November 19, 2024
JAKARTA – Eleven years ago today, the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration (AHRD) was adopted alongside the Phnom Penh Statement, marking a milestone in the region’s quest for a human rights framework.
However, this anniversary highlights the AHRD’s dual legacy: a symbol of progress in regional cooperation and a stark reminder of the ongoing challenges in aligning ASEAN’s diverse political systems and cultural contexts under a unified human rights banner.
The adoption of the AHRD during the 21st ASEAN Summit in Phnom Penh in 2012 was far from smooth. On the eve of its signing on Nov. 17, doubts arose as Indonesia and the Philippines expressed their concerns over provisions that failed to meet the standards of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).
Civil society groups had already criticized the draft for its lack of universality, its vague qualifiers like “in accordance with the law”, and provisions that seemed to allow states to limit fundamental freedoms. These shortcomings fueled fears that the AHRD might serve more as a shield for state control than as a genuine human rights instrument.
Indonesia’s proposal for the Phnom Penh Statement as an accompanying document to the AHRD offered a crucial compromise. The statement reaffirmed that the AHRD’s implementation must align with international human rights instruments, including the UDHR, the Vienna Declaration and ASEAN’s own rights-related declarations.
A key paragraph underscored this alignment by stating ASEAN’s commitment to implement the AHRD in accordance with its international obligations. This diplomatic breakthrough secured the declaration’s passage, but also exposed ASEAN’s cautious approach to human rights in balancing national sovereignty with regional aspirations.
Comprising 40 articles, the AHRD outlines general principles on human rights, civil and political rights, economic, social and cultural rights and the right to development, as well as protections for vulnerable groups.
As a nonbinding instrument however, it leaves significant room for interpretation, which has undermined its effectiveness as a tool for genuine human rights reform. This flexibility reflects ASEAN’s political realities, but also raises concerns about the declaration’s practical impact.
The ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) was tasked with furthering human rights cooperation under the AHRD, and its efforts have included promotional activities outlined in its five-year work plans.
Some AICHR representatives proposed developing legally binding conventions on women’s rights and education as logical next steps. However, there was no agreement among all AICHR representatives.
I also wrote an op-ed that was published in The Jakarta Post in 2013, arguing against legally binding instruments at that time and noting that ASEAN first needed to address the AICHR’s structural and political constraints, such as its noninterference principle, lack of independence and absence of enforcement mechanisms.
Attempts to interpret and operationalize the AHRD have also faced challenges. In 2016, a proposal for the AICHR to provide interpretations of specific AHRD provisions failed due to a lack of consensus among member states.
In 2019, the AICHR organized consultations with civil society, experts and ASEAN sectoral bodies to contextualize and develop “general recommendations” on certain provisions, such as those on the rights of migrant workers (Article 4), the right to remedy (Art. 5), people participation (Art. 9), prevention of torture (Art. 14), freedom of religion and belief (Art 22), freedom of expression and opinion (Art. 23), freedom of peaceful assembly (Art. 24), the right to a safe, clean and sustainable environment (Art. 28f.) and the right to development (Art. 35).
These efforts have yet to materialize into actionable drafts however, reflecting ASEAN’s broader struggle with implementation.
Despite these challenges, the AHRD remains a vital reference point for promoting a rights-conscious ASEAN.
The AICHR organized human rights dialogues, such as the ASEAN Human Rights Dialogue in 2013 and 2021-2024 as a platform to engage ASEAN member states to share developments in human rights in their respective countries. Another was the ASEAN Community Councils Dialogue on Human Rights in 2013 and 2023, which created a platform for sectoral bodies under the ASEAN’s Political Security, Socio-Cultural and Economic pillars and an opportunity to redefine its commitment to human rights as a lived reality for all its peoples.
ASEAN’s sectoral bodies have integrated human rights into various areas, including counter-trafficking, violent extremism, disaster management, peacebuilding and women, peace and security, disaster management, gender equality in agriculture, the protection of migrant workers, women empowerment and child protection and climate change.
However, these efforts remain fragmented, with implementation often falling short.
The recommendations for the AICHR as an overarching body were to develop a whole-of-community approach in implementing the AHRD, thematic human rights guidelines and greater stakeholder engagement, which underscored the need for stronger coordination and accountability mechanisms.
Crucially, 12 AHRD provisions remain untouched. These include rights such as personal liberty and freedom of movement; to elder persons; to seek and receive asylum; to build family; to privacy; to participate in the government; to vote; to work; to form trade union; to adequate living standard, food, clothing, housing; to physical, mental and reproductive health, to social security; of motherhood and childhood to special care; and to cultural life. More must be done in these areas.
The AHRD, while a significant starting point, is insufficient in its current form. With mounting traditional and nontraditional challenges, ASEAN must demonstrate that human rights are more than aspirational ideals; they must become actionable realities.
The legacy of the AHRD will not rest on its eloquent words, but on the tangible actions ASEAN takes to fulfill its commitments.
To ensure that the promises of 2012 are not overshadowed by the political compromises of today, the AHRD must transcend its role as a mere reference document. It must evolve into a dynamic and actionable framework capable of addressing contemporary and emerging challenges.
A critical step in this transformation lies in strengthening the mandate of the AICHR, empowering it to effectively protect human rights across the region.