Since the start of the COVID-19 outbreak, governments across Southeast Asia have taken a range of measures, including declaring states of emergency, to combat the spread of the virus. As parliamentarians play a crucial role in monitoring the implementation of these measures, in particular their compliance with human rights, this document aims to explain the key international standards relating to emergency situations and steps which lawmakers can take in protecting human rights.
Three years ago today Nguyen Bac Truyen disappeared from the busy streets of Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam, while waiting for his wife near his place of work. Later the same day, the Ministry of Public Security (MPS) announced that he had been arrested alongside three other human rights defenders, accusing him of “acting to overthrow the people’s government.”
A member of the Hoa Hao Buddhist community, and a prominent advocate for religious freedom in Vietnam, Truyen’s case is just one example of the dismal human rights situation in the country. Religious minorities and individuals are some of the most heavily targeted.
Internationally, Vietnam has received widespread praise for its successful response to the coronavirus pandemic, having recorded just a few hundred cases and no deaths. However, the very apparatus used to combat the spread of the virus is used by the government to harass dissidents and others whose activities are deemed to threaten the state.
A major reason for Vietnam’s coronavirus success has been the neighborhood wardens who closely monitor communities, and have been able to sound the alarm and put in place heavy restrictions whenever a potential case is detected. This system comes under the remit of the MPS – the shadowy government department that detained Truyen.
Following his arrest, Truyen was held incommunicado for six months before his wife was allowed to see him. He was only granted access to his defense counsel two weeks before his trial, which lasted less than a day and saw him sentenced to 11 years’ imprisonment and three years of house arrest on charges of “carrying out activities aimed at overthrowing the people’s administration.”
It wasn’t the first time Truyen was targeted by Vietnam’s authorities. In 2006, he was sentenced to three and a half years in prison for “conducting propaganda” against the state, and released in May 2010.
His wife, Bui Thi Kim Phuong, has also been harassed. In March 2019, she was prevented from travelling from Vietnam to Germany and the United States, where she had planned to advocate on her husband’s behalf.
Truyen’s detainment is thought to be, at least in part, due to his work advocating for freedom of religion or belief in Vietnam, where the government continues to restrict fundamental freedoms.
According to the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), a third of Vietnam’s more than 120 prisoners of conscience have been targeted because of their religious affiliation, or advocacy on behalf of freedom of religion or belief. USCIRF has recommended the U.S. Department of State to designate Vietnam as a “country of particular concern” due to its engagement in or tolerance of systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of freedom of religion or belief.
Those facing abuses include Hoa Hao Buddhists, such as Truyen, Khmer Krom Buddhists, Hmong and Montagnards Christians, the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam, and Falun Gong, Cao Dai, An Dan Dai Dao, and Duong van Minh adherents, among others. USCIRF documented cases of prisoners of conscience being denied access to religious texts, visits, and adequate food and medical supplies.
As well as arbitrary arrests and imprisonment, harassment of religious groups in Vietnam comes in the form of interrupted religious ceremonies, the prevention of religious gatherings, forcing individuals to renounce their faith, and in some cases violent physical assault. There have also been reports of authorities destroying religious properties and confiscating land of religious significance under the guise of economic development.
The situation for religious freedom in Vietnam saw another setback in January 2018, when the government enacted the Law on Belief and Religion, which gives the government overly broad powers to restrict the right to freedom of religion or belief. The law also requires religious organizations to register with the state and to regularly report their activities, raising concerns it could be used by the government to further suppress religious groups.
As Truyen, and dozens like him, languish in prison, also concerning is the poor condition of Vietnam’s jails, where there have long been accusations of ill-treatment, forced labor, and deaths in custody.
In Southeast Asia, the dire treatment of prisoners is sadly not unique to Vietnam. Nor is the practice of jailing people for political reasons, or for holding beliefs that the state deems to be against national interests.
Prison systems across the region operate well above capacity, with Indonesia holding almost double the amount of prisoners its network of jails can handle, while the Philippines has almost five times the amount. There are no accurate figures for Vietnam.
There have long been calls for governments in Southeast Asia to decrease their prisoner populations, but the issue has become more pronounced in recent months, with the spread of coronavirus. Public health officials have advised people to remain at least one meter apart from others to stop the virus from spreading, but how do you manage that if you’re crammed into a packed prison cell?
With Southeast Asia’s prisons full to bursting, and a high risk of contagion, what are peaceful human rights advocates still doing behind bars? All prisoners of conscience, including those advocating for religious freedom, across the region must be released immediately and unconditionally.
In the midst of a global pandemic, and on the third anniversary of his arrest, Vietnamese authorities must immediately and unconditionally release Truyen, and everyone who is imprisoned solely for peacefully exercising their human rights. They also need to allow independent religious groups in Vietnam to freely conduct their religious and belief activities without fear of persecution, harassment, and imprisonment.
Kasit Piromya is a former Thai member of parliament and foreign minister, and a board member of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights.
H.E. Mr. Nguyen Xuan Phuc, Prime Minister of Viet Nam 16 Le Hong Phong Street, Ba Dinh District, Ha Noi, Viet Nam
25 June 2020
Your Excellency,
Re: Leaders must address COVID-19 human rights concerns at 36th ASEAN Summit
As a regional network of parliamentarians from Southeast Asia committed to the promotion and protection of human rights, we write to you on the occasion of this week’s 36th ASEAN Summit, to urge you to ensure that ASEAN’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath places human rights at its centre.
While our region should be commended for being reasonably successful in containing the spread of the virus, the pandemic exposed major weaknesses and inequalities in our governance systems. The region failed to protect those in the most vulnerable situations, in particular its migrant workers and refugees. It has also seen a surge in restrictions on freedom of expression and in hateful rhetoric against marginalised groups.
However, the gathering of the region’s leaders under your chairmanship this week presents an opportunity to demonstrate that ASEAN can learn and grow from these challenging times, by ensuring that from this point on, our region’s policies are inclusive of all and promote a more just, sustainable and equal society.
This should begin by ensuring that the region collectively moves towards greater environmental sustainability and social justice. Post-COVID 19 economic recovery plans are a unique occasion for our economies to move away from a reliance on fossil fuels and coal, and towards renewable energy projects that reduce contributions to climate change.
Post-COVID19 economic stimulus investments should also reach small and medium-sized enterprises, and be used to prioritise the creation of sustainable and decent employment. We urge you as leaders to see that these are necessary steps to not only avoid future shocks and crises, but also to be better prepared to absorb their impact and guarantee the long-term economic prosperity of the region.
Greater regional cooperation and assistance will also be necessary to ensure that everyone in ASEAN has access to basic services and social protection measures, including those working in the informal sector and migrant workers. Having strong social protections programs and ensuring basic services to all will help mitigate the impact of the economic crisis and help our region recover faster.
The pandemic has deepened already existing inequalities, with women and girls being disproportionately affected. Economically they are more at risk of falling into poverty and facing food insecurity, and have also faced restricted access to sexual and reproductive health services, as well as a rise in sexual and gender-based violence. For ASEAN’s post-COVID-19 economic and social policies to be effective they must take into consideration this differentiated impact, be gender responsive and ensure women’s equal participation in all policies and decision making.
Regional peace will also be crucial to guaranteeing a just and sustainable recovery from the crisis. In that regard, we are extremely concerned by the rise in xenophobic and hateful rhetoric. Our region is sadly well-placed to know how hateful comments on social media can translate into violence, deaths, and deep divides among societies.
We therefore urge you and all ASEAN leaders to immediately publicly acknowledge the risk that hate speech represents and to speak out against discrimination of all kinds. Your intervention, as our region’s leaders, could play an important preventative role to ensure unity and peace.
Finally, we would like to exhort you to use your leadership to organise urgent collective search and rescue operations for boats carrying Rohingya refugees and to organise for their proper disembarkation. We cannot overstate the shame that falls upon us collectively when our governments choose to push people back to die at sea.
Ultimately, addressing this situation will require that ASEAN fully uses its political leverage to ensure that Myanmar addresses the root causes of the human rights crisis in Rakhine State, ends all attacks on civilians and restores the rights of the Rohingya.
In the spirit of a “Cohesive and Responsive ASEAN,” we hope that Vietnam will use its leadership to ensure that ASEAN’s “new normal” is one of a truly people-centered ASEAN – that is inclusive, sustainable, and that benefits all.
Yours sincerely,
Charles Santiago Chairperson of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights Member of Parliament, Malaysia
CC:
His Majesty Sultan Haji Hassanal Bolkiah Mu’izzaddin Waddaulah H.E Prime Minister Hun Sen H.E President Joko Widodo H.E Prime Minister Thongloun Sisoulith H.E Tan Sri Muhyiddin Haji Mohd Yassin H.E State Counsellor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi H.E President Rodrigo Roa Duterte H.E Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong H.E Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha
On the
occasion of the International Day of Parliamentarism, the International Panel
of Parliamentarians for Freedom of Religion or Belief (IPPFoRB), ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR) and the (AfriPAHR) call on parliamentarians worldwide
to work to protect freedom of religion or belief and combat hate speech.
The International Day of Parliamentarism was established by the UN General Assembly in 2018 to celebrate parliaments as important institutions designed to strengthen democracy, advance human rights and bolster good functioning of society.
As the
world grappled with a global health crisis, it also faced what the
UN Secretary-General called a “tsunami of
hate and xenophobia, scapegoating and scare-mongering.” Indeed, the
COVID-19 pandemic has also led to an increase in discrimination, stigmatization
and harassment of religious and belief-based communities. In numerous
countries, the pandemic has exacerbated authoritarian trends, flared existing
religious intolerance and government restrictions unfairly targeted some
religious and belief groups. Apart from their right to freedom of religion or
belief, the pandemic has also impacted other human rights of several religious
and belief-based groups such as their right to assembly, right to movement,
right to health, right to food etc.
Parliamentarians
have an important role in addressing human rights concerns in their
constituency and country. Developing strong laws and emergency measures with
due regard to fundamental freedoms, passing of aid packages and enhancing
public confidence and social cohesion are some of the tasks undertaken by
parliamentarians to bolster democracy and strengthen resilience in the
community.
Parliamentarians
therefore are in a unique position to promote fundamental freedoms including
the right to freedom of religion and belief, to protect against discrimination,
and to combat hate speech. They can do so by ensuring that all governmental
restrictions imposed on religious and belief practices of all communities are
provided for by law, are proportionate and necessary, and non-discriminatory.
Parliamentarians should also be firmly
committed towards combatting discrimination and stigmatization of religious and
belief-based groups by way of law, education and national advocacy campaigns.
They can do so by actively interacting with local communities and individuals
in their constituencies to advance inclusive dialogue and promote solidarity
amongst all.
Lawmakers also have a responsibility to combat
hate speech and xenophobia and preserving social cohesion by using their public
status and political capital to issue positive counter narratives to hate
speech and instead promote accurate and reliable information.
Parliamentarians should actively collaborate
with diverse stakeholders both in their country and abroad to ensure they can
effectively respond not only to the global health crisis but to the ongoing global
human rights crisis.
JAKARTA – On International Environment Day, regional MPs urge Southeast Asian governments to ensure that their post-COVID19 economic recovery plans protect human rights and the environment.
“The COVID-19 pandemic has taught us that we need to invest more in our health, our workforce and our environment. Now is the time to restructure our economies in a way that promotes human lives above profits, that redistributes resources more equitably, and that better protects our environment and tackles climate change,” said Anthea Ong, a Singapore Member of Parliament, and member of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR).
“We call on ASEAN governments to operate this radical shift and ensure that measures aimed at boosting the economy do not scrap environmental and labour regulation, but rather promote a just and sustainable future.”
In order to avoid future shocks and crises, economic recovery plans must ensure an energy transition away from a reliance on fossil fuels and coal, and towards renewable energy projects that respect the rights of all and reduce the region’s contribution to climate change, APHR said.
“A poorly protected environment now will mean more diseases, more loss of livelihoods, more displacement and fewer chances of long-term economic prosperity for the region. By making the right investments now, in sustainable energy and economic activity that does not harm our environment, we will not only ensure that we get out of this economic crisis, but also help tackle climate change and air pollution”, Ong said.
The economic recovery must not only be directed towards a greener future, but also one that respects the rights of all, APHR added. As mass unemployment threatens the region, it is essential that post-COVID19 economic stimulus investments reach small and medium sized enterprises, and create sustainable and decent employment. As a UN expert recommends, this should be achieved through progressive taxation and requesting contributions to the effort from large corporate conglomerates.
“COVID19 has shown us that those such as health workers, construction workers, factory workers, and domestic workers are not disposable, but essential to our lives, and they deserve protection,” said Chamnan Chanruang, a former Thai MP and APHR member. “In the “new normal” created by the pandemic, we must reject the mindset of brutal efficiency and profit-making that has left so many people behind. Now is the time for improved labour standards in Southeast Asia that protect everyone, including migrant workers, women and those most vulnerable in a new, just and green economy.”
JAKARTA: As Singapore is expected to head to the polls in the coming weeks, urgent and immediate steps are required to effectively safeguard the integrity of the vote and remove structural barriers that favour the incumbents, regional lawmakers have said in a new report. Without these changes, Singapore’s upcoming general election will not be free and fair, said ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR).
In the report “In Singapore, an Already Unfair Vote Undermined by COVID-19” released today, APHR documented structural flaws that prevent the election from being fair, including the Prime Minister’s broad powers over the entire electoral process that lack any effective oversight. The use of a group constituency system where candidates run as a team, coupled with the short campaigning period, also place difficulties on the opposition to field candidates and prepare adequately in advance.
“There’s a reason that the ruling PAP has won every election since Singapore’s self-governance – the entire process is heavily stacked in its favour,” said Teddy Baguilat Jr, APHR’s Executive Director and a former Philippine Member of Parliament (MP). “The only way the vote can be regarded as free and fair is if urgent and genuine structural and legal reforms are implemented, including reforming electoral bodies to ensure they are truly independent, and dropping all ongoing politically-motivated charges against opposition candidates.”
“The very purpose of an election is for people to express their political will freely, and major changes are necessary to ensure that the upcoming vote fulfils the aspirations of the Singaporean people,” he said.
Moreover, the environment in which the Singaporean people are able to exercise their right to participate in public life is heavily restricted. Key opposition candidates have been targeted with lawsuits by members of the ruling party, and voters in opposition-led constituencies face reprisals for not voting for the PAP, APHR said. Fundamental freedoms, which are intrinsically linked to free elections, are limited as the government controls the media and uses restrictive laws against dissenting and critical voices.
“On polling day, the public shouldn’t be fooled by the absence of irregularities or electoral fraud. The current system is unfair from the start and entrenches a process that prevents any genuine political competition or free choice at the ballot,” Baguilat said.
“Opposition candidates face insurmountable challenges not only to run in elections, but also for their message to reach eligible voters, due to a short campaigning period and strict media restrictions. In addition, authorities continue to use draconian laws to target political opponents and muzzle other critical voices, resulting in a limited civic space.”
Finally, Covid-related measures introduced – including those under the Parliamentary Elections (COVID-19 Special Arrangements) Act 2020 – fail to ensure a fair campaigning process during the pandemic, or protect the voting rights for specific groups, particularly the sick and overseas voters. These challenges only compound the unfairness of the electoral process that already tilts favourably for the ruling party, APHR said.
“Singapore has until April 2021 to hold the election. There is no need to rush into organising one so soon, especially as the country continues to record hundreds of new daily coronavirus cases. There is no reason why the authorities are unable to accommodate all voters, and the possible exclusion of specific groups will only further undermine the legitimacy of the poll,” Baguilat said.
