The 10-member Association of Southeast Nations has been trying for years to come up with a credible human rights policy. The group again at the annual summit in Phnom Penh, has tried to bring out an Asean Human Rights Declaration. Human rights are not an area where failure is an option, but the leaders are trying to fob off a document on their citizens that is not just imperfect, as its cheerleaders maintain. It is a licence to legalise abuse. Asean's inability to construct an acceptable stance on human rights risks losing trust from the region and the world at large.
The serial failures in producing a convincing stand are understandable, if unacceptable. Even with the emergence of Myanmar from brutal oppression to democratic reform, human rights are often treated as lip service or worse within the Asean members. Countries which actually espouse meaningful, 21st century rights remain hostage to the crippling Asean rule of consensus, which gives every government a veto. This means that difficult documents like the human rights declaration devolve to the lowest common denominator.
And this result just won't do. Rosario Manalo, the Philippine diplomat who struggled to bring a document to the summit, said the Declaration "is not perfect". Two obvious examples back up this honest but understated confession.
First, the Declaration specifically allows any government to suspend human rights for real or claimed reasons of "national security, public order, public health, public safety, public morality". Then there is the claim that human rights "must be considered in the regional and national context" because not all countries are the same.
These entirely unacceptable provisions defy logic. If human rights can be suspended for claimed security or morality reasons, then they are not rights at all. And yes, each Asean member country is unique. That is a strength.
But as the seminal United Nations document on the subject says so very clearly, it is a matter of "universal human rights". They apply to all people, everywhere.
Around 60 international groups stood against the Asean statement. They correctly called on the group to go back, debate again and put together a proper human rights statement. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, recommended letting Asean citizens discuss the document. Certain governments want none of that sort of openness.
It is notable that certain countries in Asean do not believe their citizens have the right to speak openly. They will not even agree in writing to refrain from false arrest and scapegoating. Certain governments will not agree to refrain from the torture of arrested citizens. It would certainly be interesting to learn which government or governments have insisted on having an Asean-sanctioned licence to suspend human rights any time it suits their purpose.
At this point, it is better to have no Asean Human Rights Declaration than to have this one. The proposed statement is flawed beyond uselessness. The Declaration that Asean is trying to foist on its citizens actually provides legal cover to violate human rights.
Asean can produce something better. Until then, it should send this document back to the obscurity it deserves. Supporters of human rights can then attempt to make a document that articulates the right of every Asean citizen to basic freedoms and rights.