Advocates Divided on Worth of Asean Commission

Kek Galabru, founder of the rights group Licadho. (Photo: VOA, Khmer)

Soeung Sophat, VOA Khmer
Washington, D.C Monday, 28 June 2010

“Because in the Asean way of doing things, a consensus must be reached and countries cannot interfere with each other’s internal affairs. This is what I believe is a major obstacle.”

After years of effort by civil society, the establishment of the Asean Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights was seen as a milestone. However, activists and critics now say they have concerns the body, which was formed in October 2009, might not live up to its goals, and they are divided on it current value.

Human rights violations remain a problem in Cambodia and other parts of Southeast Asia, particularly Burma. The Asean rights commission was supposed to be a major step toward strengthening rights in these countries. But at least four prominent activists interviewed by VOA Khmer agree that the main obstacle for an effective commission will be its lack of protection mechanisms and independence.

“I haven’t seen this commission doing any investigation at all,” said Kek Galabru, founder of the rights group Licadho.

Unlike human rights commissions of other regions, the Asean body has been active only in human rights promotion—through teaching, dissemination, and research—but it lacks protection measures, she said.

“Because in the Asean way of doing things, a consensus must be reached and countries cannot interfere with each other’s internal affairs,” she said. “This is what I believe is a major obstacle.”

The commission’s own literature says it should “promote and protect human rights” within Asean, via 10 representatives from member nations “accountable” to their own governments. But at the same time, representatives can be replaced at will, raising concerns the body is vulnerable to political interference by its own member states.

The chair of the commission is currently Vietnam, for example, a country that itself is often criticized for rights abuses and restrictions of freedoms.

“These kinds of commissions can be created for window dressing and actually succeed in creating cynicism among a lot of people about whether or not human rights in worth pursuing,” said Brad Adams, Asia director for Human Right Watch.

“I perfectly well understand that it will take time in the best of cases to create a successful mechanism, but I don’t think that Asean is serious,” he said. “They are just a bunch of dictators running various countries, and people who would be dictators…just don’t have any interest in allowing anything out of their control. Even a country like Singapore, which is very liberal economically, is very controlled politically. So it has very serious limits, and I don’t have particular high hopes for this.”

Asean officials could not immediately be reached for comment.

Despite these apparent shortcomings, Ou Virak of the Cambodian Center for Human Rights, said that having a commission is better than nothing, noting that the ambiguity of the commission’s founding document could work in favor of civil society advocates.

“I think that it is good to have the commission, because it is a political institution,” he said. “The agreement that created this commission is a political document, meaning that it evolves according to the trends of Asean politics. This means that if Asean becomes more open to human rights, the agreement can be interpreted in a broader way. The role of the commission can thus be made more effective.”

Activists disagree on the extent to which civil society can play a role in helping shape the commission’s long-term effectiveness.

Adams said he doubted the commission will do any good for Cambodia’s civil society, noting that groups and activists here already have strong support.

“It will be more helpful to other countries,” he said. “Cambodia does have a very vigorous civil society. It was opened up by the Untac process, and it’s been sustained by…the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights office, by donors, diplomats, and most of all by the courage and tenacity of Cambodian groups themselves. And I wouldn’t expect them to get anything from the Asean process what they can get already.”

Ou Virak acknowledged that the lack of real power would hurt the Asean rights commission’s overall effectiveness, but he also said civil society can push for a greater role in the future. The association is an evolving institution, he said, and it can make inquiries that help reveal human rights deficiencies and create political pressure on governments.

The CCHR plans to work with other NGOs to file a joint complaint about Cambodia’s human rights violations to the commission, after similar proceedings were pioneered by rights groups in the Philippines earlier this year.

Thun Saray, president of the rights group Adhco, said his group is also hoping to file complaints with the commission, especially concerning the alleged shootings of Cambodian civilians by Thai soldiers along the border, should such violations continue.

The Asean commission will hold two meetings this year and has reviews every five years. The next review is in October 2014, and until that time rights groups say they have little hope in shaping its structure and workings.

The next five years are likely to see little progress in the commission’s work, Thun Saray said. Still, he said, in the long run, progress in other regions, like Africa and the Americas, where there are human rights courts, could help build momentum for Southeast Asia.

Meanwhile, Kek Galabru suggested patience, especially with a commission that is just beginning. The ultimate test will be its ability to bring justice to victims of rights abuse, she said.

“I think that it is most important for a human rights institution to have power to investigate, make findings, and then to deliver justice to the victims,” she said. “Only after it has fulfilled this role is it of any use.”

Beware of ASEAN rights diplomacy

October 29, 2009
By Awzar Thi
Column: Rule of Lords
UPI Asia Online

Hong Kong, China — Last Friday, 10 civil society representatives learned the hard way what a new Asian regional human rights initiative is really all about.

The 10 had expected to meet leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, one representing each country in the grouping, for a chat prior to the launch of the Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights.

But the night before, officials from the Foreign Ministry of Thailand – where the event was being held – said that only five would be allowed through the door. When the five arrived at the venue, officials told them that they could not open their mouths.

Welcome to human rights dialogue, ASEAN style.

In a statement, the spurned activists said that the move was “a rejection of both civil society and the democratic process” that “sabotages the credibility” of the new commission. Media reports cited other groups as “bashing” and “deriding” the body.

All this seems to be much ado about nothing.

It was obvious from the start that the purpose of the new ASEAN body is not to protect human rights. Its purpose is the exact opposite.

ASEAN has created the Intergovernmental Commission so that member governments and their own ineffectual rights institutions can push complaints of abuses outside their borders. There they can be professionally watered down and run through various “channels” and “mechanisms” until the original point is forgotten and frustrated complainants give up.

Although the commission is not intended to promote rights, it is aiming to promote members’ campaigns for seats on prestigious international bodies, like the U.N. Human Rights Council.

Thailand has already announced that it will bid for the peak U.N. rights body next year. Its current ambassador to the council was government spokesman when former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s administration was enabling the murder of thousands of alleged drug dealers in 2003.

In his new improved role as ASEAN human rights defender, the ambassador has been working on the intergovernmental body, perhaps with the expectancy of a better seat at the big hall in Geneva.

That these governments are working hard on their human rights diplomacy for reasons other than human rights is unsurprising. That civil society groups have been suckered into the diplomacy agenda is unfortunate.

Not only has it proven to be a complete waste of time and money, but also it is damaging to the defense of human rights in Asia.

Human rights diplomacy causes groups to lose touch with the real work of human rights advocacy. Diplomacy obliges negotiation and compromise. It is the stuff of closed doors and secret handshakes. By contrast, advocacy means standing firm on principles. It is necessarily public and open.

Rights diplomats fear to speak out because they might step on officials’ toes or risk their status with fellow diplomats. They sacrifice their ability to communicate on critically important issues on the streets in order to keep their cherished places at the table.

This is why, for instance, some groups have failed to speak out against the use of the lèse majesté law to silence and imprison people in Thailand, when in principle they ought to have not even hesitated.

Rights diplomats may flatter themselves into thinking that they can make progress through quiet negotiating, as if they were concluding a trade agreement or making an arms deal, but the fact is that this method is inimical to the real work of defending human rights.

This is because the single most important purpose of human rights advocacy is to break open silences and challenge taboos that allow abuses to continue. The work of human rights is to end the censorship of debate on problems that cause violations to persist.

Censorship can only be broken through advocacy. Human rights diplomacy, by contrast, not only reinforces censorship but also forces its participants to engage in self-censorship.

Persons who engage in self-censorship on the pretence of dialogue should expect little sympathy later when they find that they have been made victims of their own attempts at diplomacy, and then cry out that they have been unfairly treated.

But hopefully they will have learned an important lesson, that human rights diplomacy and human rights advocacy are incompatible. Anyone opting to engage in the former can only do so at the cost of giving up on the latter. And to give up on the latter ultimately means to give up on human rights.
--
(Awzar Thi is the pen name of a member of the Asian Human Rights Commission with over 15 years of experience as an advocate of human rights and the rule of law in Thailand and Burma. His Rule of Lords blog can be read at http://ratchasima.net)

Asian rights body draws flak

October 25, 2009
BEN DOHERTY HUA HIN, THAILAND
The Age (Australia)

A NEW human rights body for Asia that counts Burma's repressive military dictatorship as a member, and has no power to sanction nations that abuse human rights, has been condemned as worthless by critics.

Unveiled to great fanfare this weekend at the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in Thailand, the Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights is already under fire for its membership and mandate.

Burma, regarded as one of the world's most brutal regimes, is a commission member, but the body has no power to investigate governments, nor pull states into line for continued abuses.

Instead, it has a mandate to ''promote'' rather than protect rights. South-East Asia's record on human rights remains flawed.

Burma's military junta holds more than 2000 political prisoners, including Aung San Suu Kyi who has spent 14 years under house arrest. Cambodia, under Prime Minister Hun Sen, last week banned demonstrations of more than 200 people. Malaysia's Government continues to detain without trial people it deems a threat to security.

Debbie Stothard, co-ordinator for civil rights group Altsean Burma, said the commission had been stacked by secretive governments, and ''had not been set up to be effective and impartial''.

The UN said establishing a commission alone would not improve rights abuses.

The commission ''will have to work hard to establish itself as a credible regional mechanism and help close the gap between human rights rhetoric and the reality on the ground,'' said Homayoun Alizadeh, regional representative for the UN human rights commission.

The commission membership has largely been appointed by governments, with no consultation with civil society groups.

''This confirms our worst fears, because an intergovernmental body has always been second best, but an intergovernmental body that won't even talk to its own citizens is a joke, and worthless,'' said Brad Adams, Asia director of Human Rights Watch.

Defenders of the commission say the body can be strengthened over time. They also point out the difficulty of setting human rights benchmarks in a disparate grouping of nations that includes democracies like Indonesia, communist regimes such as Vietnam and Laos, an absolute monarchy in Brunei, and Burma's dictatorship.

ASEAN would review the commission's terms of reference every five years to ''further develop and strengthen the mandate and function of the body'', Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said.

The human rights debate and the late attendance of several key leaders have cast a shadow over the weekend's ASEAN summit.

On the opening day, Burma, Singapore, Cambodia, Laos and the Philippines refused to meet with civil rights organisations anxious to raise human rights issues. And four of 10 leaders missed the start of the summit.

ASEAN concluded overnight but is abutted by the East Asia Summit, which involves ASEAN members plus Australia, New Zealand, China, India, Japan and South Korea.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, who was due to arrive in Hua Hin last night, was expected to again push his proposal for an Asia-Pacific community at the meeting.

He will also have talks with leaders from China, Indonesia and Thailand.

Mr Rudd is expected to again discuss the issue of asylum seekers and a free trade agreement with Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, but no formal announcement is expected.

South-East Asia gets 'toothless' human rights commission

Fri, 23 Oct 2009
DPA

Cha-am, Thailand - The Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) was scheduled to inaugurate Friday the region's first intergovernmental human rights commission, which critics have already dismissed as a "toothless" body. The 15th ASEAN Summit plus associated summits being held Friday to Sunday in Cha-am, 130 kilometres south-west of Bangkok, are due to see leaders signing 43 documents including the declaration on the inauguration of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights.

The much-debated commission has been faulted for lacking independence from the ten participating ASEAN governments, which include human rights pariah Myanmar and other poor performers such as Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam.

Commissioners on the new ASEAN human rights body are appointed by the respective governments, raising immediate questions about its effectiveness.

The commission has no mandate to intervene in human rights violations in member countries, but will concentrate more on promoting regional understanding of human rights issues.

"The ASEAN Inter-governmental Commission on Human Rights will have to work hard to establish itself as a credible regional mechanism and help close the gap between human rights rhetoric and the reality on the ground," said Homayapun Alizadeh, head of the Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) for South-East Asia.

ASEAN has been widely criticized in the past for not dealingwith human rights abuses in its own backyard, specifically for failing to pressure member Myanmar, also called Burma, to free opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and more than 2,000 other political prisoners. Suu Kyi has spent 14 of the past 20 years under house detention.

The summit is expected to see the grouping reiterate calls for Suu Kyi's release to allow her and other political prisoners to participate in a scheduled election next year in Myanmar.

"The request for the release of Madame Aung San Suu Kyi and all political prisoners stands," Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya said before the summit's start.

The summit is also due to see the signing of declarations on food security, regional connectivity, disaster management and cultural exchange.

Thailand is this year's chair of ASEAN, which now holds two summits per annum. Next year Vietnam will chair the grouping which comprises Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.

Besides drawing the leaders of ASEAN, the leaders of Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea, the grouping's main partners, are also scheduled to attend the summit in Cha-am.

Critics dismiss [the toothless] ASEAN human rights charter

July 21, 2009
ABC Radio Australia

ASEAN, meeting on the Thai island resort of Phuket this week, had hoped to be recognised for its new Human Rights Commission, which it sees as a huge step in its 42-year existence.

But document details released so far have been criticised as being too vague and lacking bite.

Presenter: Karen Percy, South East Asia correspondent
Speakers: Rafendi Djamin, co-ordinator of the Human Rights Working Group; Abhisit Vejjajiva, Thai Prime Minister

Click here to listen to the audio program (Windows Media)

PERCY: There's little doubt that South East Asia needs a human rights body. Burma's generals have used violence against monks, locked up comedians and have been relentless in their campaign to silence and sideline the country's beloved pro-democracy hero, Aung San Suu Kyi. Cambodia sues its political opponents or allows violent vigilantes to intimidate dissenters. In Vietnam, practising Christianity can put you on the wrong side of the law. Even advanced and wealthy Singapore discriminates against gays and lesbians. Each of the 10 member countries could do with improvement, but critics say that isn't likely to happen with ASEAN's new human rights body.

RAFENDI: It's going to be a political as well as a legal document so in that sense you cannot just go to the lowest, lowest common denominator.

PERCY: Rafendi Djamin is with the Indonesian-based Human Rights Working Group. He's teamed up with civil society and advocacy groups from across the region trying to persuade ASEAN nations to take a stronger stand.

RAFENDI: Human rights itself is already something that is already committed in the charter and enshrined in the charter. That means that the principal of non-interference, if you're going to put it that way, is one that becomes barriers for the human rights body to operate.

PERCY: The 11-page document setting out the framework for the intergovernmental commission on human rights is laced with qualifications and generalisms. Even Indonesia tried to beef up the language with no luck. Instead it had to be content with a statement from AEAN leaders later this year, promising that the process will be strengthened over time. ASEAN's president and Thailand's prime minister, is Abhisit Vejjajiva.

ABHISIT: It's not something that we will just go on doing without any kind of assessment at all. But we believe that with the implementation of the charter, when the grouping and the community becomes more rules-based there will be more room for manouevre in terms of trying to tackle these kinds of issues.

PERCY: Human rights advocate Rafendi Djamin understands the idea of an evolving body but he maintains that there have to be better provisions to protect ASEAN's 500-million citizens.

RAFENDI: When the mandate of protection was not clearly stipulated then you will have the problem because then at the operation level some government will not accept that kind of action when they say, well, this is an interpretation that we do not accept.

Politiktoons No. 66: ASEAN Human Rights

Click on the cartoon to zoom in

Cartoon by Sacrava (on the web at http://politiktoons.blogspot.com
and also at http://sacrava.blogspot.com)

ASEAN makes rights body toothless

Sat, 02/28/2009
Lilian Budianto
The Jakarta Post

Cha-am, Thailand - The power of the ASEAN human rights body has been watered down to a "consultative level" forum for the bloc's members, who have different political systems, after negotiators agreed to take into account each member's legal readiness.

The high level panel for the rights body submitted the first draft of its terms of reference to the bloc's foreign ministers Friday during the 14th ASEAN Summit in Cha-am, Thailand. The body is set to operate soon this year after the panel of representatives of the 10 member states submitted its final draft in July.

Indonesian Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda said Friday there should be more provisions to protect human rights in the reference, adding the body should have "monitoring, dissemination and education, and advisory services functions".

Hassan said monitoring, which meant there was a reporting mechanism for rights protection in all member states, would contribute to the progress of enforcement of human rights in the region with different levels of democracy.

"There has been some issue when we come to the *provision on* protection. Countries may feel reluctant as they do not want to interfere in domestic affairs. The point is there should be a shift in the way we perceive the principle of non-interference in domestic affairs. Gross violations of human rights are not a domestic problem," he said.

Rafendi Djamin, an Indonesian representative of the panel, said although the body might look limited in its power, there was "space" to encourage the protection of human rights among the member countries with different levels of democracy.

"This body explicitly says there is going to be a dialogue process between the human rights commission and civil society. When it comes to dialogue, you can bring the victims of human rights abuses to talk at the body. Exposure is protection. The governments would feel the pressure once they learn that victims have established contact with the human rights body," he said.

Rafendi, coordinator for the Indonesian NGO Coalition for International Human Rights Advocacy Group, added that each member state would have to appoint a commissioner to the body, who could come from a government office or a representative from civil society.

"The commissioners have the right to ask governments about allegations of human rights abuse, whether it is an individual case or a trend in the member state," he said, adding that governments would also be obliged to report on the enforcement of human rights to the body.

ASEAN Secretary-General Surin Pitsuwan said the scope of power of the human rights body could always evolve, adding the "members should not be too ambitious" for the time being.

"The draft body has been deliberating the issues on how to promote and how to protect human rights. Would it mean the right to investigate, the right to issue judgments or ask orders for judicial review or to correct the wrong or to give advice? I think the point now is we have to begin somewhere. We can't be too ambitious. Let it evolve," Surin said in Cha-am.

Civil communities had expected the rights body would have the power to investigate and prosecute by piling pressure on iron-fisted governments, especially the military junta in Myanmar.

ASEAN consists of 10 countries, ranging from military-ruled Myanmar, socialist Vietnam and Laos, to democratic Indonesia, the Philippines and Cambodia.

Djauhari Oratmangun, the Indonesian Foreign Ministry's director general of ASEAN affairs, said because the terms of reference of the rights body would still be developed until it was finalized in July, Jakarta would look into the possibility of having all member states take into account what the human rights commission in Indonesia had achieved.

"The development of the rights body in the future could also refer to the existing rights commissions, especially the one in Indonesia, which has the power to investigate cases and summon people *to be questioned*," he said.

ASEAN still toothless after 40 years

Nov 27, 2007
By Alex Au
Asia Times (Hong Kong)

SINGAPORE - When United Nations special envoy Ibrahim Gambari landed in Singapore prepared to brief Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and other East Asian leaders on his mission to Myanmar, he was told at the last minute that the briefing was off.

The senior diplomat, charged with mediating national reconciliation between Myanmar's ruling generals and its oppressed pro-democracy movement, had effectively flown halfway around the world for nothing.

The 40th anniversary summit of ASEAN, a grouping comprised of 10 Southeast Asian countries, will be remembered more as a shambles than the celebration of the beginning of a new era. ASEAN's leaders were in particular expected to show the world progress on the Myanmar issue, but ended up looking more disunited - if not outright cowardly.

They also inked agreements towards creating an integrated ASEAN economic community, while at the same time the grouping's largest member Indonesia had just handed down a controversial decision against a Singaporean investor which ratcheted up the risks for all foreign and ASEAN investors.

The summit's first working dinner for the 10 ASEAN leaders on November 19 was gummed up by the Myanmar issue. As ASEAN's current chair, Singapore had invited Gambari to brief all the other ASEAN leaders on his mission's progress. In addition, with leaders from China, South Korea and Japan in attendance as part of the post-summit "ASEAN+3" roundtable, Gambari was also slated to brief those countries' leaders.

Prior to the event, when Singapore sounded out the other ASEAN leaders on the meeting's scheduled proceedings, none of them at the time had objected to the planned Gambari briefing. According to an unnamed diplomat quoted in the Straits Times, Singapore's main daily, even the Myanmar government explicitly said it had no objections to the briefing.

But at the dinner, and while Gambari was en route from New York, Myanmar Prime Minister Thein Sein suddenly shifted his government's position and refused to agree to an ASEAN briefing by the UN envoy. Myanmar's internal affairs were not the business of other ASEAN countries, he insisted.

Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines and Malaysia disagreed, pointing out that with global attention on the situation it could no longer be considered a domestic matter. One leader reportedly told Myanmar: "The rest of the world thinks that this is a matter that concerns ASEAN also and have begun to hit at us." Still Thein Sein refused to budge, forcing all the other leaders to climb down and severely embarrassing the group.

Just the week before, ASEAN had rejected the US Senate's call to suspend Myanmar from the grouping. Introduced by California Democrat Senator Barbara Boxer, the unanimously-approved resolution urged ASEAN to take "appropriate disciplinary measures, including suspension, until such time as the government of [Myanmar] has demonstrated improved respect for and commitment to human rights".

Ong Keng Yong, ASEAN's secretary general, said in reply that Myanmar was part of the ASEAN family and insisted that dialogue should be the way forward. Suspending Myanmar maybe be possible from the "perspective of American decision-makers ... but from our perspective we believe we should be a bit more circumspect", he said.

Ong also said Myanmar could simply walk away from ASEAN, as they "are quite happy to be left alone". "They are not scared, not afraid of being isolated. They can just shut the door and go into hibernation."

In a sense, his estimation of Myanmar's intransigence was proved right, except that Myanmar was prepared not only to thumb its nose against the West, but against its ASEAN neighbors as well. That being the case, the group might as well have suspended Myanmar as the US Senate's resolution urged.

However, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia did not want the group to set a new precedent of interfering in a member state's affairs, and generally objected to ASEAN taking a hard line against Myanmar. Even sanctions were ruled out once again. "Not only will they not work, but they will be counterproductive," Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told reporters.

He was responding to the view of the Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Socrates: "We think sanctions are important in order to proceed." Socrates was in Singapore representing the European Union at the ASEAN-EU dialogue. The same week as the ASEAN summit, the EU adopted sanctions against 1,207 Myanmar firms and expanded visa bans and asset freezes on the country's military rulers.

Toothless charter

Despite the Gambari briefing fiasco, ASEAN's leaders made a big show of supposed unity at the summit by unveiling and signing a new charter. Throughout the drafting process, most of the details were kept secret, though advance publicity had mentioned moving the grouping towards a "rules-based" orientation.

While the primary aim of the new charter was to facilitate a speedier integration of the 10 members' economies, to meet the twin challenges of a rising China and India, in the months leading up to the summit the new charter's provision for a new "human rights commission" was also highlighted.

When the final document was leaked, it proved right all those who had the lowest of low expectations. The document was full of motherhood statements about promoting a "people-oriented ASEAN" and having "respect for the different cultures, languages and religions of the peoples".

As for human rights, it said loftily that there should be "adherence to the rule of law, good governance, the principles of democracy and constitutional government" together with "respect for fundamental freedoms, the promotion and protection of human rights and the promotion of social justice", but the establishment of a new human rights commission didn't figure in the final draft.

Instead it provided for an unspecified "ASEAN human rights body" which "shall operate in accordance with the terms of reference to be determined by the ASEAN foreign ministers meeting". At the same time, the charter enshrined among its principles "non-interference in the internal affairs of ASEAN member states" and "respect for the right of every member state to lead its national existence free from external interference, subversion and coercion".

That being the case, it is difficult to see how the new charter can make any difference to the situation in Myanmar, or any other rights-abusing ASEAN country, for that matter. For instance, no provision is made in the new charter for sanctions or expulsion from the grouping if a member state refuses to live up to any of these broad obligations.

In any case, the charter can only come into toothless force after all 10 countries have ratified it. Already, Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo signaled a likely roadblock ahead. "The expectation of the Philippines is that if Myanmar signs the charter, it is committed to returning to the path of democracy and releasing [opposition leader] Aung San Suu Kyi," she said. "Until the Philippines Congress sees that happen, it would have extreme difficulty in ratifying the ASEAN charter."

The same day the ASEAN charter was signed, the leaders also inked additional agreements on economic integration and two declarations on the environment. The economic agreement calls for an ASEAN Economic Community by 2015 which in theory will form a single market "where goods, services, investments and capital, as well as skilled workers, will be able to flow freely".

The blueprint says that four priority sectors, namely air services, e-commerce, healthcare and tourism, will have all barriers to services trade removed by 2010. Such designs, however, will remain a pipe dream unless there is much more political will than hence demonstrated. For example, ASEAN countries, with few exceptions, still regulate air links with each other through highly restrictive bilateral air services agreements. Indonesia has so far banned all foreign budget airlines from operating into its airports to protect its own domestic budget carriers.

Moreover, while ASEAN leaders were hammering out liberalization measures in Singapore, Indonesia made an alarming decision against Singapore state investment vehicle Temasek Holdings that promises to dampen broad investor sentiment. Jakarta's competition watchdog, the Business Competition Supervisory Commission, told Temasek it had to divest within two years its stakes in one of two telecom local companies, ruling its crossholdings violated anti-monopoly laws.

It also fined Temasek and eight linked companies 25 billion rupiah (US$2.7 million) each for allegedly manipulating Indonesia's telecom market. Temasek has protested the decision and plans to appeal the controversial ruling to a Jakarta court. In its current form, ASEAN is notably powerless to mediate and hand down binding rulings on such disputes.

Hence, ASEAN's dream of forging a rules-based single economic community from its current talk-shop incarnation is still far from reality, freshly inked mutual agreements notwithstanding. And with ASEAN's continued resistance to international calls to suspend or at least sanction Myanmar, despite the signing of a new rights-promoting charter, the grouping looks for the foreseeable future to remain a paper tiger.

Alex Au is an independent social and political commentator, freelance writer and blogger based in Singapore. He often speaks at public forums on politics, culture and gay issues.

Asean to reject proposed HR court [-The toothless ASEAN Human Rights body]

Monday, November 19, 2007
By Pia Lee-Brago
Philstar (Philippines)

SINGAPORE – The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) will reject the creation of a human rights court to try human rights cases against member countries, according to a ranking official of the Department of Foreign Affairs.

DFA Assistant Secretary for Asean Affairs Luis Cruz said in a press briefing that although the Philippines lobbied strongly for the creation of an ASEAN Human Rights body during the negotiations for the charter, ASEAN will not create a “supranational” body.

“If some members suggest the creation of a human rights court, I’m sure that’ll be shot down by ASEAN. That’s not the agreement. It will not be,” Cruz said.

“We’re not creating a supranational body. We’re not creating a Court of Justice like in the European Union. We’re batting for functions such as human rights education and monitoring. These are what we’ll propose in the Terms of Reference (TOR) subject to agreement of all ASEAN leaders,” Cruz added.

Myanmar, one of the 10 ASEAN member countries, is expected to be on the agenda at the 13th ASEAN Summit held here this week, with focus on the political crisis experienced by the country particularly the alleged human rights violations.

Other members of ASEAN are Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.

Host Singapore’s Foreign Minister George Yeo said the ASEAN leaders’ informal dinner today will be “the critical meeting” for adopting a common position on Myanmar.

“That’s a family dinner, there will be no officials present; there will be no closed-circuit television. It’s just the leaders meeting among themselves,” he said.

The ASEAN is under tremendous pressure from its trading partners, the US and Europe, over Myanmar.

The signing of the Asean Charter is one of the highlights of the 13th Asean Summit.

The High Level Task Force (HLTF) that drafted the Charter will present today the final draft to the foreign ministers for possible changes before the ministers submit the Charter to the leaders for signing.

The ASEAN Charter, which contains 13 chapters, will give legal personality to the regional bloc, provide the constitutional framework for ASEAN member states to work together in a rules-based environment where decisions are legally binding and will build the foundation of members to further develop the Asean Community beyond 2015.

President Arroyo, who arrived here yesterday, is expected to put forward Philippine interests on various environmental issues including the protection of coastal and marine ecosystems and the use of more renewable and alternative sources of energy.

In her departure statement to Singapore, Mrs. Arroyo said the interests of the people come first. “Their agenda is my agenda in Singapore: energy independence, environmental stewardship, a strong economy and a commitment to human rights.”

The President will have one-on-one meetings with four government leaders at the sidelines of the summit, including Myanmar’s new prime minister, General Thein Sein; Chinese Premiere Wen Jiabao; Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong; and New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark. She will also join the other ASEAN Leaders in meeting with the business leaders of the ASEAN Business Advisory Council (ASEAN BAC) tomorrow.

Meanwhile, Singapore, known as one of the safest countries in the world, still stepped up its security and tightened laws on public protests for the ASEAN summit.

About 2,500 police officers will guard 16 leaders and hundreds of delegates gathering for the summit. Yesterday, members of the paramilitary Gurkha Contingent stood guard with submachine guns and shotguns in the driveway of the Shangri-La hotel, the main summit venue located just off Singapore’s Orchard Road shopping strip.

With Paolo Romero, AFP, AP