respected much. In another word, we are being deprived of our rights in different aspect of our lives here. We became so accustomed to being controlled and told what to do that we already thought it is okay. Thus the low turn up in the Maruah Workshop. I think here we know the Human Rights issue will cause the authority to raise their eye brown from all the examples we saw when the ruling party bankrupted their opposing party and the government getting their ways in almost anything. We are taught to FEAR and we are taught also that it is good…. “It puts money in our pocket and roof above our head”. We are always told, in fact every country in ASEAN, I notice, were always told that their country is unique and that we have to sacrifice “a little” of our rights to path the way for prosperity and progress. However, lessons in history taught us that all these things are important, but we will never be truly happy if we are not given a choice. “TO OBEY OR DISOBEY” is never a choice!!!

I agree that UN is doing their best in a more diplomatic way to give the people here more rights. I also agree that here in ASEAN, the leaders are a little “possessive” and “autocratic”. However, ASEAN leaders must understand that when we do not respect the rights of another, we are controlling their lives and manipulating them. This are acts of selfishness and self-centered mindset, and it gave rise to corruption and the abuse of power. If you notice, every ASEAN country have an undeclared “Emperor” who sits in power although he may not be in the most powerful political position.

Finally, we must not look at the Human Rights issues as a western propaganda (which are what many governments are saying). It is not an intrusion from another country or organization, it is the rights of every human. We own it! We deserve it!

A good government must not take away the rights of any human being unless they broke the law. In any case the law should deal with that human being not the government. That is why the law must be above the government.

A good government must not twist the law or change the law so that human rights are being taken away.

ASEAN government must change their attitude, if we are to move forward as a civilized human race here.

Joel, you have my agreement for sure.

But the question is how we are going to bring about a change in attitudes, in ourselves as (global) citizens, and in governments. This is where we always get stuck.

Thank you tookie.

The right things will always worked it’s way out and straightened. The earlier these governments understand it the less violence will result. It is only a matter of time when the government became bolder and bolder that they cross that line of endurance by the citizens. Then the country will go through a massive uprising and many will be hurt through this unavoidable stage. We have seen through history that every unchecked government will become more and more corrupted and the citizens will suffer more and more until the day they fight back. Then there will be bloodshed as the government will resort to violence and suppress their falling. People will suffer and the economy will crumble.

How much poorer and set back the country will end up with depend on how long the government will stand it’s ground. The are many countries in history that could never regain it’s previous glory after that.

I think for the first step, we must respect the LAW above all, and that the government is not above it and they cannot alter it to suit their need. They cannot use it to suppress public voices and media reports.

Second step is to allow full media freedom. Yes, you may get the good stuff and a lot of bad stuff, but it will put any politician on checks which ensure public interest.

Thirdly, allow freedom of speech.

You see, the government have been telling us it is a normal thing that the ruling government devices schemes and adventages to make their continual ruling easier. This is so”wrong” and so “not alright” They should face the same or higher difficulty if they want to continue to rule the country. The people will access their performance and decide whether they have reached the mark or do what they have promised.

That is why our mind have be conditioned to think that what they do is alright and that no LAW can help us to check on them. When the government is above all, they can always justify what they do even if it is wrong. What could be worse is when they also control the media. WE ARE DOOMED !!!

What could be worse is when they also control the media. WE ARE DOOMED !!!

WE ALREADY ARE!