Taiwan Tati Cultural and Educational Foundation

 
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Home Editorials of Interest Taipei Times By all means, please interfere

By all means, please interfere

The focus of this weekend’s ASEAN summit in Thailand was, as one would expect, the economy. With representatives from six extra countries attending talks — Australia, India, New Zealand, China, Japan and South Korea — all eyes were on the future of Asia’s growing economic strength.

But the summit also brought ASEAN’s human rights body to fruition after years in the making. Considering the poor records of many of ASEAN’s members, that should have been cause for applause. Rights groups both within ASEAN countries and abroad are, however, concerned that the body is little more than show.

The charter for ASEAN’s Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights was signed by member states almost two years ago. While encouraged by human rights organizations and governments outside of ASEAN, the plans soon came under fire.

The process of negotiating and preparing a charter was spearheaded by Singapore, which itself was cause for skepticism. But criticism came to a head when an internal report was leaked indicating that the commission would hopefully stop foreign countries from “attempting to interfere in the human rights issues” of ASEAN countries.

Concerns resurfaced on Friday, the day of the body’s inauguration, when half of ASEAN’s member states blocked human rights activists from their countries from taking part in an ASEAN forum. Singapore was one of these, as was Myanmar.

Human Rights Watch called the body a “joke” and “worthless” for failing to communicate with voices of concern within the member states.

Taiwan has made greater progress in terms of democracy and human rights than most ASEAN states. As in many other countries in Asia, however, its gains are fragile and must be guarded — an imperative that has emerged under the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九).

As a country aspiring to improve its rights record, Taiwan can assure the members of ASEAN that foreign “interference” — in the form of concern expressed by international human rights organizations and foreign governments regarding human rights violations — can play a positive role in discouraging government abuse of power.

Nor is this the case in Taiwan alone. Foreign pressure has repeatedly helped secure the release of political prisoners in countries like Vietnam and China and in some cases seems to have stopped executions.

In Taiwan, it is likely that international attention, combined with the work of domestic campaigners, has helped push the government toward abolition of the death penalty and improving treatment of prisoners. It may also have helped in infamous criminal trials such as the Hsichih Trio and Hsu Tzu-chiang (徐自強) cases.

There is cause for concern in Taiwan that the human rights situation is eroding — including indications of government pressure on media outlets. For this reason, the concern of well-known, international human rights groups is as welcome as ever.

From this perspective, human rights “meddlers” at international organizations or in foreign governments are often a blessing, helping to amplify voices at home that the government would rather ignore. In the case of ASEAN, however, it seems doubtful that member states are willing to listen.

Source: Taipei Times - Editorials 2009/10/28



Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Reddit! Del.icio.us! Mixx! Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! Facebook! Twitter!  
 

Newsflash


The Constitutional Court in Taipei on Friday deliberates on the constitutionality of Article 4, Paragraph 2 of the Status Act for Indigenous Peoples.
Photo: Chang Wen-chuan, Taipei Times

A legal provision that grants indigenous status to people with only one indigenous parent based strictly on their name has been declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court.

The court took aim at Article 4, Paragraph 2 of the Status Act for Indigenous Peoples (原住民身分法), which states: “Children of intermarriages between indigenous peoples and non-indigenous peoples taking the surname of the indigenous father or mother, or using the indigenous peoples traditional name shall acquire indigenous peoples status.”