http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsindex.php?id=448966
Five Countries Reject Civil Society Reps At Asean Summit

By D Arul Rajoo

HUA HIN, Oct 23 (Bernama) — The governments of Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, the Philippines and Singapore have rejected members of civil groups from their respective countries at the 15th Asean Summit here.

Debby Stothard, of the Alternative Asean Network, said they were informed by the Thai Foreign Ministry at 11pm yesterday that the leaders would not meet the five people nominated by the civil groups.

“Some governments like Singapore have even replaced the nominees with their own representatives,” she said as the summit kicked off at the Dusit Thani Hotel in the seaside resort here Friday.

She said the remaining five representatives from Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam were told to come to the meeting at 7am Friday, five hours before the scheduled Informal Meeting between the Leaders and the civil society groups.

Stothard said the civil groups were disappointed that the representatives were not allowed to speak at the 30-minute meeting, and instead only an academician from the Chulalongkorn University would be allowed to talk.

“We are still trying to get more people to talk at the meeting,” she said.

The rejected civil society representatives are Khin Ohmar (Myanmar), Sister Crescencia L. Lucero (Philippines), Sinapan Samydorai (Singapore), Manichanh Philaphanh (Laos) and Nay Vanda (Cambodia).

Malaysia is represented by Moon Hui Tah, campaign coordinator of Suaran, a Malaysian human rights organisation.

The dialogue between the 10 Asean Leaders and civil society groups was introduced during the 14th Asean Summit held here last February.

The first meeting itself was embroiled in controversy after leaders of Myanmar and Cambodia refused to meet the representatives from their respective countries.

Among the highlights of the 15th Summit is the launch of the Asean Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (Aichr).

Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) commissioner, Datuk Muhammad Shafee Abdullah has been appointed Malaysia’s representative to the body.

The Straits Times interviewed Ms Braema Mathi regarding the new ASEAN Inter-governmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), see below for the article.

——————————————–

23 October 2009
The Straits Times
‘Bite the bullet and learn from mistakes’

LIKE most civil society activists, Ms Braema Mathi takes issue with several aspects of the new human rights commission – particularly its adherence to Asean’s policy of non-interference.

But she points out one saving grace: The terms of reference (TOR) for the Asean Inter-governmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) will be reviewed in five years.

This will give activists and civil society organisations in the region room to define new areas of improvement.

Ms Mathi, 51, says: ‘As the mantra goes, what is not prohibited in the TOR is not forbidden. This means testing boundaries all the time, which can be tiring.

‘But these areas can be identified for review only in five years, if the limitations are shown up when we test the system.’

As the chairman of local rights advocacy group Maruah, Ms Mathi – a former Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) – has been at the forefront of efforts to promote awareness of human rights issues.

Maruah, or dignity in Malay, was appointed in 2007 as the focal point for the Regional Working Group for an Asean Human Rights Mechanism, which was set up in 1995.

This was two years after Asean foreign ministers had agreed that the regional group should consider the establishment of an appropriate regional mechanism on human rights, in support of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action.

Asean has since been pushing for the setting up of a regional rights body, through meetings with government officials and holding conferences and workshops on the issues.

Many advocates felt that the AICHR should have been launched earlier, but Ms Mathi would rather look on the positive side. ‘It is an achievement for Asean to have come this far as our expectations of the grouping have been very low all this time. So while 16 years seems a long time by Asean standards, perhaps it is not so bad.’

After all, she points out, Asean has had to counter many challenges in setting up the commission.

One challenge is dealing with a consensus-seeking approach which is time-consuming.

The other challenge is Asean’s lacklustre rate in the implementation of its commitments and agreements.

Only 30 per cent of Asean agreements and commitments had been implemented, according to three former Asean secretaries-general in previous media reports.

Says Ms Mathi: ‘There were detailed workplans, but at the end of the day the member countries themselves must take their agreements seriously.’

But she feels that change is in the air, now that Asean has a Charter to follow and implement.

The Charter, which was signed in 2007, also heralds a restructuring of the Asean organisation and sees the setting up of new bodies like the AICHR.

There is also the Committee of Permanent Representatives, which consists of ambassadors appointed by each member state, at the Asean Secretariat in Jakarta.

‘They all point to a consolidation which I hope will pave the way for greater regionalism beyond economic integration,’ says Ms Mathi.

Listing some areas that she thinks the AICHR should focus on, she says that in the short run, it should get people acquainted with the commission while it expands on the technical details of the TOR.

In the long run, the TOR should be improved in every review to include a stronger protection mandate.

She believes that the success of the AICHR will hinge largely on the first slate of representatives that Asean governments have appointed to the commission.

Singapore has picked former senior district judge Richard Magnus as its first representative to the AICHR.

Says Ms Mathi: ‘This first slate of representatives will be the ones who will pave the way for the AICHR to become stronger in the long run.

‘If they fail in that role – paving the way, that is – then in five years’ time, the review will be much in the same mould as the current TOR, which will exasperate many actors in Asean.’

She predicts ‘a lot of unsettling moments’ in implementing the AICHR’s aims, and that the representatives will often find themselves in the hot seat as Asean enters a new chapter.

‘There is no other way than to bite the bullet and learn along the way from the mistakes.’

She hopes that the advent of a new regional rights commission will help Maruah’s work here.

The group holds public consultation workshops and conferences to raise awareness among Singaporeans about human rights issues here and in the region.

Maruah’s members include former NMP Siew Kum Hong, lawyer Peter Low, academic Cherian George, Dr Stuart Koe – founder of media company Fridae, and Mr Leong Sze Hian – president of the Society of Financial Service Professionals.

As Ms Mathi explains: ‘We enjoy a higher state of well-being. We are tuned to look at development from a welfare-oriented perspective as opposed to a rights-based perspective which some Asean citizens are very aware of.

‘For Singaporeans to be thus engaged will mean some discomfort. But it can also mean a fresher way to stay engaged by seeking the betterment of our fellow human beings.’

MEDIA STATEMENT
22 October 2009

We congratulate the appointment of Mr Richard R Magnus as Singapore’s first representative to the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR).

MARUAH has engaged in informal discussions with him and are very pleased to note that he is open to discussions with civil society organisations in Singapore.

With his experience as the Senior District Judge prior to his retirement from the Legal Service, we look forward to his contributions to AICHR towards promoting and protecting the rights of people in ASEAN in accordance with international legal norms.

MARUAH calls on the Singapore Government to engage and consult civil society further and to include our voices in the future for such appointments.

———————————-

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs press release can be found here.

Defending a region’s rights can be a balancing act
Bangkok Post, 14th October 2009

Sriprapha Petcharamesree has been endorsed as Thailand’s representative to the Asean Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights.

The 53-year-old yesterday spoke to Achara Ashayagachat immediately after being given the three-year AICHR posting.

How will you live up to the different expectations of the civil society and the government?

Expectations vary from one country to another. Launching the commission is a state obligation and needs the involvement of more than one ministry, not just the Foreign Ministry alone. There are also other ministries and agencies that have a role to play in promoting human rights, including the National Human Rights Commission .

Regionally, the AICHR is expected to serve as a link between the state and the civil sector. It could even be asked to offer advice and technical assistance on how to organise fair and free elections in Burma next year.

Do you feel the agency has a limited scope of authority, and what are its shortcomings?

As a voice of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, I think we should only defend Asean when we really need to in the international arena, but not if they are not taking good care of their people as the spirit of the Asean charter demands. Neither should member states expect the AICHR to act as their mouthpiece if things are not in line with our mandate.

If you ask me whether I feel heavy-hearted or am afraid of conflict, the answer is no.

This is because the Asean governments and the AICHR share the same goals in promoting and protecting Asean people’s rights.

But I need to make clear that I am not the representative of the Thai government but of the Thai civil sector, which was involved in the selection process.

For controversial terms of reference, we may have to borrow Dr Vitit Muntabhorn’s guidelines which state that things that are not prohibited (by the terms) are not forbidden.

I try to encourage myself to interpret our job description more creatively so that we will not be easily discouraged. After all, the promotion aspect remains important in the region.

We could gather information and commission certain bodies to prepare studies on such issues as child soldiers – now also a problem in southern Thailand – migrant workers, violence against women, human rights violations, and development projects.

How could the AICHR and the NHRC collaborate?

The NHRC has a larger mandate as it can receive petitions and undertake investigations, while we could not move on such things without the consent of the hosts. Yet, I believe there are issues that carry cross-border impacts which the NHRC cannot grapple alone. On issues like dam construction impacts, such problems are rather common in the region, and the AICHR is in a good position to handle them.

How will the AICHR get started?

After the Asean leaders meeting in Cha-am next week, Thailand as the chair of the meeting will propose the establishment of a human rights fund.

I realise that from NGOs’ point of view, Burma might be on top of the agenda. But there are also other more important issues to be addressed, and we need to make sure none of the member governments are offended.

What will happen if the AICHR’s consensus is not in line with the governments’ expectations?

Autonomy is important, but communications and consultation with Asean foreign ministers is also key.

Are you afraid of losing your identity as a strong and principle-oriented person?

I certainly do not like to compromise my principles but will offer my cooperation in working out the details and the procedures.

I don’t have the diplomatic skills to compromise if those skills mean I must offer blank promises without an honourable commitment. Certainly, it is not an easy job.

The Singapore Working Group for an ASEAN Human Rights Mechanism (MARUAH) would like to invite all youths to participate in a Youth Human Rights Workshop: “whose Right is it anyway?”. Co-organised with UNYAS, this is a full-day workshop for anyone keen on learning more about human rights.  Read more in our e-flyer here.

Details below
Saturday, 31 October 2009
9.00 am to 5.30 pm
Singapore Management University
More information at our website: http://www.whoseright.wordpress.com

Sign up online here, as soon as possible.

The Online Citizen has written an article about the selection process of the Singapore representative to the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR).

ASEAN Human Rights – Going Forward or Stalled?

Please see below for the full recommendations from the recent public consultation organised by MARUAH on the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) on 22 August 2009.

—————————–

Consultation Workshop:
“Engaging the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) – The People’s Views”
Novotel Clarke Quay, Singapore
22 August 2009

A. Background
1. The above-named consultation was organised with the aims of raising awareness to the functions, role and governance of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) and for the people sector to engage in this process at the regional and national levels.

2. Ninety participants from various civil society, political and academic organisations, and interested members of the public attended the workshop and participated fully. Others who attended the event included diplomats, media personnel who were observers. The event was closed to media. A press conference was held at the end of the consultation.

3. The Workshop notes that the ASEAN Charter entered into force on 15 December 2008 following its ratification by all member-states. The Workshop notes that the timeline agreed upon by the ASEAN foreign ministers to have the Terms of Reference (TOR) of the AHRB finalized by 2009 will be met and that the High Level Panel (HLP) submitted the final draft of the TOR of the human rights body to the ASEAN foreign ministers on 19 July 2009 for consideration and endorsement.

4. The Workshop asserts that though the TOR does not have a strong mandate on protection, the process of protecting the rights of the people in ASEAN has begun.

5. The Workshop recognizes that while member-states of ASEAN still have diverse records on human rights, it appreciates that ASEAN itself, as a rules-based regional organization, has increasingly paid attention to human rights. The Workshop also thanks the HLP for their commitment.

6. The Workshop looks forward to the establishment of the AICHR by the 15th ASEAN Summit in October 2009 and is encouraged by the level of civil society engagement with the HLP in this process.

7. The consultation began with a plenary session on the AICHR. This was followed with a Question and Answer interaction. The speakers were:- Ambassador Ong Keng Yong, Director of the Institute of Policy Studies and former ASEAN Secretary-General, Singapore; Dr Sriprapha Petcharamesree, head of Human Rights Centre, Mahidol, Thailand and Chair of the Thai Working Group on ASEAN Human Rights Mechanism; Ms Shanthi Dairiam, former UN CEDAW Committee and founder of IWRAW, Malaysia; Mr Arpee Santiago, Programme Manager, The Working Group for ASEAN Human Rights Mechanism and Law Lecturer, Ateneo Human Rights Centre, Philippines. The chair was Ms Braema Mathiaparanam, Chairperson and coordinator, MARUAH, Singapore.

8. This plenary which was then followed up by break-out sessions aimed at specific aspects of the human rights in ASEAN and on AICHR. These break-out sessions, managed by Mr Siew Kum Hong, Vice-chair of MARUAH, were:
i. Selection of candidates for the AICHR,
ii. Dynamics between the State and AICHR,
iii. The human rights role of civil society and its synergy with the AICHR,
iv. The Political Declaration and the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration,
v. The dynamics between the Sectoral Bodies and AICHR.

9. The participants opted for the break-out sessions they were interested in through a registration exercise held earlier. Newcomers were asked to form two additional groups on sessions (ii) and (iii). The recommendations that follow are a summary of the points raised from the break-out sessions.

B. Recommendations
General Recommendations
10. The Workshop considers that as human rights permeate every sector of society, human rights must be mainstreamed into the whole ASEAN agenda.

11. The Workshop reiterates that the role and function of the AICHR also needs to be contextualised in the context of the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Conventions on Human Rights.

12. The Workshop emphasises that in five years’ time the AICHR must have a stronger mandate on protection of human rights as AICHR’s Terms of Reference (TOR) are reviewed.

Selection of Candidates
13. The Workshop stresses that the Singapore candidate for the AICHR must hold non-partisan interests, act with integrity and impartiality, have knowledge and experience in human rights work, have good negotiating skills, act as an independent expert even though he or she is a government representative, and most importantly, have the passion and commitment to uphold the principles as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

14. The Workshop asserts that at the end of five years, there should be an AICHR which has a strong mandate on protection and that the Singapore government representative needs to enable this process for such a provision to materialise when the TOR comes up for review.

15. The Workshop is keen to see a transparent process being put in place as soon as possible to select the candidate and that this process must be pluralistic and inclusive. In addition the Workshop also requests that the selection criteria and results through minutes of the selection process be published for the public.

16. The Workshop believes that since the government representative to the AICHR holds a human rights mandate, the process of selection itself must be a democratic one which is consistent with the aspects of the Paris Principles with regards to the selection of candidates

17. The Workshop suggests the adoption of a structured approach such as the NMP Selection Scheme with a Select committee comprising government, legal and civil society representatives to select the candidate, or alternatively, this selection could be carried out in a similar manner to that of the Committee of the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). In either case various sectors (business, legal, NGO, arts, charity, unions, academe, etc) could be invited to propose candidates for selection.

18. The Workshop expresses concern that the current approach to select candidates independent of each other among ASEAN member countries, has an inherent risk of being inequitable in gender and civil society representation at the ASEAN level. The Workshop believes that as all representatives are working for ASEAN, there needs to be a diversity of fields and a gender balance among the candidature at ASEAN level.

19. The Workshop also believes that once appointed the representative must develop a platform to engage civil society and all other stakeholders in this process, besides being focused on creating the pathway for a stronger AICHR in five years’ time.

Dynamics between the State and the AICHR
20. The Workshop emphasises that since ASEAN is aiming to become more people-oriented, the government must develop forward-looking strategies and engage stakeholders to promote and protect human rights. As such, the workshop would like to see the Government implement human rights education and ensure that there are no barriers to public participation in human rights processes.

21. The Workshop requests that the Government mainstreams human rights across all Government agencies, such that they incorporate human rights into all aspects of policy-making and implementation. To that end, the Government should formulate an action plan to accomplish this, and also institutionalise a platform to engage civil society on issues related to AICHR.

22. The Workshop encourages the Government to set up a national human rights institution consistent with the Paris Principles.

23. The Workshop also suggests that it is important for AICHR to work towards setting up an Optional Protocol on human rights, geared at mainstreaming human rights into other ASEAN bodies, and for Singapore to sign up to it.

24. The Workshop asserts on the importance for AICHR to be aligned with the United Nations human rights system, such as monitoring member states’ compliance with and their accountability to human rights obligations.

The Human Rights Role of Civil Society and Its Synergy with the AICHR
25. The Workshop wants a platform for civil society to continually interact with the Government on matters of human rights in relation to the AICHR, and that this provision be mandated in the Political Declaration.

26. The Workshop wants the Government to invest in human rights education for the people, and to allocate budgets to support the human rights-related activities by civil society.

27. The Workshop seeks support from the Government to build up capacity of civil society on human rights processes at both the regional and international levels including the Universal Periodic Review, CEDAW, CRC processes.

28. The Workshops gives the assurance that it will support the Government by working together to make the AICHR a success, subject to an ongoing process aimed at substantive reviews to be put into effect in five years’ time for a stronger mandate for protection. In this regard, the Workshop also encourages civil society groups to support each other in this effort and in its watchdog role on human rights issues in Singapore and ASEAN.

Political Declaration/ASEAN Declaration on Human Rights and the ASEAN Human Rights Regime:
29. The Workshop is clear that the Political Declaration must embrace the following principles:
i. In the interpretation of the TOR, there can be no lowering of standards to below that of international human rights norms, including the ASEAN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
ii. A committee is established by the Government to assist the AICHR and the government representative in supporting the process of interpreting the terms of the TOR and the ASEAN Charter. This committee should include lawyers and civil society representatives.
iii. Provisions are made for each AICHR representative to engage constituents in participatory discussions on matters of the TOR and AICHR processes.

30. The Workshop in noting that the principle of non-interference is contained within the ASEAN Charter, affirms that adherence to this principle should in no way compromise human rights as a fundamental principle for the people of ASEAN.

31. The Workshop believes that the ASEAN Declaration on Human Rights should include a roadmap for its own transition to a convention that includes an enforcement mechanism and a stronger protection mandate.

32. The Workshop also encourages the ratification of major human rights instruments including the ICCPR, ICESCR by all ASEAN members and that ASEAN member countries and ASEAN as a region improve on their international rankings on human rights.

Dynamics between Sectoral Bodies and AICHR
33. The Workshop reiterates that the ASEAN Commission on Women and Children (ACWC) cannot be held to principles lower than CEDAW and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), as these are treaties which all ASEAN states have ratified.

34. The Workshop urges ASEAN member countries s to withdraw their reservations on CEDAW and CRC and to accede to the Convention on the Protection of All Rights Migrant Workers and Members of their Families as all these Conventions are rights-based.

35. The Workshop also emphasises that the ASEAN Committee on Migrant Workers (ACMW) cannot have standards that are lower than the International Labour Standards to which ASEAN member countries have agreed.

36. The Workshop believes that the ACWC and ACMW should function independently of the AICHR, at least in the short term, and that this status quo be reviewed in five years’ time based on improvements made to the TOR of AICHR.

37. The Workshop emphasises the need for the AICHR to establish structured linkages with the ACWC and ACMW, as soon as reasonably practicable once these sectoral bodies are created.

38. The Workshop is clear that there must be civil society representation in the ACWC and ACMW.

C. Acknowledgments
The workshop participants thanked Maruah( The Singapore Working Group for an ASEAN Human Rights Mechanism), Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies and the ASEAN Studies Centre for convening the day’s discussion. They also thanked the speakers who made the time to be present at this historic event for civil society.

Please see below for news of the open invitation for candidates, as part of the process of selecting the Thai representative to the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR).

MARUAH recently held a public consultation on the AICHR, and has submitted its recommendations, which includes calling for an transparent & open process for the selection of Singapore’s
representative to the AICHR. To date there has been no response on the selection process in Singapore…

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/09/02/regional/regional_30111285.php
FM invites candidate for Asean human rights panel
By Supalak Ganjanakhundee
The Nation
Published on September 2, 2009

The Foreign Ministry has opened for applications of candidates to represent Thailand in the Asean Inter-governmental Commission on Human Rights, the regional body to promote and protect human rights in the region.

The application is opened for all Thai nationals who are interested in and keen on human right matters as well as have experience in human right works, said the ministry’s Director of Asean Affairs Department Vitavas Srivihok.

The ministry has set up 12-member selection committee chaired by former permanent secretary Witthaya Vejjajiva to select the candidates, he said.

The ministry opened for the application from September 1 to 16 and the selection committee would make the final decision to pick up the representative for the Asean human right body by the end of this month, he said.

The Asean expected its human right commission could open inaugurate meeting in late October around the same time as the leader of the group gathered for the annual summit, Vitavas said.

The Asean would officially announce an establishment of the human right commission during the summit on October 23, he said.

Members of the Asean are free to pick up their respective representatives to sit in the human right commission. Some countries might have open selections like Thailand while some members might pick up government officials to sit in the commission, he said.

The Asean commissioners have three year term in the position and could be renewed for another term.

The Asean human right commission was widely criticized of lacking of power to protect basic of people in the region, it emphasized too much on right promotion, rather than protection.

See below for a newspaper commentary on the new ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission for Human Rights (AICHR)

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/08/31/opinion/opinion_30111033.php
Making AICHR work for Asean citizens
By Kavi Chongkittavorn
The Nation
Published on August 31, 2009

FOR THE NEXT TWO WEEKS, Thailand will be on the look-out for an ideal person to serve as the Thai representative of the upcoming Asean Intergovernmental Commission for Human Rights (AICHR). The candidate must be willing to work for free and be keen to promote human rights in the most diverse, if not difficult, region in the world. Knowledge of Asean affairs, especially the human rights situation, a good track record of human rights protection and an excellent command of English are a must. During the three-year stint, the successful candidate will be given a free hand in managing a Bt1-million fund to support activities or plan of actions related to human rights within the country and Asean. Other expenses related to AICHR will be paid by the government.

Indonesia , Philippines and Malaysia, which have their own national human rights commissions, are expected to do the same. The remaining members would either stick to their High Level Panel (HLP) members who helped draft the AICHR terms of reference or pick a new government representative. At least half of HLP members will probably return as the commissioners. They consider themselves the gatekeepers.

Against this background, independent human rights experts are pivotal to ensure that the rights body would perform its dual functions to promote and protect human rights in balanced ways, without discrimination. A majority of Asean members preferred human rights promotion than protection – this bone of contention remains. However, at last week’s meeting between members of Asean-based civil society groups and HLP in Jakarta, both sides expressed their willingness to work together to ensure AICHR will serve the 590 million Asean citizens despite their unresolved disagreements over the terms of reference (TOR). The AICHR will need all the help it can get from all stakeholders from the formal and informal sectors.

To provide such assurance, the HLP will issue a political declaration at the Asean summit in Cha-am, Hua Hin to reiterate Asean’s political will to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms, and to indicate Asean’s vision for the development of human rights cooperation. At the moment, quite a few HLP members have already submitted their own versions with different emphasis and twists. Last week, a coalition of 70 Asian civil society groups also released its own political declaration calling for the establishment of a regional human rights court.

Civil society groups expect the AICHR’s so-called evolutionary process would be an accelerated one and eventually incorporate all features of the existing regional mechanisms as in Europe or Africa. The TOR-AICHR will be reviewed in five years – quite a long time from non-governmental organisations’ point of view. They encourage pro-human rights Asean members to push the envelope and serve as models for other recalcitrant members to emulate through pragmatism and actions. During the painstaking deliberation, majority of HLP members refused to give mandate to the AICHR for cross-country work – receive complaints, monitor and investigate human rights abuses.

Once it is launched in October, it remains to be seen how the AICHR will proceed next year when Vietnam succeeds Thailand as the Asean chair. Vietnam has already set up a national committee for Asean Chairmanship to identify issues and objectives that Asean would like to achieve under its leadership. At the Asean summit in March, Vietnam welcomed the dialogue between the Asean leaders and civil society sectors and subsequently urged them to work out a modality for the institutionalisation of the interface. Vietnam’s plan of action will greatly impact on the relations between Asean and civil society groups as well as the future direction of human rights cooperation.

Vietnam’s huge challenge ahead will be how to cope with the growing empowerment of the people’s sector inside and in Asean. They are better equipped to articulate, monitor and lobby for issues related to Asean-wide protection of human rights and people-oriented causes. Under the Thai chair, they have been holding repeated dialogues directly with the HPL members and working with the pro-human rights Asean members. They have learned to appreciate the limits and potential of Asean and its cooperation on sensitive issues. They now have a more realistic view of Asean.

Looking ahead, certain articles of the TOR-AICHR could be used wisely to tackle sensitive issues as the commissioners have the mandate and function to take initiatives on human rights. Take for instance, the Article 4.8, which states that the AICHR must engage in dialogue and consultation with other Asean bodies, including civil society organisations and other stakeholders. This provides a window for the commissioners to continue the dialogue with the civil society groups.

Furthermore, Article 4.10 states in general terms that one of the AICHR functions is to obtain information from Asean on the promotion and protection of human rights. Information can be anything that the AICHR desires. So there is still room for manoeuvre. Eventually, each of the 10 commissioners would make a difference, either to push Asean human rights to a new plateau or to make a mockery of Asean aspirations.

However, the biggest spoiler is Article 2.1.b on the non-interference in the internal affairs of Asean members. After 42 years, this long-held and much-abused principle is under scrutiny. While most of the Asean members still respect this protective shield, others want to move ahead with ongoing regional and global diplomatic dynamics, dwelling on collective responsibilities and shared norms. The litmus test will come soon when the current Asean chair submits the Asean statement on Burma calling for Aung San Suu Kyi’s freedom, which will be signed by only half of the Asean members (Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, and Singapore). For the first time, Asean is washing its dirty linen for all to see. This Asean core group does not want to be held hostage by Burma’s intransigence and lack of credibility anymore.

This is a good sign for the future Asean Community. Substantive changes of policies and practices on Burma would come from these members, after all they were the original drafters of the non-interference principle 33 years ago, which are currently asking for broader interpretations and applications.

The Sunday Times
23 August 2009
‘Adopt NMP process to pick rep for ASEAN rights body’
By Kor Kian Beng

Singapore’s representative to an ASEAN human rights body should be picked in a process similar to the selection of Nominated Members of Parliament (NMP).

This is one key proposal that Singapore rights advocacy group MARUAH will make to the Government, said its chairman Braema Mathi.

MARUAH (Malay for dignity) hosted a public dialogue and workshop yesterday to gather feedback on the body – the ASEAN Inter-governmental Commission on Human Rights. It will be launched in October at the ASEAN Summit in Thailand.

The 10 ASEAN states are naming representatives to the body, which will promote and protect human rights in the region.

Ms Mathi appealed to the Government to involve civil society groups and let them name nominees.

She suggested the NMP selection process as a model: NMP candidates are named by various sectors or individuals before a select committee screens them.

Said Ms Mathi, a former NMP herself: ‘This will make it an open, transparent process. It’s also good to involve the groups because the representative will not only represent the Government but also the people.’

She added that MARUAH, whose members include veteran lawyer Peter Low and former NMP Siew Kum Hong, will send nominations if the process opens up.

Human rights professor Sriprapha Petcharamesree of Mahidol University, who spoke at the event, said a committee is picking the Thai representative. This will foster openness, transparency and participation, she said.

Former ASEAN secretary-general Ong Keng Yong told The Sunday Times that MARUAH has the right to make the NMP suggestion, and this is for the Foreign Ministry to consider.

But he said civil society groups should understand that the Government will weigh several factors. It will choose someone who understands ‘bureaucratic processes’ involved in ASEAN. The person must also work well with ASEAN representatives.

‘The Government’s position is to pick the best person for the job, not just someone who understands the points of view of the civil society groups,’ he added.

He tempered expectations of the body and urged the near-100 participants to work with it creatively.

‘We can’t expect it to deliver results overnight,’ he said.

MARUAH will also recommend that the Government and ASEAN Secretariat appoint a panel to support the work of the representative and invest money to promote human rights awareness.