Shveta Dhaliwal teaches at the Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab, Patiala, India. Her areas of specialisation are geopolitics, regional human rights systems, comparative political thought and international relations. She has published more than 40 research papers and presented over 150 papers in international and national conferences. She has an authored and three edited books to her credit. She is member of the Indian Political Science Association and the Indian Society of International Law and South Asian Foundation.
This book reviews Southeast Asia’s National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) as part of an emerging assessment of a nascent regional human rights architecture that is facing significant challenges in protecting human rights. The book asks, can NHRIs overcome its weaknesses and provide protection, including remedies, to victims of human rights abuses? Assessing NHRIs’ capacity to do so is vital as the future of human rights protection lies at the national level, and other parts of the architecture—the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), and the international mechanism of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR)—though helpful, also have their limitations. The critical question the book addresses is whether NHRIs individually or collaboratively provide protection of fundamental human rights. The body of work offered in this book showcases the progress of the NHRIs in Southeast Asia where they also act as a barometer for the fluid political climate of their respective countries. Specifically, the book examines the NHRIs’ capacity to provide protection, notably through the pursuit of quasi-judicial functions, and concludes that this function has either been eroded due to political developments post-establishment or has not been included in the first place. The book’s findings point to the need for NHRIs to increase their effectiveness in the protection of human rights and invites readers and stakeholders to find ways of addressing this gap.
Regional inter-governmental human rights organizations have been in operation for sometime in Europe, the Americas and Africa. These regional human rights mechanisms have proven to be useful and effective in comparison to the global human rights mechanisms available at the United Nations. The purpose of this study, first published in 2004, is to investigate the possibility of establishing a regional inter-governmental human rights mechanism in East Asia, with a focus on the contributions of nongovernmental organizations' (NGOs) to such a development.
In Human Rights and Participatory Politics in Southeast Asia, Catherine Renshaw recounts an extraordinary period of human rights institution-building in Southeast Asia. She begins her account in 2007, when the ten members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) signed the ASEAN charter, committing members for the first time to principles of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. In 2009, the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights was established with a mandate to uphold internationally recognized human rights standards. In 2013, the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration was adopted as a framework for human rights cooperation in the region and a mechanisim for ASEAN community building. Renshaw explains why these developments emerged when they did and assesses the impact of these institutions in the first decade of their existence. In her examination of ASEAN, Renshaw asks how human rights can be implemented in and between states that are politically diverse—Vietnam and Laos are Communist; Brunei Darussalam is an Islamic sultanate; Myanmar is in transition from a military dictatorship; the Philippines and Indonesia are established multiparty democracies; while the remaining members are less easily defined. Renshaw cautions that ASEAN is limited in its ability to shape the practices of its members because it lacks a preponderance of democratic states. However, she concludes that, in the absence of a global legalized human rights order, the most significant practical advancements in the promotion of human rights have emerged from regional institutions such as the ASEAN.
Launched in 1991, the Asian Yearbook of International Law is a major refereed publication dedicated to international law issues as seen primarily from an Asian perspective, under the auspices of the Foundation for the Development of International Law in Asia (DILA). It is the first publication of its kind edited by a team of leading international law scholars from across Asia. The Yearbook provides a forum for the publication of articles in the field of international law, and other Asian international law topics, written by experts from the region and elsewhere. Its aim is twofold: to promote international law in Asia, and to provide an intellectual platform for the discussion and dissemination of Asian views and practices on contemporary international legal issues. Each volume of the Yearbook normally contains articles and shorter notes; a section on State practice; an overview of Asian states participation in multilateral treaties; succinct analysis of recent international legal developments in Asia; an agora section devoted to critical perspectives on international law issues; surveys of the activities of international organizations of special relevance to Asia; and book review, bibliography and documents sections. It will be of interest to students and academics interested in international law and Asian studies.
We live in a world that not only sets standards for, but also professes its commitment to promoting and protecting ‘rights’. Since ours is an age of heightened public interest in auditing the actual realisation of such standards and commitment, the first major focus of this book is a critical account of international standards aimed at the protection of minorities. To that end, it concentrates on four key dimensions. Firstly, it addresses the issue of the identification of minorities as understood by international law. Secondly, it outlines a brief history on the development of international law towards improving the protection of minorities. Thirdly, it gives an overview of international instruments and mechanisms on minorities. Finally, it analyses the rights of minorities under international standards. All these dimensions point to the fact that international minority rights lag behind the development of other branches of rights. The second major focus of this book is to relate international standards on minority protection to South Asian regimes. Concentrating on India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, the Maldives, and Afghanistan, an endeavor is made to examine the state of minorities and their protection under the domestic regimes. It emerges that the normative commitments of these states are more or less compatible with international standards. Nevertheless, majority-minority syndrome persistently remains as one of the causes behind multidimensional deprivation and victimization of South Asian minorities. The present book also assesses the extent to which regional cooperation in South Asia has so far contributed to extending protection to minorities. This ends with an argument that SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) has the potential to play a far greater role in this regard.
This book proposes a selective approach for states with more advanced human rights protection to establish a human rights court for Southeast Asia. It argues the inclusive approach currently employed by ASEAN to set up a human rights body covering all member states cannot produce a strong regional human rights mechanism. The mosaic of Southeast Asia reveals great diversity and high complexity in political regimes, human rights practice and participation by regional states in the global legal human rights framework. Cooperation among ASEAN members to protect and promote human rights remains limited. The time-honored principle of non-interference and the “ASEAN Way” still predominate in relations within ASEAN. These factors combine to explain why the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights is unlikely to be strong and effective in changing and promoting regional human rights protection.
This assessment of progress in Southeast Asia on human rights begins in the wake of the 'Asian values' debate and culminates in the formal regional institutionalisation of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR). Chapters examine the arduous negotiation of AICHR, the evolving relationship between ASEAN states' and the international human rights system, and the historical and experiential reasons for hesitancy. The text concludes with a discussion of how the evolving right to development impacts upon AICHR and international human rights in general, and how their preference for economic, social and development rights could help ASEAN states shape the debate.
