FROM THE EDITORS · 2020-01-08 · FROM THE EDITORS Dear readers H uman rights is a principle that...

FROM THE EDITORSDear readers

Human rights is a principle that applies to everyone regardless of their gender, race, ethnicity, and nationality. It is fundamental to all human beings, without discrimination. As a commitment to promote human rights in Southeast Asia, in 2009, ASEAN established the ASEAN Intergovernmental

Commission on Human Rights (AICHR). ASEAN member states also affirm all the civil and political rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights through the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration in 2012. Nevertheless, Southeast Asia is a region with diverse cultures and varying political structures. While some ASEAN member states countries have attempted to address a wide range of human rights issues, others are still struggling with various challenges in the implementation of Human Rights policies.

In this edition of ASEAN Insights, we raise the theme of “Human Rights in ASEAN,” which will discuss the challenges and opportunities on the human rights issues in ASEAN. We got the honor to interview Andreas Harsono, a researcher at the Human Rights Watch on the future of Human Rights in ASEAN. This edition also presents an article by Killian Spandler which discusses the effectivity of ASEAN’s humanitarian cooperation in handling the recent humanitarian crisis in Rakhine. Meanwhile, the second article by Kyana Dipandana talks about how the case of modern slavery in fisheries reflects the trajectory of ASEAN Economic Community.

Enjoy your reading!

Sincerely yours,Aisha R. KusumasomantriManaging Editor

ASEAN Study CenterDepartment of International RelationsFaculty of Social and Political Sciences Universitas IndonesiaNusantara 2 Building, 2nd Floor Depok, West Java - IndonesiaTel/Fax: +62 21 7873744 • email: [email protected]://asc.fisip.ui.ac.id/?page_id=57

asean insights

asean insights is a monthly newsletter which aims to provide important insights on ASEAN issues. The news-letter is published by ASEAN Study Center, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Indonesia, with the support from the Mission of the Republic of Korea to ASEAN. The content of asean insights does not re-flect the official opinion of the Mission of the Republic of Korea to ASEAN.

Mission of theRepublic of Korea to ASEAN

Spotlightphoto/facebook-awc

From 7-8 November, the ASEAN Women’s Circle (AWC) held the Annual ASEAN Charity Bazaar in Jakarta, Indonesia, under the

support of the ASEAN Secretariat. The bazaar is one of the main annual agendas of the AWC. It featured over 9 participants from the 10 ASEAN member countries and its partner countries, such as the US, the EU, India, the Republic of Korea, and China. They collaborated with communities, selling crafts and foods made by indigenous women, female prisoners, and individuals with disabilities, among others. The event showed the dedication of the AWC to help marginalized communities across the region and encouraged visitors to shop for a good cause. This year, money raised from the 2-day event will be donated to Sekolah Alam Tunas Mulia in Bantar Gebang, Jakarta. The event was opened by the ASEAN Secretary-General, Lim Jock Hoi, and the AWC’s Chairwoman, Dhani Sarwono.

ASEAN Women’s Circle Annual Charity Bazaar

Also on 7-8 November 2019, the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human

Rights (AICHR) held the Workshop on Promoting Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women through Information Communications Technology (ICT) in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. The theme for this workshop is “Towards Achieving the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” This workshop is a priority activity for AICHR in 2019. It is also the first time AICHR explored the aspect of ICT and digitalization in protecting the rights of vulnerable groups in the region, such as women.

Ambassador Professor Nguyen Thai Yen Huong, Representative of Viet Nam to the AICHR and also the host of the workshop, shared her views on an ICT-based approach to gender equality by emphasizing the potential that ASEAN could derive from digital economy development and its impact on women. Those who participated in this workshop include relevant ASEAN Sectoral Bodies, representatives from ASEAN member states, civil society organizations, and academia and experts working in the field of gender and ICT. This workshop was hosted by AICHR Viet Nam, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Viet Nam, and supported by the Japan-ASEAN Integration Fund.

AICHR Workshop on Promoting Gender Equality and mpowerment of Women through Information Communications Technology

photo/asean.org

1vol.2 no.9 november 2019 • asean insights

NOVEMBER

2019BOARD OF EDITORS

Edy PrasetyonoEvi Fitriani

Hariyadi WirawanShofwan Al Banna Choiruzzad

MANAGING EDITORAisha R. Kusumasomantri

FINANCIAL MANAGERYuni R. Intarti

LAYOUT & DESIGNIvan Sanjaya

SUPPORTING TEAMAkbar Renaldy

CONTENTS

03ASEAN Updates

06Opinion

ASEAN’s Humanitarian Cooperation: What does the Rakhine Crisis Tell Us? | By Kilian Spandler

04Youth Opinion

Case of People Smuggling and Human Trafficking: An Attempt of Securitizing Transnational Crimes in ASEAN for Regional Integration| By Fachri Pramuja

08Opinion

What can we learn from Benjina-case for the ASEAN Economic Community trajectory? |By Kyana Dipananda

12Korean Mission Updates

01Spotlight

ASEAN Women’s Circle Annual Charity BazaarAICHR Workshop on Promoting Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women through Information Communications Technology

10What They Sayabout ASEAN?

Andreas Hartono | Reseacher at Human Rights Watch

14Profile

Mission of the Republic of Korea to ASEANASEAN Study Center

2 asean insights • vol.2 no.9 november 2019

asean updates


31- 4

9

11-13

11-15

16 -19

Meeting of the Committee of Permanent Representatives to ASEAN ASEAN Senior Officials’ Meeting 20th ASEAN Political-Security Community Council Meeting ASEAN Economic Community Council Meeting ASEAN Socio-Cultural Council Meeting 24th ASEAN Coordinating Council Meeting RCEP Ministerial Meeting 35th ASEAN Summit and Related Summits Handing Over Ceremony of the ASEAN Chairmanship to Viet Nam

Nov

Cambodia’s National Day

Nov

10th Anniversary of ASEAN International Mobility for Students Program (AIMS) Student Forum on “Advancing Partnership for Sustainability Review Meeting of the AIMS Program

Nov

48th ASEAN Senior Trans-port Officials Meeting (STOM)25th ASEAN Transport Ministers (ATM) and related meetings

Nov

ASEAN Defense Ministers’ Meeting Retreat 6th ASEAN Defense Ministers’ Meeting Plus

Nov

Bangkok,Thailand

Thailand

Ha Noi,Viet Nam

Oct

Bangkok,Thailand

18-21

18-21

18-22

25-26

25-27

Special Meeting 02/2019 of the AICHR

Nov

Defense & Security 2019

Nov

10th AMMSWD (ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Social Welfare and Development)6th AMMSWD+3 15th SOMSWD 14th SOMSWD+3 14th ASEAN GO-NGO Forum on Social Welfare and Development SOMSWD Planning for Results Workshop

Nov

ASEAN-ROK Commemorative Summit

Nov

ASEAN Cultural Troupe at the ASEAN-ROK Commemorative Summit (to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the ASEAN-ROK dialogue relations)

Nov

Impact Arena Muang ThongThani Nonthaburi, Thailand

Vientiane,Lao PDR

Busan, Republic of Korea

Republic ofKorea

25-272nd ASEAN-Korea Heads of IP Offices Meeting

NovSeoul, Republic of Korea

Bangkok,Thailand 25-29

25-29

26-28

28-29

The 31st Meeting of the Coordinating Committee on the Implementation of the ATIGA and the 30th Meeting of Sub-Committee on ATIGA Rules of Origin (31st CCA/SC-AROO Meeting)

Nov

8th ASEAN Coordinating Committee on Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprise (ACCMSME) Meeting and Related Meetings

Nov

31st Meeting of the Coordinating Committee on Customs (CCC)

Nov

The Fourteenth ASEAN Senior Officials Meeting on Education(14th SOM-ED) The Tenth ASEAN Plus Three Senior Officials Meeting on Education (10th SOM-ED+3)

Nov

Phnom Penh, Cambodia

Lao PDR

Bangkok,Thailand

Singapore


Transnational crime is a threat to almost all countries in the world. This gave rise to the

idea that countries (especially in ASEAN) should securitize the issues of transnational crime. The reason for securitizing the transnational crime within ASEAN is aimed to increase the effectiveness of ASEAN on tackling the problems. One of the issues is the case of people smuggling and human trafficking to be intended as workers in neighboring countries across Southeast Asia, specifically as illegal drug and weapons couriers. However, this problem can become an instrument opportunity for ASEAN to increase regional integration through cooperation and coordination in handling transnational crimes in the region.

This paper argues that the securitization of the issue of transnational crime in the Southeast Asian region (in this context, the case of people smuggling and trafficking) has not been able to be comprehensively implemented and issued a special policy due to the difficulty of integration

among ASEAN member countries. Furthermore, this paper contends that the tendency of ASEAN countries which are more focused on handling transnational crime cases domestically has become an obstacle for this region to be able to resolve by collaborating in an integrated manner among member countries. In the ASEAN region, smuggling and trafficking people has become a complex crime practice. Moreover, the Southeast Asian region is currently one of the regions with the largest population of groups of individuals who are used as objects of human trafficking, to be exact, about one third of women and children who are victims of human trafficking worldwide come from the Southeast Asian region with 60% of them settled within the region.

Furthermore, currently, the focus of people smuggling and human trafficking has also become more escalated, namely with the increase in interregional migration flows across ASEAN as a transit country or sending country for migrants.

An Attempt of Securitizing Transnational Crimes in ASEAN for Regional

Case of People Smuggling and Human Trafficking:

photo/unsplash-daniel_curran

Youth Opinion


This migration is often carried out as an attempt to move to another country with the aim of getting a better job and life but often ends in opposition to illegal migration. This condition adds to the complexity of the settlement of human trafficking as a transnational crime. Transnational crime involves many non-state actors but its scope has crossed more than one state territory. This makes transnational crime considered as security issue, according to Emmers, and this action can affect the country as well as its citizens. The problem of transnational crime often requires a non-military response, but indirectly the state security apparatus is also needed in dealing with this issue. Transnational crime itself is considered as a non-traditional security threat, which means that this action can endanger a country and its people but not in military ways and through the armed forces. Buzan in his article titled “Security: A New Framework of Analysis” includes five new frameworks related to security, namely the military sector (forceful coercion), the

public sector (government, authority, and status), the economic sector (trade and production), the social sector (collective identity) , and the environmental sector (biosphere diversity). The five categories indicate that the expansion of security issues can also be contained within these sectors and the state is the determining actor in defining the agendas in the categorization of the new framework. Moreover, these transnational crime cases are not only happening in one Southeast Asian country but are integrated into one network. An approach is needed in protecting individual security from the threat of smuggling and human trafficking, from which the idea of human security, can be the forerunner to the emergence of policy responses from ASEAN member countries. In line with what was addressed by Amitav Acharya that the concept of human security as one of the categories in securitization can become a new basis for regional cooperation in the region; in an effort to do so, it is necessary to change from an approach to the concept of security which has long been used as a reference by member countries. The efforts of securitizing transnational crime in ASEAN have not been able to be fully implemented and thus concrete policies still cannot handle this issue comprehensively. One of the reasons is because ASEAN member countries still focus in domestic perspective in tackling solutions of transnational crimes, specifically people smuggling and human trafficking. Hence, this paper sees that the issue of transnational crime can potentially be an opportunity for regional integration in ASEAN in order to produce significant and relevant policies to the issue.

BibliographyAcharya, Amitav. 2007. “Promoting Human Security: Ethical, Normative, and Educational Frameworks in Southeast Asia,” UNESCO.

Amri, Ahmad Almaududy. 2015. “People Smuggling in Southeast Asia: Trends, Challenges, and Way Forward,” Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs (Routledge).

Buzan, Barry., Ole Waever., Jaap de Wilde. 1998. Security: A New Framework of Analysis (London: Lynne Riener Publisher).

Emmers, Ralf. 2002. The Securitization of Transnational Crime in ASEAN, Working Paper No. 39 (Singapore: Institute of Defense and Strategic Studies).

Wuiling, Cheah. 2006. “Assessing Criminal Justice and Human Rights Models in the Fight against Sex Trafficking: A Case Study of the ASEAN Region,” Essex Human Rights Review 3, no. 1.

AuthorFachri Pramuja

Student of Undergraduate Program Departement of International Relations

FISIP Universitas Indonesia

Opinion

phot

o/un

spla

sh-je

sse_

scho

ff

ASEAN’s Humanitarian Cooperation:What does the Rakhine Crisis Tell Us?

At the 35th ASEAN Summit held in Bangkok in November, the ASEAN Prize 2019 was

awarded to Jemilah Mahmood, founder of Mercy Malaysia and high-level official at the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. By honoring a luminary of humanitarian activism in Southeast Asia, ASEAN leaders once more demonstrated their eagerness to upgrade the organization’s profile as a regional leader in humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. Under the slogan of One ASEAN, One Response, humanitarian crises are no longer treated as national emergencies but as collective region-wide challenges. Accordingly, the member states have introduced regional disaster prevention and relief mechanisms, the most prominent of which is the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster Management (AHA Centre).

For many observers, the humanitarian crisis of the Rohingya people in Rakhine state and neighboring Bangladesh is a litmus test for ASEAN’s new humanitarian ambitions. Indeed, the organization has made efforts to formulate a joint response. In the summer of 2017, a violent campaign by Myanmar security forces, which Western human rights organizations and the UN have condemned as ethnic cleansing, caused widespread chaos and displacement among

Rohingya communities. Within a few months, the AHA Centre coordinated the delivery of relief items from regional stockpiles in Malaysia and channeled assistance from the Singaporean government into the conflict zone. In 2019, the AHA Centre was granted access to Rakhine state to monitor the crisis and work towards a safe return of displaced Rohingya who have fled to Bangladesh from Myanmar.

Despite these signs of activism, tangible effects have remained marginal. Recent estimates by UNICEF put the number of cross-border Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh at almost a million and that of internally displaced people at around 244,000. Against this background, delivering a few hundred tents, a couple thousand sets of hygiene and kitchen equipment, two boats and some technical equipment falls far short of what is needed. More fundamentally, by focusing on relief, the organization has left the root causes of the conflict unaddressed. Several diplomatic initiatives aimed at engaging the Myanmar government were undermined by disunity among ASEAN member states. And when the AHA Centre’s preliminary report on the Myanmar authorities’ repatriation efforts was leaked, human rights organizations criticized it as glossing over problems and appeasing the government.


AuthorDr. Kilian SpandlerGuest researcher at the School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg, Sweden email: [email protected]

Overall, ASEAN’s engagement on the Rakhine issue has thus failed to meet optimistic expectations that it would replicate its productive role in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis in 2008, when it brokered access for the ‘international community’ after the Myanmar government’s initial refusal to accept external aid. Does this mean that its humanitarian cooperation is nothing more than ‘organized hypocrisy’, a pipe dream conjured up by leaders that are only interested in scoring symbolic points with lofty declarations and photo-ops? Such a conclusion would disregard not just the uniquely complex circumstances of the protracted conflict in Rakhine State, but also the general political and institutional conditions of ASEAN’s humanitarian cooperation.First, after the traumatic experience of the 2004 Tsunami in Indonesia, ASEAN governments have created both the legal foundations and organizational capacities for joint humanitarian action. At the same time, they have narrowly circumscribed the scope of the organization’s activities. Expressing longstanding political sensitivities of regional regimes, the AHA Centre’s formal mandate covers natural disasters only. ‘Man-made’ crises – a shorthand for violent conflict – remain officially outside of its remit. While this is ultimately an artificial division and the agency’s deployment in the Marawi crisis and Rakhine State demonstrate a certain flexibility, it makes it impossible to address these emergencies as what they are: conflicts that have deep-seated socio-political and economic roots. Second, for ASEAN governments, regional disaster response is not an end in itself – but neither is it mere rhetoric. Their cooperation aims at strengthening and amplifying national capacities by decreasing reliance on external aid. This, they hope, will ultimately buttress their domestic legitimacy. Accordingly, the AHA Centre’s operational autonomy is very small. The Governing Board of the AHA Centre is made up of representatives from the National Disaster Management agencies – including

that of Myanmar – and its ordinary budget is enough only to secure the agency’s day-to-day operability. Any substantial relief engagement therefore depends on a political consensus to deploy the AHA Centre as well as on the latter’s ability to secure voluntary contributions for its activities. Thus, if ASEAN has not enabled a large-scale and comprehensive crisis response by the ‘international community’, it is because that was not its purpose to begin with. Policy-makers argue that depoliticizing humanitarian action and supporting national capacities help them build trust and lobby for political solutions behind the scenes. Naturally, these claims are hard to verify. However, the recent shuttle diplomacy by the Thai Foreign Minister in his role as representative of the ASEAN Chair seems indeed to have elicited some concessions on part of the Myanmar government regarding the conditions of repatriation. ASEAN has also contributed to a political climate in which Myanmar authorities feel they can accept bilateral aid by fellow member states without losing face. Still, Western actors are unlikely to leave the driver’s seat in the crisis response to ASEAN. Despite all rhetoric of ‘localizing’ aid, their concerns that the ASEAN Way of humanitarian assistance will further embolden a repressive regime are overwhelming. For Southeast Asian governments, the balancing act between insisting on regional ownership and building global humanitarian partnerships will continue.


Opinion

What can we learn from Benjina-case for the ASEAN Economic Community trajectory?

The fishing industry, both capture fisheries, and aquaculture sector provides income, opens up

employment opportunities, alleviates poverty and improves food and nutrition security across value chains. In 2015, it is noted that at least 869,225 fishing boats and 6,11,389 fishers were employed in Southeast Asian fisheries (Lieng, Yagi and Ishihara, 2018). While the number shows that the fishing industry has been the source of livelihood for many families in the region, human trafficking and forced labor at sea remain a critical issue in the Southeast Asia fishing industry. For the last five years, there are several cases of human rights violations within the fishing industry in the region of Southeast Asia. One of them is the Benjina-case where modern slavery is an everyday reality for these fishers on board.

Modern slavery is "any situation of exploitation that a person cannot refuse or leave because of threats, violence, coercion, deception, and/or abuse of power". This definition includes "forced labor, debt bondage, forced marriage, slavery and slavery-like practices and human trafficking". A most recent report from International Labour Organisation (ILO) and the Walk Free Foundation (WFF) shows at least 40 million people in the world are estimated to be trapped in modern slavery in agriculture, construction, textile industries, as well as fisheries (International Labor Organization and Walk Free Foundation, 2017).

Robin McDowell, Margie Mason, and Martha Mendoza are the Associated Press (AP) journalists who conducted 18-months long investigation in Aru Islands, Maluku. They found nearly 600 fishermen, mostly Burmese and Cambodian, were trapped in a cage. At first, the fishermen were recruited by an agency with the promise to work in Thailand waters. However, the fishermen were tricked and sold to Silver Sea Fishery Co, the company that owns the boats at Benjina. These fishermen were sent to Indonesian remoted island without their consent and later received fake names as if they do not have identity, family and previous life that is worthy. PT Pusaka Benjina Resources was accused of abusive slavery practices on these fishermen that held on boats at sea for years, unpaid, beaten, was denied rest time and could not return home.

Benjina, with roughly a population of 3.500 residents, became the melting pot of the ASEAN community. Burmese, Thais, Cambodians, and Indonesians live together in the tiny island located in Aru Islands. Unfortunately, this is not what ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) has envisioned.Benjina-case shows us that there is a wide spectrum in looking at the fishing industry in the region.

phot

o/un

spla

sh-h

arry

_piq

ue

From fish as an industry that plays a vital role in the lives of millions of people in Southeast Asia to the fish as food in our plate that might be harvested by hundreds of souls stuck at sea for years, not knowing how to escape. Benjina became the island of slave where hundreds of fishermen stuck in limbo.

With only five years ahead of us towards ASEAN Community Vision 2025, Benjina-case presents the reality we faced today. Following such statement, there are two points worth to highlight here:

First, modern slavery in the fishing industry is one of the multidimensional and multifaceted contemporary challenges for the AEC trajectory that needs attention from all ASEAN members. Up until today, Thailand has become the only country in Southeast Asia to ratify the Work in Fishing Convention, No.188 which protects the living and working conditions of fisher’s onboard vessels. Thailand's political will is not enough to ensure that the fishing sector in Southeast Asia would provide decent living conditions for fishers on board. The nature of an isolated environment at open sea and internationalized supply chain made the labor condition of fish workers difficult to be monitored and the reported labor issues difficult to be quantified. Shortly, AEC Blueprint 2025 needs to consider developing a regional enforcement mechanism that would ensure the life of informal and low skill workers like the Benjina fishermen.

Second, to show its relevance as a regional grouping with significant existence, ASEAN needs to review its deep-rooted principle of non-interference. The state sovereignty and non-intervention principle made the stakeholders reluctant in discussing human rights issues on a regional level. In this case, the role of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) is vital for AEC. AICHR should not serve only as an extension body but as an authorized intergovernmental institution that can investigate human rights violations related to each member state. AICHR needs to step up its game to ensure that the rights of informal and low skill workers will be protected. While the AICHR is currently still in the "promotional" stage of human rights development

with limited authority granted by the ASEAN members, I would argue that only by committing to the implementation regime in managing human rights and labor issues, ASEAN could become the people-centered regional body that can have real impact in the life of its people.

As we know, the AEC Blueprint 2025 focuses on the needs of the ASEAN business community where it stresses the issue around AEC's trade, investments, and competition in terms of their roles and contributions to ASEAN's economic growth. Concerning the fishing industry, this blueprint is in line with the involvement of ASEAN countries in becoming the frontline of the global trend in meeting the expanding seafood demand out to 2050 (Chan et al., 2017). However, while the narratives of meeting the world's seafood supply followed by the fishing sector's contribution to regional economic growth have been prioritized, the challenges for managing the associated socioeconomic impact, especially concerning human rights issues are being put on the back burner for the time being. Finally, the Benjina case gives us important reminder that if the vision on market integration in ASEAN are driven only by market-oriented goals like free flow of goods, capital, labor and services without carrying human rights principles as one of the main values, the AEC will only lead to the discrimination and marginalization of grassroots communities.

References:

Chan, C. Y. et al. (2017) ‘Fish to 2050 in the ASEAN Region’, p. 36.

International Labor Organization and Walk Free Foundation (2017) Global Estimates of Modern Slavery: Forced Labour and Forced Marriage. Available at: http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/documents/publication/wcms_575479.pdf.

Lieng, S., Yagi, N. and Ishihara, H. (2018) 'Global ecolabelling certification standards and ASEAN fisheries: Can fisheries legislation in ASEAN countries support the fisheries certification?', Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(11), pp. 1–17. doi: 10.3390/su10113843.

AuthorKyana DipanandaPh.D Candidate University of Amsterdam,Dept. Anthropology & Governance and Inclusive Development


photo/unsplash:lance_asper

As an activist and a journalist, what are the pertinent challenges on human rights in Southeast Asia?

I just finished a book by Michael Vatikiotis, Blood and Silk. He used to live in Southeast Asia, in Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta, and Singapore. He argued that Southeast Asia has some of the most violent nations in the world post World War II. He wrote in the book that no other region in the world after World War II had killed its own citizens more than Southeast Asia. Compared to the casualties in the Middle East, in South Asia such as in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and other regions like Africa and Latin America, statistically there are more people killed, died of unnatural death in Indonesia, Myanmar, Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, than other regions in the world. That is a very interesting explanation. These 11 countries, including East Timor, have a violent history. This is a region with so many human rights problems.

According to Vatikiotis, the people who were killed are mostly killed in an intra-ethnic or intra-religious violence. In Myanmar, mostly Rohingnya, people are being kicked out, and also some other ethnic groups. Vietnam had the Vietnam War. Cambodia has a history of long wars. And if we take a look at it, we also see the rise of, once again, authoritarianism in Southeast Asia. It has murderer President Duterte in the Philippines, who killed more than 20 thousand of his own citizens in their war against drugs. It has Hun Sen who basically turned the 1991 Paris agreement upside down. It has military junta in Thailand, and a new king who is also authoritarian. And of course we have Indonesia and Malaysia seeing the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, intolerance, radicalism, and terrorism. So, the challenge of protecting human rights in the region is immense.

WhatThey

Sayabout

ASEAN?The following questions are directed to

Andreas HarsonoAndreas Harsono has covered Indonesia for Human Rights Watch since 2008. Before joining Human Rights Watch, he helped found the Jakarta-based Institute for the Studies on Free Flow of Information in 1995, and in 2003 he helped create the Pantau Foundation, a journalist training organization also based in Jakarta. A staunch backer of the free press, Harsono also helped establish Jakarta’s Alliance of Independent Journalists in 1994 and Bangkok’s South East Asia Press Alliance in 1998. Harsono began his career as a reporter for the Bangkok-based Nation and the Kuala Lumpur-based Star newspapers, and he edited Pantau, a monthly magazine on media and journalism in Jakarta. In Indonesian Malay, his published books include Jurnalisme Sastrawi: Antologi Liputan Mendalam dan Memikat (with Budi Setiyono) and “Agama” Saya Adalah Jurnalisme as well as in English Race, Islam and Power: Ethnic and Religious Violence in Post-Suharto Indonesia.


So, we do have lots of challenges, unresolved problems in Southeast Asia. Regarding this situation, can you explain the role of your organization in advocating human rights in Southeast Asia?Basically we document human rights abuses, whether it is like in Papua, the issue of minorities, weakening democracy, imposing the Islamic sharia law, and things like killings. We document human rights abuses, from Myanmar, to Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippines, etc.

You said that, mainly, the role of your organization is to document human rights violation in Southeast Asia, is there any advocacy that is conducted by your organization?We are coordinating with many governments, in Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta, Bangkok, Manila, and Yangon. We present them with the data, findings, and recommendations, but unfortunately in general, they don’t implement the recommendations.

You say that there are a lot of human rights violations in Southeast Asia, what do you think about the current ASEAN initiative on human rights?It is too late, too small. ASEAN has been around for about fifty years, but, it is mainly to protect one ruler backed by another ruler. We are seeing a huge humanitarian crisis in Myanmar, but, no single ASEAN government has spoken up boldly. What we are seeing is a small West African country speaking up, Gambia. It should be an embarrassment for ASEAN to see Gambia doing that.

Since you mentioned about the other state outside ASEAN in advocating and speaking up about human rights violation, what do you think we can do, especially the ASEAN member states, to make Southeast Asia a better place in terms of human rights?I guess the main issue for now is whether we have the knowledge to implement those international instruments. I suggest that ASEAN countries need to continuously implement and reform so it can be in line with the UN Human Rights mechanisms that they have signed.

Considering the diverse political cultures in ASEAN, do you think it is possible to have a common understanding on human rights in ASEAN member states?It is not possible. It is because once again the long history of violence in ASEAN, since the World War II, and there are too many leaders in ASEAN from Jokowi to Myanmar General, Aung San Suu Kyi, that have no moral courage to do reform.

That’s pretty interesting. In your opinion, what should we do, as an individual and nations as a whole, to make Southeast Asia a better place and improve the implementation of human rights in Southeast Asia?Civil society organizations need to understand the long history of violence in Southeast Asia. People need to understand that we are the most violent region in the world. We need to avoid majoritarianism, like what happened in Myanmar and Thailand with its Buddhist majority, and Malaysia and Indonesia with their Islamic majority. If we don’t want to create equality in our citizens, I think our children and grandchildren will see the same thing like what we are seeing now. In addition, in some of the ASEAN countries, we see a conspiracy that the majority is being victimized, like Muslims are being victimized in Indonesia and Buddhists are being victimized in Myanmar. Those conspiracies should end.

photo/unsplash-hailey kean


Korean MissionUpdates


Commemorative Reception for the 30th Anniversary of ASEAN-ROK Dialogue Relations

The Mission of the Republic of Korea to ASEAN together with

CPR, Committee of Permanent Representatives of ASEAN, hosted Commemorative Reception for the 30th

anniversary of ASEAN-Korea Dialogue Relations on November 7th at the Nusantara Hall of the new premise of ASEAN Secretariat.

H.E. Ambassador Lim Sungnam delivered opening remarks and reiterated that cooperation with ASEAN is not a choice but a must. H.E. Kasim Dato Kasmalati, Ambassador of Brunei Darussalam to ASEAN (Korea's country coordinator) and H.E. Dato Lim Jock Hoi, Secretary-General of ASEAN attended the reception.

After the ceremony, Asia Traditional Orchestra (ATO), Jaz, a Bruneian singer, and McKay, a K-Pop singer, gave performances.


Meeting with Mr. Jusuf Wanandi, co-founder and Vice President of CSIS Indonesia

On November 13th, Ambassador Lim Sungnam paid a courtesy visit to Mr. Jusuf Wanandi, co-founder and Vice President of CSIS Indonesia. Ambassador Lim explained the Korean government's New

Southern Policy as well as the upcoming ASEAN-Korea Commemorative Summit to be held in Busan on 25-26 November.

asean insights welcomes opinion piece and publication review from creative and talented international scholars and professionals. There will be incentive and interesting souvenirs for authors.

asean insights

The ASEAN Study Center Universitas Indonesia (ASC UI) is devoted to research and discussion on issues that pertain to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as an institution and a process. The Centre aims to provide inputs to ASEAN member states and ASEAN bodies on issues and events that call for collective ASEAN actions and responses, especially those pertinent to building the ASEAN Community. The ASC UI seeks to illuminate ways of promoting ASEAN’s purposes of political solidarity, economic integration and regional cooperation, and finding pragmatic solutions to the challenges on the path to achieving this.

Department of International RelationsFaculty of Social and Political Sciences

Universitas IndonesiaNusantara II Building, 2nd Floor Depok,

West Java - Indonesia 16424Tel/Fax: +62 21 7873744

email: [email protected]://asc.fisip.ui.ac.id/?page_id=57

Mission of the Republic of Korea to ASEANSentral Senayan II, 23F. JL. Asia Afrika No.8,

Gelora Bung Karno Jakarta - Indonesia 10270 Tel : +62 21 5795 1830

http://overseas.mofa.go.kr/asean-en/index.do

Mission of the Republic of Koreato ASEAN

In 2012, the Korean Government established the Mission of the Republic of Korea (ROK) to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in Jakarta, where the ASEAN Secretariat is located. As a dialogue partner, the Korean Government is fully committed to bolstering its contributions to the integration process of ASEAN. The Mission of the Republic of Korea to ASEAN will strive to further strengthen and deepen the multifaceted development cooperation between Korea and ASEAN in all possible fields, including politics, economy, society and culture.

FROM THE EDITORS · 2020-01-08 · FROM THE EDITORS Dear readers H uman rights is a principle that...

Documents

Transcript of FROM THE EDITORS · 2020-01-08 · FROM THE EDITORS Dear readers H uman rights is a principle that...