Evaluating Competing “Democratic” Discourses: The Impact on Human Rights Protection in Southeast Asia
Gomez, James, and Robin Ramcharan (2014), Evaluating Competing “Democratic” Discourses: The Impact on Human Rights Protection in Southeast Asia, in: Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 33, 3, 49–77. Abstract This paper evaluates the impact of competing “democratic” discourses on human rights protection in Southeast Asia. The authors identify three key discourses emanating from a set of national governmental policies, advocacy positions promoted by both global and local civil society and international standards and procedures adopted by members of inter-governmental organisations. These discourses, the authors argue, are collectively shaping the emerging ASEAN inter-governmental human rights regime. The political impact of these competing “democratic” iscourses and their complex interactions bring a cultural dimension to regional human rights. The authors argue that observers seeking to understand the emergence of norms, the establishment of institutions and their capacity to collectively protect regional human rights, need to understand these competing discourses. [row] Full Text: PDF (ENGLISH)
Introduction: Democracy and Human Rights in Southeast Asia
Gomez, James, and Robin Ramcharan (2014), Introduction: Democracy and Human Rights in Southeast Asia, in: Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 33, 3, 3–17. Abstract Southeast Asia has been undergoing a transition to more democratic forms of governance over the last two decades. The 2007 Charter of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) stated that henceforth ASEAN would pursue democratic forms of governance, the rule of law and the attendant fundamental human rights, which are the hallmark of liberal democratic states. This major normative evolution is one chapter of ASEAN’s post-Cold War efforts to deepen its members’ interactions in the economic, politico-security and socio-cultural realms. ASEAN has been engaging in “community-building” in these areas. A community presupposes the development of common values among its member-states and among all of their citizens. It has been argued by constructivist scholars, for example, that in the politico-security realm a security community has been forged via a diplomacy of accommodation, or the “ASEAN Way”, that respects the core principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of states. An ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) envisages a liberalised economic space through free trade and the creation of an integrated production platform. The new democracy and human rights order aims to create a more “people-centred” ASEAN. [row] Full Text: PDF (ENGLISH)
The Protection of Human Rights in Southeast Asia, Improving the Effectiveness of Civil Society. Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law
James Gomez & Robin Ramcharan, The Protection of Human Rights in Southeast Asia, Improving the Effectiveness of Civil Society. Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law (2) (2012) 27-43 1. Introduction A nascent human rights regime is emerging in Southeast Asia, one equipped with an institutional body, the ASEAN Inter-governmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) and a normative framework enshrined in the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration (AHRD). While advocacy Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) are playing a vital shadowing role that confronts ASEAN governments with the need to craft a credible protection mechanism, the lack of formal consultation with the current legal frameworks reflects the marginalization of CSOs within the member states. Beyond marginalization of CSOs in crafting the AICHR, States have sought to limit the impact of CSOs’ advocacy activities through selective engagement of government approved CSOs. The adoption of the AHRD on 18 November 2012 and the inability of civil society to effectively influence its drafting is the latest phase in the human rights story in Southeast Asia. It is symptomatic of the tension that has existed between civil society and States in this region since the end of the Cold War. [row] Full Text: PDF (ENGLISH)
A Political Utopia Called Singapore
A Political Utopia called Singapore: Will the PAP stay in power another 50 years? Since its independence in 1965, Singapore has been continuously governed by the People’s Action Party (PAP) as it won every General Election. In the 2011 General Election, the PAP won 60.1% of the valid votes the lowest in its entire election history fueling discussion of political change in the city-state. But in the 2015 General Election, the PAP dramatically improved their mandate to govern by winning 69.9% of the valid votes surprising even some of its own party candidates. Is the PAP’s landslide victory at the recent polls irrefutable proof that Singaporeans still want the PAP to stay in power indefinitely? Has the PAP won elections fair and square? Jeannette, an opposition politician who contested against the PAP candidate in both the 2011 and 2015 General Election, offers her perspective of politics in Singapore. Speaker Jeannette Aruldoss is a lawyer and opposition politician from Singapore. She entered politics in 2009 when she joined an opposition political party. She subsequently ran at the 2011 General Election as a candidate of the National Solidarity Party (NSP) against the incumbent PAP Member of Parliament at the Single Member Constituency seat of Mountbatten (Mountbatten SMC). Jeannette served as NSP’s Vice-President from July 2011 to October 2013 and as NSP’s Secretary General from October 2013 to January 2015. At the 2015 General Election, Jeannette returned to contest the seat at Mountbatten SMC, this time as a candidate of the Singapore People’s Party. Jeannette, 52 is a full-time practising lawyer of 27 years’ standing. She is happily married to a non-lawyer and has four children aged 18 to 26. She shares her socio-political views at her blog at http://jeannettechongaruldoss.blogspot.sg/