VZCZCXRO5327
RR RUEHCHI RUEHCN RUEHDT RUEHHM
DE RUEHBK #2208/01 2431218
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 311218Z AUG 09
FM AMEMBASSY BANGKOK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 8129
INFO RUEHZS/ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN NATIONS
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 9927
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 1876
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 7411
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 5745
RUEHWL/AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON 0081
RUEHCHI/AMCONSUL CHIANG MAI 6931
RHEFDHS/DIA DHS WASHINGTON DC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHINGTON DC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 BANGKOK 002208 
 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED, PLEASE HANDLE ACCORDINGLY. NOT 
FOR INTERNET DISTRIBUTION. 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PHUM DRL TH
SUBJECT: THE ASEAN INTER-GOVERNMENTAL COMMISSION ON HUMAN 
RIGHTS:  NO BARK, NO BITE? 
 
REF: A. 08 BANGKOK 2941 (THAILAND ASSUMES ASEAN CHAIR) 
     ¶B. 08 BANGKOK 3701 (ASEAN CHARTER) 
     ¶C. BANGKOK 517 (14TH ASEAN SUMMIT) 
 
BANGKOK 00002208  001.2 OF 003 
 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: ASEAN plans to launch its newly-developed 
human rights body, the ASEAN Inter-Governmental Commission on 
Human Rights (AICHR) at the 15th ASEAN Summit in October in 
Thailand.  Although local and international NGOs have already 
described the Terms of Reference (ToR) adopted by Foreign 
Ministers in July as "toothless," Thai academics and human 
rights activists involved in the drafting process have 
defended the document as a step in the right direction. 
While one could characterize the AICHR ToR as a significant 
achievement given ASEAN dynamics and the need for buy-in from 
"new ASEAN" members Burma, Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam, the 
ToR only provides for an "evolutionary framework" to be 
re-evaluated after a five-year review period.  It is unclear 
whether this body will be able to enhance its legitimacy and 
make concrete gains during the ensuing chairmanships of 
Vietnam, Brunei, and Cambodia.  Thailand is attempting to set 
a precedent of a transparent process in selecting its 
representative, involving civil society and likely selecting 
a non-governmental official, following its similar earlier 
decision to send an academic expert to the existing High 
Level Panel on the Human Rights Body.  END SUMMARY 
 
MOVING TOWARDS AN ASEAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
 
¶2. (SBU) On July 20, the ASEAN member nations took another 
significant step towards the creation of a regional human 
rights body as dictated by Article 14 of the ASEAN Charter 
(which entered into force December 2008, see Ref B).  By 
adopting the Terms of Reference (ToR) drafted by the High 
Level Panel on the Human Rights Body (HLP) for what will be 
known as the ASEAN Inter-Governmental Commission on Human 
Rights, ASEAN is now poised to have a human rights mechanism, 
as do all other regional groupings in the world.  However, 
there is a decided lack of positive sentiment by human rights 
observers about this development, as virtually all involved 
with its creation and implementation seem resigned to a 
"toothless" body tasked with only promotion, rather than 
protection, of human rights.(Ref C) 
 
¶3. (SBU) From early in the process of shaping the body, human 
rights activists and NGOs have denigrated the proposed ToR 
and resultant mechanism, calling it "decorative" (Ref B) and 
a "sham" or "diplomatic window dressing."  In addition to 
these expected criticisms, ASEAN itself seems determined to 
keep expectations low.  Official ASEAN communications 
emphasize that the ToR reflect a "maximum consensus" and that 
the "evolutionary" nature of the platform allows for the 
possibility of later "enhancement" at the five-year review. 
Prime Minister Abhisit Veijajiva was even more explicit that 
the body would initially focus only on promotion, but 
maintained, "It is better to make a start." 
 
¶4. (SBU) Longtime Thai human rights activists and academics 
echo the Prime Minister's sentiment.  Dr. Sriprapha 
Petcharamesree of Mahidol University has been involved with 
the Working Group for an ASEAN Human Rights Mechanism 
(Working Group) since the early 1990s.  She told us that 
members of the Working Group were laughed at for even 
contemplating an ASEAN human rights mechanism, and said that 
she could not help but see this latest development as  a sign 
of progress.  While admitting her disappointment with the 
ToR, she acknowledged that an incremental approach 
represented the only chance for success within ASEAN's 
environment of political compromise.  Dr. Sriprapha revealed 
that the Working Group had contemplated giving up the fight 
and utilizing the ASEAN Commission on the Rights of Women and 
Children as a back door method to a human rights mechanism. 
In that context, the AICHR must be seen as an achievement. 
 
THE SPECIFIC TERMS IN THE TERMS OF REFERENCE 
-------------------------------------------- 
 
¶5. (SBU) The ToR language is general, and it arguably is open 
to interpretation by the AICHR chair and members.  In 
 
BANGKOK 00002208  002.2 OF 003 
 
 
particular, Dr. Sriprapha referenced the use of terms like 
"obtain information" and "prepare studies" which could be 
viewed as opportunities for monitoring and interviewing 
suspected victims of human rights violations.  Similarly, 
Homayoun Alizadeh, the Regional Representative of OHCHR in 
Bangkok, highlighted the repeated use of "consult" and 
"consultation" as an opportunity for interaction with civil 
society.  In contrast to this very general terminology is the 
explicit provision that any funding or contributions from 
other countries or sources "shall be used solely for human 
rights promotion, capacity building and education."  In that 
sense, the ToR acts as a barrier to human rights protection 
activities sponsored by others. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Of additional note is the use of the term 
"representative" rather than "commissioner" for the 
designated ASEAN member participants in AICHR, suggestive to 
some of a likely lack of independence of these country 
representatives.  With this kind of cover, according to 
Alizadeh, it was unlikely that the majority of ASEAN members 
would appoint impartial individuals with proven expertise in 
human rights, as encouraged by the UN High Commissioner of 
Human Rights Navi Pillay. 
 
WHO MORE IMPORTANT THAN WHAT? 
----------------------------- 
 
¶7. (SBU) All observers stressed that the potential 
effectiveness of the AICHR would be determined by its 
composition.  While High Commissioner Pillay, in her 
congratulatory press release, urged that the national 
selection processes for representatives allow for 
"consultation and participation by all sections of society," 
only Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines are likely to do 
anything other than directly appoint a government official, 
according to our contacts. 
 
¶8. (SBU) Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya has vowed that 
Thailand's selection will represent Thailand's people, rather 
than Thailand's government.  Thailand's selection committee 
met August 28 for an initial discussion on the way forward 
and endorsed what it hopes will be a transparent process, 
including nominations from civil society, to stand as a 
precedent for other countries to follow, selection committee 
member (and journalist) Kavi Chongkittavorn told us August 
¶31.  As Thailand's representative on the HLP, Chulalongkorn 
University law professor Dr. Vitit Muntarbhorn was the only 
HLP member who was not a government official. 
 
¶9. (SBU) Both Dr. Vitit and Dr. Sriprapha -- two likely 
candidates -- claim to have withdrawn themselves from 
consideration.  Dr. Vitit told us he believes it would be 
inappropriate given his role on the HLP, and he is busy as 
the UN's Special Rapporteur on North Korea; Dr. Sriprapha 
prefers a behind the scenes role.  Kavi predicted Surasi 
Kosolnawin, a former Thai Human Rights Commissioner who has 
pushed the Thai government in the past for more 
accountability in the Deep South, will emerge as the Thai 
representative.  Dr. Vitit felt strongly that he played an 
important role as the only non-governmental representative on 
the HLP, and that his academic viewpoint, history as an 
activist, and close relationship with civil society provided 
a valuable perspective.  Thailand's AICHR representative may 
be called on to fulfill that role again, depending on who 
else is selected. 
 
¶10. (SBU) The other critical ASEAN member in this regard is 
Indonesia.  Thai-based NGOs who have tracked the ToR drafting 
process from its inception, such as Forum Asia, note that 
Indonesia was the last holdout for a stronger human rights 
mechanism, one that had a protection mandate and could 
undertake investigations and receive complaints.  Initially 
Indonesia had been joined by Thailand and the Philippines in 
pushing for a higher standard, but eventually the other two 
conceded, Thailand influenced by its desire to launch the 
AICHR during its chairmanship.   While the political 
declaration accompanying the launch of AICHR in October will 
fall something short of a mandate, it could go farther than 
the ToR to discuss the future of AICHR and a possible roadmap 
 
BANGKOK 00002208  003.2 OF 003 
 
 
that could lead to an emphasis on human rights protection. 
The document was drafted at a meeting in Jakarta last week 
and the HLP plans to wrap up its work at a meeting in 
Singapore in September. 
JOHN