Civil Society Presentation to ASEAN Heads of State and Government

Focus on the Global South
>Download PDF

11th ASEAN Summit
Kuala Lumpur Convention Center
Monday, December 12, 2005

The Right Honourable Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Prime Minister of Malaysia and Chairman of the 11th ASEAN Summit, His Majesty,Your Excellencies, Heads of States and Governments, and the Secretary-General of ASEAN.

I speak on behalf of my colleagues here from all ten ASEAN nations and together we represent the participants at our ASEAN Civil Society Conference that was held at UiTM from December 7 to 9, 2005.

This is the first time ASEAN civil society has been invited by ASEAN Heads of State to interact and present the conclusions of their deliberations to the Summit itself. We welcome this unprecedented gesture, and would like to convey our deep appreciation to ASEAN Heads of States for this long awaited opportunity. We hope this historic development will become a regular part of the program of future ASEAN Summits.

To complement the 11th ASEAN Summit’s theme of “One Vision, One Identity, One Community”, we chose as our theme “Building A Common Future Together”.

Excellencies, the following are the ten main issues and proposals we would like to bring to your attention:


Civil society participants recognized the need for more openness and transparency at all levels of the ASEAN power structure in order to secure greater accountability and allow civil society to effectively play their roles as watchdogs, monitors and early warning systems.  Towards this end, the deep feeling was that civil society was not getting access to accurate, relevant and timely information on matters of concern to the people.

As a first step toward opening up ASEAN to the people, we urge the Eminent Persons Group already established to deliberate the ASEAN Charter, to involve civil society and other interested groups through public hearings in all ASEAN countries so that we can ensure that there are benchmarks in developing an ASEAN Charter and that these are in conformity with international standards and reflective of universal values embodied in ASEAN’s religions and cultures.


Despite its 38 years of existence, ASEAN does not have mechanisms in place to engage civil society.  This is a major stumbling block to achieving the ASEAN vision of integration and community building.

We call for the immediate review of current accreditation procedures to allow for all segments of civil society and all stakeholders to be part of ASEAN.  This will remove impediments to meaningful engagement and bring ASEAN closer to the people. Some suggestions in this regard include:

• Establishing a mechanism composed of civil society organizations independent from the governments and other influences. This will help to systematically channel civil society inputs to the ASEAN Secretariat and other ASEAN processes.
• Helping to build the capacity of civil society to address regional issues. Here, we wish to state our willingness to work towards strengthening of civil society organizations in countries where there is such a need. We appreciate the importance of adopting a balanced, rational and principled approach to challenges confronting ASEAN.


The notion of an “ASEAN Community” has remained elusive and illusory because the organization is perceived as being overly bureaucratic, elitist and top-down in its approach.

We urge that the existing ASEAN Parliamentary Caucus be strengthened with a view to eventually transform it into the ASEAN Parliament that can carry the voices of all ASEAN peoples.


Despite numerous Vision Statements, Plans of Action and Declarations that  ASEAN leaders have committed to, significant segments of society remain weak and vulnerable and continue to be denied their basic human rights.

We urge the ASEAN Summit to take firm and concrete steps to implement all its commitments, including those for the protection of women and children as well as those under the ASEAN Security Plan of Action and the Vientiane Action Programme (2004-2010), including :

i. Establishing a network of cooperation among existing human rights mechanisms and initiatives. We welcome the proposal by the Malaysian government to work towards a regional human rights mechanism in 2006;
ii. Creating an ASEAN human rights commission which would serve as a channel for the articulation of human rights grievances at the regional level and as an avenue for proposing solutions to national governments;
iii. Developing an ASEAN instrument on the protection and promotion of the rights of workers, including migrant workers;
iv. Establishing an ASEAN Commission on the promotion and protection of the rights of women and children;
v. Undertaking effective measures to protect vulnerable groups including women, children, the elderly, people with disabilities, refugees and migrant workers, and
vi. Continuing to promote and emphasize the role of education and public awareness in relation to human rights.


There are far too many major transboundary challenges relating to the environment like the haze, health,  especially HIV/AIDS and now bird flu, human security, migration and labor that the region is facing.

We urge the ASEAN Summit to reconsider the ‘ASEAN way” of dealing with these transboundary challenges so that swift and effective action can be taken in the interest of the people. The principle of consensus should not hinder ASEAN from acting decisively on behalf of justice when the situation so demands.


Some parts of the region are burdened with the suppression of civil and political rights and continue to suffer under dictatorships. As a result, millions of people are denied social justice and human dignity.

This tragic situation has led to the stigmatization of the entire region and ASEAN is compelled to pay a heavy price in terms of its international credibility and is constrained in its ability to play a leading role in the regional and global arena.

The 11th ASEAN Summit should act immediately to end such suppression.  It should harness all its resources to persuade all its members to adhere to a rules-based framework which gives priority to the rights and interests of the people and adheres to the tenets of good governance. The political empowerment of the people is essential for the emergence of a genuinely free and stable ASEAN community.


Rapid globalization, with its calls for deregulation, privatization and inappropriate liberalization, can create a race to the bottom, where social, environmental and labor standards are compromised.

To compound matters, ASEAN as a bloc is now pursuing trade and economic frameworks and agreements with non-ASEAN countries. The wide scope of these agreements that include investment, intellectual property, services, government procurement, market access, labor and environment is of growing concern as they contain commitments and obligations that are even more burdensome than those of existing WTO agreements.

We therefore call on ASEAN member states to :
• adopt economic and employment policies that satisfy the highest standards of social, economic, civil and political rights;
• consider institutionalizing civil society participation in decision making on socio-economic issues through an ASEAN Economic and Social Advisory Council;
• be open and transparent in the conduct of all trade negotiations;
• undertake comprehensive impact assessments of trade negotiations at the multilateral, regional and bilateral levels;
• maintain a strong position at the forthcoming Sixth Hong Kong Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization with regards to the liberalization of trade in services, based on the joint proposal of a number of ASEAN countries;
• defer any conclusion of bilateral free trade agreements with developed countries until there are broad-based consultations with all stakeholders; 
• develop rules and codes of conduct to ensure corporate accountability among business entities in ASEAN;
• safeguard the rights of consumers and address consumer protection issues comprehensively;
• establish mechanisms for broad consultations with civil society organizations both at the national and regional levels and
• ensure trade justice and equity for all ASEAN peoples.


Despite a long history of cooperation and scores of legal instruments, the region is not on a path towards environmental sustainability. Environmental degradation in the ASEAN region is now being aggravated by human and man -made disasters.

We appeal to all ASEAN Member States to:

• Prioritize integrated natural resources management in all national development plans and strategies and work towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and targets;
• MDG implementation in the region should be premised upon the inter-linkages between all the Goals;
• Allocate adequate funds for implementing these plans and policies;
• Tackle corruption head-on;
• Regulate corporate behavior;
• Implement the Rio Principles; and
• Support the establishment of an ASEAN Civil Society Consultative Forum on Environment and Sustainable Development.


We identify several difficulties in relation to women, children, youth and indigenous people. Women, including female migrant workers continue to disproportionately bear the burdens of poverty, ill-health, violence and all forms of discrimination.

In some parts of the region there is a lack of opportunities for youth participation in decision making and a lack of decent productive work which in turn leads to social unrest, drug abuse and rising crime rates. This is totally unacceptable especially since demographics indicate that the majority of ASEAN’s citizens are young.

The unique needs and interests, special knowledge of our indigenous peoples and local communities, and their access to land and natural resources, in particular, are not being adequately safeguarded.

Our population structure demands that women, youth and indigenous people are adequately represented at all levels of decision-making processes within ASEAN.


The absence of a truly people-centered ASEAN identity is very glaring today.  Thus far, ASEAN has concentrated on political stability and economic goals. There is a need for a community driven, collective ASEAN consciousness to be nurtured through better and deeper understanding of our common history, culture and diversity.


In CONCLUSION, we the civil society are of the view that we have now arrived at a critical juncture in ASEAN’s evolution as an organization. We have this opportunity before us to transform ASEAN from an inter-governmental organization into a genuine people-centered community.  We reiterate that there can be no ASEAN Community without the people. Civil society is eager to contribute towards this laudable goal which will help secure a more just and peaceful ASEAN for us and for future generations.

India, China, & the Politics of Regionalism
Great powers, salve even if good neighbours, do compete. India and China are no exception. Though the two countries have crossed many bridges in building an affable relationship, the mutual competition for power and influence is interminable. This was evident in the recent East Asia Summit (EAS).
When the EAS was being conceived, China favoured ASEAN+3, as they came within the geographical contours of East Asia. India was thus out of the initial framework. However, partly due to sustained engagement with the region under its ‘Look East Policy’, and partly due to balance of power considerations, India found a place in the summit.
The EAS is just one example how India and China are competing to influence regional groups and associations. Although both countries were late converts to regionalism, China has an edge. It is a member of almost all regional forums along its periphery. Some of them, indeed, are China’s initiatives. After a long and unrelenting attempt, China also got ‘observer status’ in SAARC, though technically it is out of South Asia.
China’s regional policy, in many ways, is premeditated. China’s rising economic clout, high volume trade and military modernization makes it a natural choice in regional groupings. China is engaging them on all issues pertaining to economy, security, and regional politics. These engagements have helped China to transform its image as a cooperative partner in security and community building exercises. The ASEAN countries, for example, are no more vocal of China being a threat. Rather, China is perceived as an opportunity.
India’s regional posture, on the other hand, has been hemmed in by constraints. Part of the reason is India’s preoccupation with SAARC and its inability to get out of the South Asian conundrum. Also, India’s trade with SAARC or other regional groups compared to China’s is very low. For example, Indo-ASEAN trade is just one fifth of the Sino-ASEAN trade, which is over $100 billion. Nevertheless, India is attempting to reach out to new areas such as Africa and Latin America apart from consolidating its position in Europe, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia.
Both countries are engaged in competitive regionalism and they face each other on many platforms. The EAS is just one of them. Although India has thwarted Chinese pressure and gained a confident foothold in ASEAN, there is an atmosphere of apprehension elsewhere. While India has been provided an ‘observer status’ in the SCO with China’s help, allowing China a similar status in SAARC may undermine the sub-regional balance of power. Interestingly, India’s Mekong Ganga Project excludes China, while China’s own Greater Mekong Project does the same to India. In addition, wherever India looks for new partners in search for its ‘energy security’, Chinese companies step in with promises of lucrative investments and often walk away with the contracts.
Competition notwithstanding, there is space for India and China to cooperate. For example, In India’s northeast and China’s Yunan province, the Bangladesh-India-Myanmar-China (BIMC) or the Kunming initiative has the potential to churn the region into a zone of prosperity. Similarly, enduring partnership between the two Asian giants via SCO, ASEAN Regional Forum, or the EAS has the potential to curb transnational crime, terrorism, drug menace and sea piracy. On a positive side, it has the capacity to promote, as the Kuala Lumpur Declaration of the EAS noted, concerns like ‘development, financial stability, energy security, economic integration and growth, technology transfer and infrastructure development, capacity building, and promote financial links, trade and investment expansion’.
Regionalism is here to stay. Indeed, as the Hong Kong ministerial meet of the WTO echoed, regionalism is a better approach to overcome issue – based division and divisions between developed and developing countries. The proliferation of regional associations in post-WTO period substantiates this fact. However, India needs to be more consistent in pursuing regionalism. Two things go in India’s favour. First, there are many regional associations having no formal contact with India. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) is one such example. On the other hand, China is in final stage of negotiating a free trade pact with GCC. India is also not incorporated in Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) or Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM). Second, India’s educational infrastructure, scientific institutions and resource pool are one of the best in Asia. So is the case with its military training institutions. A little more munificence can earn the country plenty of goodwill and soft power proj!
Competition or cooperation, India’s location, size, GDP, etc. is such that it needs to explore linkages with as many regional groupings as possible. Only then can India realize its potential as a regional and global power.