1

UNDP ASIA PACIFIC REGIONAL CENTRE

OHCHR REGIONAL OFFICE FOR SOUTH-EAST ASIA

REPORT ON “REGIONAL DIALOGUE ON UN ENGAGEMENT WITH THE

ASEAN HUMAN RIGHTS SYSTEM”

BANGKOK, 6 SEPTEMBER 2010

I. INTRODUCTION

On 6 September 2010, UNDP Asia Pacific Regional Centre and OHCHR Regional Office for

South-East Asia jointly organised a “Regional Dialogue on UN Engagement with the ASEAN

Human Rights System”, which was held at the Intercontinental Hotel in Bangkok.

This was the first occasion that senior UN staff (Resident Coordinators, Country Directors,

Regional Representatives) from across the region had come together to consider the emerging

ASEAN human rights system and how the UN could engage with and support it at the national

and regional level.

It was considered to be an appropriate time to hold such a meeting, due to the new opportunities

for engagement created by references to human rights in the recently adopted ASEAN Charter

and three blueprints for an ASEAN community, and the establishment of two ASEAN human

rights bodies.

The resource persons for this dialogue were a mixture of representatives and support staff from

the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) and the ASEAN

Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Women and Children (ACWC),

staff from the ASEAN Secretariat in Jakarta, civil servants from national ASEAN Departments,

and representatives from national human rights institutions and civil society organisations.

II. STRUCTURE OF THE MEETING

The dialogue consisted of five panel discussions with persons of recognised expertise on the

ASEAN human rights system from across the region providing 15 minute presentations prior to

an interactive dialogue.

III. SUMMARY OF THE MEETING

Following opening remarks by Mr. Nicholas Rosellini, Deputy Assistant Administrator and

Deputy Regional Director, Regional Bureau for Asia and the Pacific, UNDP Asia- Pacific

Regional Centre and Mr. Homayoun Alizadeh, Regional Representative, OHCHR Regional

Office for South-East Asia, introductory remarks were provided by the moderator for the

2

workshop, Professor Vitit Muntarbhorn of Chulalongkorn University. This was then followed by

an overview of the process towards the establishment of an ASEAN human rights mechanism and

the five panel discussions, a summary of which follows:

III.1 Presentation - Towards an ASEAN Human Rights Mechanism

Mr. Ray Paolo J. Santiago, Programme Manager at the Working Group for an ASEAN Human

Rights Mechanism, made a presentation which gave an historical overview of the process

towards the establishment of an ASEAN human rights mechanism, which began in 1993

following the Vienna World Conference on Human Rights. He referred to ASEAN’s adoption

of the 2004 Vientiane Action Programme (VAP) which, inter alia, committed ASEAN to the

establishment of an ASEAN Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of

Women and Children (ACWC) and the elaboration of an instrument on the protection and

promotion of the rights of migrant workers. This was followed in 2008 with the adoption of the

ASEAN Charter, which referred to the promotion and protection of human rights as being part

of the fundamental principles and underlying purposes of ASEAN as well as committing

ASEAN to the establishment of a human rights body (article 14). 2009 saw further references

to human rights in the three blueprints for an ASEAN community and the launching of the

ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) in October, and was

followed by the launch of the ACWC in April 2010. Following this overview, the speaker

provided some insights into engaging with ASEAN on human rights, highlighting the following

points: i) the process of engagement is as important as the substance; ii) the importance of

“planting seeds” with relevant government officials at all levels; iii) the “rollercoaster ride” of

changing mindsets due to the regular movement of government personnel within the ASEAN

Departments; iv) the “Rice Cake Approach” of engaging with government officials at all levels

(cooking from below and above); v) the need for complementary approaches, engaging with

different groups with a variety of strategies.

III.2 Panel 1 – Human rights challenges in the region and the role of regional and

international human rights mechanisms in addressing them

Mr. Le Hoai Trung, Director General of the International Organisations Department of Viet

Nam's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, on behalf of AICHR Chair Mr. Do Ngoc Son, provided

some opening remarks for the first panel discussion. The speaker drew reference to regional

human rights mechanisms in other parts of the world, highlighting their varied nature. It was

noted that the ASEAN Charter provided the legal foundation for AICHR, which led to the

drafting of the TOR for AICHR over a one year period (2008/9) by the representatives of each

member state with inputs from other stakeholders. The speaker emphasised that the launching

of AICHR in October 2009 brought into being the first regional human rights mechanism in the

Asia-Pacific region, and should be regarded as a significant achievement. He noted that

AICHR had already developed a five-year workplan, with activities specified for 2010-2011

and the remainder to be approved during the ASEAN Summit in October 2010, and that the

drafting of AICHR’s rules of procedure was ongoing. Regarding AICHR’s interaction with

civil society and international partners, he highlighted that AICHR’s workplan contained over

40 activities with many opportunities for engagement. One of these activities would be the

drafting of an ASEAN Declaration on Human Rights, and Viet Nam had already developed

some suggestions for instruments, both legally and non-legally binding. While acknowledging

the broad and overarching mandate of AICHR, the speaker stated that more specificity would

come as the mechanism evolved, as had occurred in other regions. The speaker emphasised

that the region should not be considered as consisting of countries of “two-tiers” and that all

nations should respect one another.

3

The second speaker, Mr. Homayoun Alizadeh, Regional Representative for OHCHR South-

East Asia Regional Office, focused on the role of international human rights mechanisms in

improving the situation of human rights on the ground. The speaker emphasised the importance

of focusing on the implementation of recommendations from the three pillars of the

international human rights system: treaty bodies, special procedures and the Universal Periodic

Review. He stated that the member states of ASEAN had a legally binding duty to implement

these obligations, but that the current norm was for recommendations to remain

unimplemented. The speaker then provided an overview of OHCHR Regional Office’s newly

launched database, which provided searchable access to all recommendations of the

international human rights system. Mr. Alizadeh stated that the aim of the database was not

only to help increase awareness of the human rights recommendations issued to States in the

region, but also to encourage all stakeholders, including governmental and non-governmental

institutions as well as UN partners, to assist with the implementation of these recommendations.

During the subsequent discussion, the question was raised by the UN Myanmar representative

as to how AICHR representatives and the UN could help to ensure that the voices of people

were heard in countries where there were significant restrictions on freedom of expression and

assembly. The positive experience of UN collaboration with ASEAN and the government of

Myanmar on post-Nargis relief efforts was highlighted, which included helping to ensure that

the voices of the people were reflected in the planning processes, but whether this model could

be applied to the emerging ASEAN human rights system remained to be seen. Mr. Trung

emphasised that there were other civil society networks apart from the Working Group for an

ASEAN Human Rights Mechanism. For instance, in Viet Nam it was stated that there were

thousands of NGOs at the national and regional level, and that it should not be the case that

absence from a particular network meant that your voice was not heard. The point was made

by the UN Lao PDR representative that all countries in ASEAN were not at the same level,

when it came to capacity and infrastructure, to implement commitments made at the political

level. In this regard, it was noted that civil society had a particularly important role to play.

III.3 Panel 2 - Opportunities for engagement with the ASEAN Intergovernmental

Commission on Human Rights (AICHR)

The second panel discussion featured short presentations from the three AICHR representatives

present: Dr. Sriprapha Petcharamesree (Thailand), Mr. Mahammad Shafree Abdulla (Malaysia),

Mr. Rafendi Djamin (Indonesia), as well as Mr. Le Hoai Trung on behalf of AICHR Viet

Nam’s representative and current Chair of AICHR, Mr. Do Ngoc Son.

Dr. Sriprapha highlighted three main points as the basis for possible UN engagement with

AICHR. Firstly, there was a growing acceptance within ASEAN of international human rights

standards which, in turn, indicated a growing acceptance of the universality of human rights

and the role of international human rights bodies. Secondly, there was an increasing level of

cooperation on the handling of transnational problems. For instance, ASEAN’s three blueprints

for a regional community had identified issues of common concern for cross border

cooperation. Thirdly, the growth of civil society had taken place in a number of countries in the

region.

The speaker emphasised that AICHR had just started work and had decided on a workplan but

had not yet discussed how it would be implemented. She highlighted that the secretariat

support at the national and regional level was very limited as was the budget. She also stated

that AICHR was diverse in members and needed time to attune itself to the tasks at hand.

Dr. Sriprapha then highlighted four possible areas of engagement between the UN and AICHR:

4

i) encouraging member states to ratify and implement the core international human rights

treaties; ii) capacity building for members of AICHR and their assistants, including with regard

to existing international and regional mechanisms. Also, capacity building for relevant

government officials and government agencies, which could be conducted jointly with AICHR;

iii) thematic studies, for instance linking up with relevant special procedures mandate holders;

iv) the drafting of ASEAN human rights instruments, with lessons learned and experiences

from outside the region being made available.

Mr. Mahammad Shafree Abdulla then addressed the meeting, emphasising that when it came to

capacity building activities, AICHR members themselves would benefit as it was vital that they

were kept abreast of the latest developments such as in human rights case law. The speaker

highlighted the need to bridge mindsets among AICHR members, who came from a variety of

different backgrounds, and to overcome fear of the unknown through capacity building

initiatives. The speaker stressed that AICHR members themselves needed to show strength of

character to change mindsets within their governments and help dispel fears on matters such as

the implications of acceding to international human rights treaties. He noted that the UN could

assist in these areas by providing access to relevant human rights knowledge and experiences.

He stated that government ministers did not appreciate the importance of human rights until

they themselves were confronted with situations in which they relied on human rights concepts

for protection.

Mr. Abdulla went on to highlight the importance of timing when deciding on work priorities.

For instance, the abolishment of the death sentence was currently a very sensitive issue for

Singapore and may not be the appropriate time for AICHR to take it up. The speaker also

stressed the importance of the UN approaching states in the right way in order to dispel

unfounded suspicions. For instance, the UN should not only point the finger at states

concerning human rights violations, but also highlight the human rights violations committed

by non-state actors such as big corporations and the role of the state as the guardian of human

rights rather than just the offender.

Regarding the drafting of an ASEAN Human Rights Declaration, Mr. Shafree stated that the

process should be conducted quickly. He informed participants that the upcoming meeting of

AICHR in Kuala Lumpur from 20-23 September 2010 would decide on the composition of the

Task Force to draft the declaration. He also stressed that there was no point in drafting this

regional human rights instrument unless it was “better” than the Universal Declaration of

Human Rights; for example, by including reference to the human rights responsibilities of big

corporations. Dr. Sriprapha added that the return of the “Asian Values” arguments of the 1990s

had to be prevented with explicit reference to the universality of human rights. Furthermore, the

participation of different stakeholders, including civil society, should be ensured in the drafting

process.

Mr. Rafendi Djamin then made some remarks, stating that the Regional Dialogue was very

timely as AICHR had in July agreed on its five-year workplan and it would now be a good time

to explore which UN agencies were interested in collaborating on certain activities. The

speaker highlighted that AICHR was still very much a new player within the ASEAN

framework and that the role of AICHR to ASEAN’s work was still not yet properly understood.

He highlighted that it would be good for UN agencies to mainstream AICHR within existing

frameworks of cooperation that existed, and emphasised that UN agencies had an important

role to play in terms of providing relevant information to all actors. For instance, concerning

migration, it was important for AICHR members to properly understand the human rights

situation of people crossing borders in the region.

Mr. Le Hoai Trung commented that the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights should be

more optimistic regarding AICHR, referring to a press statement issued on 22 July 2009, which

5

had stressed the importance of regional human rights mechanisms having a strong protection

mandate, independent members and ensured engagement with civil society groups. Mr. Trung

stated that one had to be realistic and that it was a process that was moving forward.

During the discussion, Mr. Yap Swee Seng of Forum-Asia observed that while there had been

important progress made in ASEAN’s engagement with civil society, there was still insufficient

public information on what was happening with AICHR which hindered contributions from

civil society, NHRIs as well as the UN. Mr. Seng also highlighted the importance of

conducting national consultations to raise awareness on AICHR and gather inputs on its future

activities, including the drafting of an ASEAN human rights declaration.

Other points made during the discussion dealt with the role of the UN in helping to facilitate

South-South knowledge exchanges in the context of AICHR’s thematic studies. Professor

Amara Pongsapich, Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand, stated

that the South East Asia National Human Rights Institution Forum (made up of the four NHRIs

in South-East Asia) had had difficulty in engaging with AICHR and asked for UN agencies to

assist the Forum in this regard.

III.4 Panel 3 - Opportunities for engagement with the ASEAN Commission for the

Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Women and Children (ACWC)

For panel three, one presentation was given by Ms. Rita Serena Kolibonso, ACWC

representative for Indonesia on women’s rights. The speaker gave a brief overview of the

process towards the establishment of the ACWC, which was launched in April 2010. She

highlighted some areas of the ACWC’s mandate, including its mandate to promote the

implementation of international human rights instruments; to advocate on behalf of women and

children; to assist, upon request by the ASEAN member states, in preparing its periodic reports

for CEDAW and CRC, the UPR and other treaty bodies; and to assist with the implementation

of the Concluding Observations of CEDAW, CRC and other treaty bodies.

The speaker highlighted the focus areas of the ACWC, which would include applying MDG

indicators in the review of progress achieved in the implementation of the ACWC’s mandate,

and harmonizing policies, strategies and operational programmes between the ACWC and UN

Women, both at the regional and national levels. Amongst the priorities to be contained in the

ACWC’s upcoming five-year workplan would be national capacity building for the promotion

and protection of the rights of women and children based on CEDAW and CRC, which would

involve the development of indicators for the monitoring and evaluation of progress achieved,

the assessment of obstacles and challenges encountered, and the provision of recommendations

for actions to be taken to overcome obstacles and challenges to human rights in the region. The

ACWC would also engage in institutional capacity development within ASEAN, particularly in

the context of the building of the three ASEAN Communities, which would involve engaging in

periodic dialogues with CSOs. At the country level, the ACWC would assist with the creation

of databases with sex and age disaggregated data, and on the issue of engagement with CSOs.

During the subsequent discussion, comments were made by the UNICEF representative that

there needed to be a stronger voice from civil society on children’s rights issues; by UNIFEM

that members may be human rights experts but not gender equality experts; and on the

unresolved issue of the alignment of AICHR and ACWC. Ms. Kolibonso stated that the

ACWC would need to develop a model of dialogue and consultation with stakeholders in order

to enable them to feed into the ACWC’s five-year workplan. She highlighted the role that UN

agencies can play in bringing in expertise and assisting with the exchange of experiences from

other regions on issues such as the alignment of separate human rights bodies. And she stressed

6

the importance of mainstreaming women and children’s rights throughout the three pillars of

the ASEAN community.

III.5 Panel 4 - Working with the ASEAN Secretariat at the national and regional level

Ms. Leena Ghosh, Assistant Director on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights from the

ASEAN Secretariat in Jakarta, began this session with a presentation on the workings of the

regional secretariat. She provided an outline of the three pillars of the ASEAN Community and

the organisational structure of the secretariat, describing how AICHR came under the Community

and Corporate Affairs Department, with only two persons supporting the work of AICHR and

with funds for additional staff members being sought for 2011. Regarding national secretariats,

the speaker highlighted how the decisions of ASEAN were implemented at the national level.

The important coordinating and supervisory role played by the Committee of Permanent

Representatives (CPR) (each member state having a person at the rank of Ambassador based in

Jakarta) was emphasised, with the speaker describing how the CPR supported the work of the

ASEAN Coordinating Council (ACC), coordinated with ASEAN national secretariats and the

ASEAN Sectorial Ministerial Bodies, approved the dispersal of funds, facilitated ASEAN

cooperation with external partners, and liaised with the Secretary-General and the ASEAN

Secretariat on all subjects relevant to its work. AICHR issues that were directly under the CPR’s

mandate included the Work Plan of AICHR, the annual budget and funding of AICHR

cooperation activities, and the amendment of the Terms of Reference of AICHR. The speaker

described how the ASEAN Secretariat’s support to AICHR included overseeing project proposals

from external parties; providing inputs to AICHR on human rights developments and other

matters of relevance that were taking place in the ASEAN Secretariat as well as in other sectors;

supporting the communication between the CPR and AICHR, and between AICHR and other

units such as the ACWC and the ASEAN Committee on Migrant Workers; assisting with the

implementation of AICHR’s priority programmes and workplan; and providing internal

coordination at the ASEAN Secretariat between AICHR and the ASEAN Political and Security

Community.

Mr. Chutintorn Gongsakdi, Deputy Director General of the Department of ASEAN Affairs,

Thailand, then provided a presentation on the potential engagement by UN agencies with the

national secretariats. The speaker began by highlighting that human rights were included under

all three pillars of an ASEAN community. He referred to article 13 of the ASEAN Charter,

which stated that the national secretariats should serve as the national focal point on ASEAN; be

an information depository at the national level on all ASEAN matters; coordinate the

implementation of ASEAN decisions at the national level; coordinate and support preparations of

ASEAN meetings; promote ASEAN identity and awareness; and contribute to ASEAN

community building. The speaker gave an overview of the structure of the national secretariat,

and described how the Thai Cabinet had approved the establishment of the National ASEAN

Committee on 24 August 2010. The speaker outlined how the National ASEAN Committee

brought together relevant Government agencies, private agencies, academic institutions, the

media, and civil society organizations, and informed that its TOR included the power: to appoint

sub-committees or working groups to consider issues; to integrate the three blueprints of an

ASEAN Community (Political-Security, Economic, and Socio-Cultural) into the National

Economic and Social Development Plan along with other relevant National Plans; to engage in

public awareness activities to promote and seek the public’s opinion on the building of an

ASEAN Community; and to recommend to the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Culture, and

the Department of Public Relations the promotion of education on ASEAN including in school

curriculums. The speaker ended by focusing on the specific support that Thailand’s Department

of ASEAN Affairs had provided to AICHR since its establishment in October 2009; namely, its

role in the recruitment and selection of the Thai Representative to AICHR, and the provision of

policy and secretariat support to the Thai Representative. In terms of the support provided, the

7

speaker highlighted the financial obstacles to secretariat support, with the ASEAN national

secretariat provided with only 30 million baht from the Government’s 7 billion baht annual

budget.

During the discussion, it was highlighted that agreeing on declarations and statements at the

regional level was relatively easy and that the implementation of these words was the real test. It

was again noted that the UN could play more of a role in helping the exchange of relevant

experiences and lessons learned, to provide technical support when required and to help with

AICHR’s thematic studies. It was also noted that the regional level provided space to work on

human rights issues when there was sometimes none at the national level. Ms. Ghosh informed

the meeting that the project proposals that would be considered by AICHR during their 20-23

September 2010 meeting, in line with their priority programmes for 2010/2011, would include the

strengthening of the ASEAN Secretariat, the development of the ASEAN Secretariat website, and

human rights training for AICHR members and the CPR.

III.6 How UNCTs can engage with CSOs and NHRIs on the ASEAN human rights

system

Mr. Yap Swee Seng, Executive Director of the regional human rights NGO Forum-Asia, gave a

presentation which highlighted the significant increase of civil society groups that had been

created to focus on ASEAN and human rights. Regarding the “Solidarity for Asian People’s

Advocacy” (SAPA) network, the speaker informed that this was a network of Asian NGOs that

was established in 2006 and was currently made up of more than 100 national and regional NGOs

with the objective of enhancing engagement with intergovernmental bodies. SAPA had

previously engaged with the ASEAN Eminent Persons Group and the High Level Task Force on

the ASEAN Charter and made civil society submissions to these groups. The SAPA Task Force

on ASEAN Migrant Workers (focal point, Think Centre in Singapore) had organised eight

national and eight regional consultations which had resulted in a regional framework instrument

on the promotion and protection of the rights of migrant workers. The Task Force was also one

of the co-organisers of the ASEAN Migrant Labour Forum. Regarding the Southeast Asia

Women’s Caucus, the speaker described how it was established in 2008 and coordinated by the

Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD) based in Chiang Mai and the

International Women’s Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific (IWRAW) based in Kuala Lumpur, and

had also participated in an interface meeting with the High level Panel and submitted

recommendations. The speaker described the SAPA Task Force on ASEAN and Human Rights,

established in 2007, as the main group coordinating CSO engagement with AICHR. The Task

Force consisted of national focal points for Myanmar (Human Rights Education Institute of

Burma), Cambodia (ADHOC), Indonesia (Human Rights Working Group), Malaysia

(SUARAM), the Philippines (the Task Force Detainees of Philippines), Singapore (Think

Center), Thailand (People’s Empowerment) as well as six thematic focal points on child rights

(South-East Asian Child Rights Coalition), migrants (SAPA Task Force on ASEAN Migrant

Workers), Indigenous Peoples (Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact), persons with disabilities (Disabled

Peoples’ International Asia-Pacific), refugees (AP Refugee Rights Network) and housing rights

(Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions). The speaker informed that the Task Force advocated

for an independent and effective ASEAN human rights mechanism, the enhancement of civil

society participation in ASEAN, and increased awareness from the bottom up on AICHR and

ASEAN. He described how the Task Force had engaged in two rounds of national consultations

in nine countries between 2008 and 2010 on the ASEAN human rights mechanism, which

resulted in submissions to the High Level Panel during interface discussions. The Task Force has

also engaged in capacity building for NGOs on ASEAN and submitted a civil society proposal on

the rules of procedure for AICHR.

8

The speaker stated that the current issues of concern for CSOs included the independence,

effectiveness and responsiveness of ASEAN’s human rights mechanisms; CSO participation; and

compliance of the future ASEAN human rights declaration and migrant workers instrument with

international human rights standards. In terms of concrete recommendations for UNCTs to

engage with CSOs, the areas pinpointed were on information sharing (from both sides in terms of

activities, plans and strategy setting) and coordination in general, the facilitation of dialogue

between all stakeholders at the national and regional level with the UN playing a convening role,

the sharing of best practices and the provision of expertise in terms of CSO engagement with

regional human rights mechanisms, and the joint monitoring of implementation of governments’

human rights commitments and obligations.

The final presentation of the day was provided by Professor Amara Pongsapich. The speaker

outlined how the four NHRIs in South-East Asia had established the South East Asia National

Human Rights Institution Forum to engage with ASEAN on human rights, and had signed a

Declaration of Cooperation in 2007. She described how the group worked on five thematic

projects, with Malaysia the focal point on migration and migrant workers, the Philippines on

human trafficking and human rights education for judges and the police, Thailand on economic,

social and cultural rights and the right to development, and Indonesia on terrorism and human

rights. She highlighted that in countries where NHRIs had not been established, AICHR offered

a regional alternative. Regarding engagement between AICHR and the four NHRIs, the speaker

noted that some AICHR members viewed the NHRIs as a threat which had led to an

uncomfortable relationship.

During the subsequent discussion, the point was made that in countries where there was no NHRI

and the space for civil society activity was limited, there needed to be imaginative engagement

with the regional and international human rights systems in order to give a voice to the people of

these countries. For instance, even in countries that were hostile to human rights, the UN had

been able to work on areas such as land, labour and child rights. The UN could also focus on

issues of governance, accountability, decentralization, all of which had an effect on the human

rights situation but could be seen as less threatening to governments than concepts of human

rights.

Mr. Seng stated that human rights were more recognized and legitimate in the ASEAN region

than ever before, and that AICHR provided an official channel for discourse on human rights. He

observed that what existed currently was a watered down regional human rights system with a lot

of flaws in the design and modalities of the ASEAN human rights mechanisms. While

recognising the step by step approach of ASEAN, he expressed his hope that it would not take too

long for the organisation to develop a credible and effective regional human rights system. For

the time being, CSOs saw the newly established human rights mechanisms as an opportunity to

raise issues officially and recognised that they would need to keep pushing the mechanism to be

relevant to the victims of human rights violations on the ground. He ended by stating that if the

ASEAN human rights mechanisms “kept issues in the cupboard” they would soon be seen by

civil society groups as irrelevant in terms of addressing human rights issues in the region.

III.7 Discussion and suggested areas of engagement for the UN with the emerging

ASEAN human rights system

In the closing session, Mr. Nicholas Rosellini commented that it had been a productive meeting

with enough material to last for two days. He added that it was encouraging to see a commonality

of purpose and underlying convergence on the rights agenda. The role of UNDP Asia Pacific

Regional Centre in working with regional institutions and also providing technical support to UN

Country Teams was noted. It was emphasised that rights were a cross cutting issue, and closely

related to people-centred, equitable development. In this regard, it was noted that there was much

9

that could be done within UNDAFs. Regarding the role of the Regional Centre in providing

capacity development, which had been emphasised throughout the meeting, there were many

opportunities for knowledge exchange, facilitation of South-South cooperation, and exchanges

between regions. Regarding the need for coherence and coordination, Mr. Rosellini emphasised

the principle of subsidiarity whereby the UNDP Regional Offices support UN agencies at the

country level. The UN Development Group was also highlighted as a strong tool for cooperation

within the UN system. At the regional level, Mr. Rosellini noted that it may be easier to discuss

issues and promote cross country exchange, and stressed the potential for collaboration on areas

such as AICHR’s upcoming thematic studies.

Mr. Homayoun Alizadeh, in his closing remarks, stressed the need to be creative but also patient

in engaging with AICHR representatives, and also to link the regional system with international

human rights mechanisms such as special procedures. He noted that UN agencies were in a good

position to assist AICHR and the ACWC with their research and surveys, with many relevant

papers already available which should be made use of. Mr. Alizadeh also noted that since World

War II, an international legal framework for human rights had been successfully developed but

that it had not been successfully implemented and that the establishment of an ASEAN human

rights system offered a potential means to address this problem of implementation.

The moderator, Professor Vitit Muntarbhorn, then brought an end to the Regional Dialogue by

providing a summary of the discussions that had taken place during the day and the potential

areas for UN engagement with the ASEAN human rights system that had been located. He

observed that the current buzz word within ASEAN was “interconnectivity” in terms of the

region’s structures, institutions and people, and that the day’s discussion had brought out the

following points: i) In any healthy regional “system” there were a variety of actors who acted as

checks and balances on one another, and this was vital in any situation where power was being

exercised; ii) In terms of the promotion and protection of human rights, although promotion was

easier to talk about, the complementarity between the promotion and protection of human rights

should be recognised; iii) Human rights was a cross-cutting issue for ASEAN, which now

permeated all three pillars of the ASEAN community; iv) The important work currently being

conducted by AICHR and the ACWC should be recognised, such as the drafting of the rules of

procedure, the human rights declarations and the workplans; v) There was a need to secure the

fuller engagement of the whole range of actors with the newly established human rights

mechanisms in order to ensure access to those who had suffered human rights violations; vi) The

need to affect the mindsets of people with regard to human rights concepts both within regional

institutions and amongst the wider general public; vii) The call for coherence within the UN and

how the UN was going to “deliver as one” with regard to ASEAN; viii) The question of cohesion,

complementarity and consistency between national, regional and international human rights

standards, and the need for ASEAN to maintain and improve standards rather than lower them.

Regarding specific areas for potential UN engagement with the ASEAN human rights system,

Professor Vitit drew out the following points from the day’s discussions with regard to the role of

the UN: i) To promote awareness raising, knowledge sharing and communication on AICHR and

the ACWC. Internally within ASEAN institutions, the UN could help to improve awareness of

international human rights norms and standards; ii) To enhance capacity building and help

develop the link between the promotion and protection of human rights consistent with

international standards; iii) To support the thematic studies and programmes of AICHR and the

ACWC, such as those to be conducted in 2010/11 on corporate social responsibility and

migration; iv) To interact more on the development of forthcoming regional instruments such as

the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration and the ASEAN instrument on the protection and

promotion of the rights of migrant workers, so as to enrich both regional and international

standards; v) To help promote more consultations with a bigger variety of stakeholders; vi) To

help strengthen access to and from AICHR and the ACWC to support ASEAN’s efforts to

become a rules-based and people-centred organisation; vii) To support capacity building activities

10

with the ASEAN Secretariat, both at the regional and national level; viii) To provide technical

assistance and assist cooperation amongst all stakeholders with regard to the implementation of

human rights. Professor Vitit concluded with the remark that for ASEAN at this point in time,

the new maxim could be “unity in connectivity”.

______________