Myanmar's Reforms Put Rights Spotlight on ASEAN

By Loc Doan

Until recently a pariah state and the bête noire of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Myanmar is now poised to outshine the organization and its members if the liberalizing nation can steadily advance its reforms.

Since March 2011, when President Thein Sein’s reformist government was formed, Myanmar has witnessed a series of dramatic changes. One of these was the free and fair by-election in April, which resulted in pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy winning representation in parliament.

Another remarkable development was Myanmar’s decision in August to abolish media censorship. As Kyaw Zwa Moe, English editor of the Irrawaddy, a previously exiled news outlet long regarded as illegal by the military regime, wrote in an email interview, now “news journals and magazines can report almost whatever they want.”

Writing recently from the Irrawaddy’s new bureau in Yangon, Moe emphasized that the reforms are far from complete and that Myanmar still has a long way to go to achieve international standards of press freedom. To do so, the government needs to remove all remaining controls over media, by abolishing the censorship board and its control over all dailies and TV channels, for instance.

Nevertheless, Moe acknowledged that Myanmar’s press landscape has changed significantly, with journalists who were subjected to strict censorship and even routine surveillance under the military regime now enjoying their newfound freedom.

Making the contrast even more striking is the fact that the Myanmarese press is now freer than that of some other ASEAN countries, which, as Moe observed, “still control all types of media.” In a report published in May, the Southeast Asian Press Alliance said that, in 2011, every country in the region aside from East Timor and the Philippines had “taken measures to control information online or penalize persons who violate established prohibitions that protect national security as well as dominant cultural norms.” And according to the latest press freedom indexes released by Freedom House and Reporters Without Borders, Southeast Asia is one of the world’s least media-friendly regions.

Seen in this context, Myanmar’s media opening is a positive sign that could have regional repercussions. In an email interview, Nguyen Quang A, former director of the Institute for Development Studies in Hanoi, an independent think tank that disbanded in 2009 to protest the Vietnamese government’s restrictions on economic and political research, wrote, “The recent changes in Myanmar will put pressure on regional countries, such as Vietnam and Laos,” where he said “pressure from the citizens and the press sector on the government is now greater.” While recognizing that the real pressure must come from inside, he thinks that Myanmar’s reforms may have positive impacts on other ASEAN members. “It is also possible that the Vietnamese Communist Party will learn something from these changes,” he wrote.

A similar argument could be made with respect to democracy. Though there have been some positive changes in recent years in a few regional countries, such as the Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia, democratic standards and practices are still uncommon in most Southeast Asian countries. For instance, despite its advanced economy, Singapore remains a relatively authoritarian country that has been ruled since independence by the People’s Action Party. (The opposition Workers’ Party won a record six seats -- out of 87 -- in elections held in May 2011.) In Cambodia, democracy will remain largely a stage-managed affair as long as Prime Minister Hun Sen, one of the world’s longest-serving political leaders, and his Cambodian People’s Party continue to dominate Cambodian politics.

In other countries, such as Brunei, Vietnam and Laos, where democracy is still a taboo subject, the ruling parties do not even accept the presence of opposition parties in any form or manifestation. In fact, many ASEAN members have never held a free and fair election with the participation of all parties, nor allowed the international community to observe polls, as Myanmar did during its April by-election. By highlighting democratic and human rights deficits in other ASEAN countries, Myanmar’s reforms are likely to heighten international pressure on regional governments to promote liberal agendas.

While the potential impact of Myanmar’s reforms on individual ASEAN members may be of major importance, perhaps more significant is the potential long-term impact they might have on the organization as a whole. In April, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak acknowledged that ASEAN “has been criticized in foreign policy circles for doing too little to promote democracy and human rights.” This democratic deficit has in large part been obscured by the attention the organization has historically devoted to dealing with Myanmar. But with that obstacle now removed, ASEAN has no excuse for its refusal to embrace democratic standards and practices.

One place to start would be to revise the terms of reference of the ASEAN human rights body approved in 2009, giving it more power to promote human rights in the region. So far, the body’s weak mandate and ASEAN’s strong insistence on the principle of noninterference have combined to block any concrete results in this area.

Though Myanmar’s reforms must still stand the test of time, they have the potential to shake up a region where political and civil rights are still not fully respected, and too often even completely ignored.

Dipetik dari - World Politics Review