Christopher E. Bailey
This chapter will argue that despite its role as a norm entrepreneur the African Union (au), when analysed through the un Secretary-General’s 3-Pillar framework of responsibility, has only had limited success and faced significant constraints in promoting Pan-African norms relating to sovereignty and non-interference, governance and development in order to achieve human protection and the prevention of mass atrocities. Human protection refers to protection of civilians from human rights abuses with a particular focus on mass atrocity crimes. This chapter will also assess the evolving au-un partnership and conclude by assessing the limits of norm building and propose strategies for enhancing human protection in Africa.
Noel M. Morada
Since the adoption of the asean Charter in 2008, the friction between the group’s traditional norms of sovereignty and non-interference and its people-oriented principles upholding universal norms such as human rights has become more pronounced in the case of Myanmar. This chapter examines asean’s diplomacy in dealing with Myanmar’s human rights protection issues. It argues that although in practice asean has put aside its non-interference principle in response to human protection problems within Myanmar including the crisis in Rakhine, the organisation’s collective efforts have been rebuffed by the previous military junta and the current civilian government which also invoked the same principle in protecting its sovereignty. While there are increasing calls from some asean members and other non-state actors in the region to consider relaxing the non-interference principle when it comes to humanitarian crisis issues affecting the region, it appears that reaching a consensus on this within the group would be extremely difficult given the strong resistance of some members to the idea.
This chapter explores the challenges and prospects of mainstreaming RtoP in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (asean) through the analysis of the roles and performance of the asean human rights bodies, in particular the asean Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (aichr). The author argues that although asean has made some progress in institutionalizing the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, it will take more time for asean to mark substantial shift in intra-asean relations and suggests that, in Southeast Asia where sovereignty is still jealously guarded, norms and ideas such as RtoP cannot yet have a decisive impact in practice. Specifically, mainstreaming RtoP in asean is constrained by the principles of non-interference and consensus decision-making, which unfortunately remains the norm. In order for asean to effectively care for people, a paradigm shift is necessary. Such shift can be anchored in the asean Human Rights Declaration (ahdr) as well as employing the ‘asean minus X’ decision-making formula, activating the Troika, and dispatching of special envoys. These options, which are not new to asean and have historically helped in its engagement with human rights, could also enable asean to prevent and respond to systematic human rights violations and other issues which may amount to war crimes. As well, promoting national and regional dialogues on RtoP could influence asean member states, especially those who are not yet comfortable with the principle. Different workshops and seminars that the aichr has been organizing already provide the body opportunities for sharing and learning from other regions.
Bellamy Alex J.
Drawing upon talks delivered at the Second Global Action Against Mass Atrocity Crimes conference, held in Manila 2016, this paper examines the extent to which the Asia Pacific region has begun to translate its commitment to the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) into practice. It finds that the so-called “East Asian Peace” has transformed the region from one of the world’s deadliest to one of the world’s most peaceful. But many key challenges remain and there is much to be done to make R2P and atrocity prevention a daily lived reality. This chapter proceeds in three parts. The first briefly describes the dramatic decline of atrocity crimes in East Asia. The second points to some key challenges on the ideational and institutional fronts. The third section turns specifically to the need to develop national architectures for atrocity prevention.
This chapter situates the growing academic and policy interest in advancing international normative frameworks namely the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and Women, Peace, and Security (wps) in asean within broader feminist critiques of the ‘protection gap’ that results from the ‘siloing’ of international security and peace agendas. It builds on recent works that suggest a rethinking of asean as constituted by three distinct community pillars (political-security, economic, and socio-cultural) for fully addressing human security and development in the region. Using the asean Regional Plan for Action (rpa) of the 2013 Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women (evaw), which covers a ten-year period (2016–2025), this chapter makes a case for how the rpa can serve as a critical vector for broadening the significance of R2P and wps in the region to address sexual and gender-based violence as occurring both in crisis situations and ‘everyday life’.
Veneracion-Rallonza Ma. Lourdes
Women, Peace and Security (wps) as a global agenda has gained traction since it was institutionalized in the United Nations Security Council (UNSCR) fifteen years ago. By December 2014, 46 out of 193 Member States of the United Nations have adopted their National Action Plans to systematically implement their respective country commitments to wps. To date, 24 of the countries with National Action Plans (NAP) are in Europe while 13 are in Africa; the Asia Pacific Region has 6 and the Americas have 3. In Southeast Asia, only the Philippines has developed a NAP within the framework of the wps while other countries integrated it in the existing broad policy and programmatic frames such as addressing violence against women. At the level of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (asean), taking on the agenda of WPS has yet to move beyond communicative rhetoric. This paper is an attempt to explore how wps can be made part of the regional agenda on human protection and mass atrocities prevention, by mapping out discursive and institutional entry points within several asean Member States and within asean itself through the idea of multi-focal norm entrepreneurship.
Learning Lessons across and between Regions: Norm Promotion and Capacity Building for Human Protection
Charles T. Hunt and Noel M. Morada
Hunt Charles T.
Growing international solidarity for protection principles has formed the backdrop for an evolving notion of human protection at the un in the post-Cold War era. The emergence of the ‘Human Rights up Front’ initiative, protection of children and Women, Peace and Security policy agendas, and normative frameworks such as the protection of civilians and the Responsibility to Protect are indicative of a tangible human protection agenda at the un. However, the extent to which human protection norms have diffused in different regions vary in important ways. Africa – one region or many – has been a norm maker, shaper and taker, as well as a major recipient of action in accordance with this nascent normative regime. This chapter provides an overview of regionalism in Africa and examines how perspectives and institutional expressions at the regional level(s) have been influenced by – and in turn influenced – the uptake and development of norms around human protection.