Skip to main content

ASEAN’S Human rights body must flex its muscles

By Zin Linn

The 15th Asean summit held at a Thai resort town, has given room for hope that the conditions governing the detention of democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi would be relaxed. Her detention figured in the talks Prime Minister Thein Sein had with the Asean leaders on the sidelines of the summit. And the summit also came out with a categorical call to the Junta to hold a free, fair, inclusive and transparent election next year.

We don’t know the reaction of Thein to the Asean demand but he must he realized that the regime cannot hope to push its envelop any further with impunity. This much becomes clear from his assurance on the detention of Aung San Suu Kyi.

Going by the official media version, he also told his interlocutors that the Nobel Peace laureate had "softened" her attitude towards the military regime since her house arrest was extended in August for a further 18 months. Interestingly, the official media was quite silent on what the Prime Minister had said if any on whether Suu Kyi would be allowed to participate in the election.

Not too long ago, when Suu Kyi was still free and was able to move around the country, she led her party to a triumphant victory in the one and only fair general election the country has witnessed. She and her party were denied the fruits of popular verdict and in fact made to face the brutalities of a regime to which popular will remains an anathema.

If she continues to remain under house arrest and political parties are barred from reaching out to the people, the next election will remain a charade. Thein Sein is not oblivious to the repercussions of such an election to the credibility and standing of the government and the constitution the Junta has drafted in a bid to perpetuate its hold on the country. Otherwise he would not have volunteered to say that soon would be announced an electoral law for next year’s planned election. He offered no further details during his meeting with the host, Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva. So it will be interesting to see how Rangoon will address these twin issues

True, the regime had made such promises in the past too but failed to honour them. Kraisak Choonhavan, the president of the Asean Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar (Burma) Caucus (AIPMC), said the junta often assured that it would respect democratic values, but has constantly refused to let its opponents to participate freely in the political process.

Burma has been fallen under military boots since 1962. The regime has earned the distrustful reputation of being one of the world's worst human rights violators. It brutally suppressed pro-democracy movements in 1988, May 30, 2003, Depayin conspiracy and Saffron Revolution in Sept 2007. There were many more sporadic crackdowns. The junta has arrested over two thousands political dissidents including Suu Kyi, who has been confined to her residence for 14 of the last 20 years.

The regime held a unilateral referendum at gun point on May 10 and 24. The 2008 Constitution, the junta said, was “approved” by more than 90 percent of eligible voters during a referendum in May 2008; just a few days after Cyclone Nargis devastated the country. The outcome of the referendum was widely dismissed as a sham, but the regime has ignored calls from the international community and Burma’s main opposition party, the National League for Democracy, to review the Constitution which will cause trouble upon the Burmese people.

The 2010 elections will legalize military rule. Hence the fear that the poll procedure will not be free and fair just like the referendum held at gun-point. The socio-economic scene is worsening. The junta will not be able to manage the socio-economic indicators which are falling like ninepins. It will soon come face-to-face with a "desolate" future if it continues to refuse the national reconciliation process being urged by the opposition the National League for Democracy (NLD), the United Nationalities Alliance (UNA) and the exile dissident groups.

For NLD and UNA the ratification of the constitution staged by the Junta is unacceptable. Both declare that the ratification was carried out against the will of the people and without observing internationally known norms for referendums. The junta also does not show respect to the successive resolutions adopted by the UN General Assembly (UNGA) calling for return of democratic system in Burma through a tripartite dialogue between the Junta led by Senior General Than Shwe, democratic forces led by Aung San Suu Kyi and representatives of ethnic nationalities. From turn of events it is clear that the junta has no plan to heed the UN call and to release political prisoners, which is a pre-condition to facilitate the tripartite dialogue.

Looking at ground reality, there is more belligerence in these days, more military attacks on ethnic minorities, more arrests, more political prisoners, and more restrictions on media, more control on Internet and civil societies. So, there is an urgency to continue to put pressure on the regime till the bench marks are met.

Today's question for ASEAN is whether Burma is an authoritarian or a democratic state? According to a Burmese saying, a tiger is a tiger and it never lives on grass. Then, if someone says a dictator would build a democratic country, it may be an object of ridicule.

For instance, ASEAN’s newly formed human rights watchdog, ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), according to critics, is toothless. It has no power to punish members such as Burma. Non-governmental rights organizations and London-based Amnesty International have expressed their concerns over the body, while the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights said it has no clear mandate for victims of abuse.

Debbie Stothard of the ASEAN People's Forum pointed out 5 of the 10 governments had rejected nominees from civil society groups for the watchdog and have replaced them with their own agents. According to Debbie, it was a big slap on the face of civil society while they were trying to engage with the ASEAN. "This situation and the gag order is an irresponsible move by ASEAN governments and it will damage the credibility of the grouping," she said.

There are still arguments for ASEAN to abandon its long standing policy of non-interference in another country's internal affairs if the affairs of a country spilled over and affected regional security. ASEAN's policy-makers have to debate on the Burma Question in the future ASEAN meetings.

ASEAN should review its policy towards Burma under the military dictatorship for the sake of the association's opportunity in favor of the whole region. The UN has also urged Asean leaders to make trustworthy the long-awaited ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), which is meant to answer claims that the grouping has fallen short on rights during its 42-year history.

Burma is likely to come under the international limelight for its continued detention of democracy figure Aung San Suu Kyi and over 2100 political prisoners. AICHR must flex its muscles as much as possible.

- Asian Tribune -

Source:http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2009/10/27/asean%E2%80%99s-human-rights-body-must-flex-its-muscles

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Terrorism in Africa

According to state.gov, ISIS was defeated a few years ago. However, the organization's presence and existence remain conspicuous in Africa. Ongoing conflicts in Somalia, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Nigeria, and Burkina Faso demonstrate that ISIS has shifted its focus away from Iraq and Syria. Although ISIS lacks a clear hierarchy like Al-Qaeda, its followers and supporters wholeheartedly believe in its strong ideology. In 2014, the United States led the formation of a broad international coalition known as 'The Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS' to combat the organization during the height of the Syrian and Iraqi conflict. The primary objectives of this 83-member coalition are to degrade and defeat ISIS, which poses a threat to international peace and security. ISIS has brought thousands of foreign fighters from around the world to combat zones like Syria and Iraq, and it has used technology to promote its violent extremist ideology and instigate terrorist attacks. For example, t

Sedition Act 1948 should have been repealed a long time ago. But why?

THE Sedition Act 1948 is a legislative measure that was enacted in Malaysia during the colonial era, designed to curb any form of speech or expression that was deemed to be seditious in nature with the aim of maintaining public order and security. The Sedition Act has been subject to much debate and criticism, with some arguing that it is a violation of freedom of speech and expression. Despite this, the Act remains in force in Malaysia to this day, albeit with some amendments made over the years. Although I concur with the abolition of this Act, it is imperative that a comparable new legislation be enacted to address the escalating prevalence of racially and religiously bigoted remarks that have been unsettling our distinctive multicultural and multi-religious society as of late. An instance that exemplifies the prudent decision-making of the governing body is the substitution of the Internal Security Act of 1960 with the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA). This rep

THE HISTORY OF TERRORISM: MORE THAN 200 YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT

The history of terrorism dates back at least 1500 years when Jewish resistance groups (66 - 72 A.D.) known as Zealots killed Roman soldiers and destroyed Roman property. The term assassin comes from a Shi'ite Muslim sect (Nizari Isma'ilis - also known as hashashins "hashish-eaters") fighting Sunni Muslims (1090 - 1275) and during Medieval Christendom resisting occupation during the Crusades (1095-1291). The hashashins were known to spread terror in the form of murder, including women and children. The brotherhood of Assassins committed terror so as to gain paradise and seventy-two virgins if killed and to receive unlimited hashish while on earth. The modern development of terrorism began during the French Revolution's Reign of Terror (1793 - 1794). During this period the term terrorism was first coined. Through the past two hundred years, terrorism has been used to achieve political ends and has developed as a tool for liberation, oppression, and i