Asean wrestles with its demons seeking human rights balance

The high level panel on the Human Rights Body, led by Thai ambassador Sihasak Phuangketkeow, has a major task in writing a powerful text for the terms of reference (TOR) for the human rights mechanism in accordance with article 14 of the Asean charter.

The charter makes clear that the Asean human rights body must be empowered to 'promote' and 'protect' human rights and the fundamental freedoms of people in the region.

Ambassador Sihasak told reporters his task is to bring a balance between the promotion and protection of human rights, as well as to make the human rights body credible and realistic in the regional context.

It is not difficult to write a beautiful text; but it is not easy to transform a well written TOR text into practise, to make the human rights body work in the region's real circumstances.

Human rights is no stranger to Asean since many of its members have taken part in international conventions on the subject. Thailand for example, has signed seven of nine such major conventions on human rights. Many countries, including even the notorious junta-ruled Burma, have their own national human rights commissions.

However, no Asean member has a trace record on human rights practices. Don't count on Thailand, since the country is not a model for regional human rights. The Thai military was accused of torturing an imam in the deep south in 2007, the same year Thailand accessed the convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The country has had experience in handling refugees and illegal migrants for decades, but the Thai Navy was accused of inhuman practices with the Rohingya boatpeople, towing nearly 1,000 of them out to be abandoned on the high seas just weeks before the Asean Summit.

No need to mention Burma where the basic rights of people are strictly limited. Opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi has spent much of her life in the junta-ruled country under house arrest for unclear reasons, but mainly because she is in the opposition. The country retains thousands of other political prisoners. Criticism of the military junta is regarded as a criminal act.

Since human rights practices in Asean member countries are so varied and different, Asean needed to define a common understanding for human rights. People in some countries have the freedom to criticise their head of state, while in many countries such a right does not exist.

Leaving human rights to be practised in line with domestic law of individual members would not make human rights protection sense. It would create legal loopholes to further violate the rights of the people.

Perhaps the major task for the Asean human rights body is to have it fine tune practices in the region and have all members of the group accept such standards.

Ambassador Sihasak believed that a comfortable atmosphere would enable members to discuss the human rights practices extensively. In its early stages, the Human Right Body would emphasise promotion, rather than protection, he said.

Promotion of Asean human rights to make all members follow a common practice sounds good, but understanding alone will not help the practice of human rights in the region become true.

The rights body also needs teeth to enforce human rights practices. A human rights body without power would provide rights protection for nobody.