TOOTHLESS CHARTER WILL HURT ASEAN CREDIBILITY
The Fletcher School - November 19, 2007By JEREMY SARKIN
It is encouraging that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations is introducing a charter and will establish a human rights body to promote human rights and democracy in this part of the world. While Asian countries have for many years discussed ways of redressing the absence of a regional human rights instrument and institution, this is the first concrete step taken to put a treaty in place and develop a human rights structure that will govern such issues.
There are already such regional arrangements in Africa, the Americas and Europe for human rights promotion and protection.
While each of these systems have their individual strengths and weaknesses, and some are more developed than others, having such a system is better than nothing at all.
Problematically, however, the Asean charter to be adopted by member states tomorrow has to be ratified by all members before it comes into force.
Furthermore, it has no punitive measures that could be taken against states that are non-compliant with the human rights and democracy provisions of the charter.
It will be left to the leadership of Asean countries to determine what if any steps ought to be taken against a delinquent state.
The charter would have been strengthened had it contained the recommendations of a group of 10 statesmen from the region. The statesmen suggested that member states which do not comply with the charter on issues such as human rights should be censured, suspended or expelled from the organisation.
While the charter aims ''to strengthen democracy, enhance good governance and the rule of law, and to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms'', it also contains the principle that there shall be no interference in the domestic affairs of states. This principle, as it has in the past, will severely hamper the ability of Asean to deal with issues in member states.
This principle has already severely limited what Asean has been willing to do in relation to Burma.
Another limitation of the charter is the fact that decisions have to be arrived at by consensus.
It is, however, clear that Asean's credibility is on the line.
It has failed to deal with Burma and a host of other problems in the region adequately.
The fact that it now will have a charter with human rights provisions will be seen to be a further test of Asean's resolve and ability to deal with the ongoing crisis in Burma.
While Asean has in the past been reluctant to deal with Burma, it has recently indicated that it is willing to play some part in dealing with the situation. But it has indicated that it is unwilling to impose measures such as sanctions.
While the charter makes provision for a human rights body to be established that will seek the ''promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms'' in the region, what the structure will be is unknown and the fact that it will be established by the foreign ministers of the various states implies that it will be given little teeth to deal with the various problems it will have to contend with.
While Burma initially opposed the creation of such an institution the fact that it now has dropped its opposition may mean that it no longer fears the creation of such a body. It seems as though Burma was given assurances that it could play a part in the process to establish the human rights body and ensure that the mechanism had limits on its powers.
If Asean is keen for the charter to be more than an exercise in international diplomacy it will need to create a human rights oversight institution that is truly able to ensure the promotion and protection of human rights in the region.
A paper charter and toothless human rights institution will cause Asean to lose more credibility and legitimacy.
Jeremy Sarkin is visiting professor of international human rights, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Boston.
Source: The Fletcher School - fletcher.tufts.edu