When it comes to a human rights dialogue among states, however, while such dialogue might be necessary, it is not always desirable.

Some participating states fear a dialogue on human rights in that it could open a space for other countries to criticize their human rights record. In addition, the relationship between a state and human rights is often fraught with tension, which is unavoidable but can be mitigated.

International human rights law perceives the role of the state as the primary guarantor of human rights and seeks them to be accountable for complying with the standards in their treatment of individuals and groups.

At the same time that a state codifies human rights law, it can also paradoxically and frequently reject human rights norms and tightly guard its authority against popular sovereignty.

Nevertheless, with agreed modalities among the participating states, tension between a state and human rights can be mitigated through dialogue.

As such, the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) held the ASEAN Human Rights Dialogue 2021 on Sept. 21 in cooperation with the Indonesian Foreign Ministry.

It was the first regional platform for all ASEAN member states (AMS) to exchange their views on the human rights programs and policies in their countries. It was also an opportunity for the AMS to update each other on progress in implementing the international instruments on human rights, as well as the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration adopted in 2012.

During the dialogue, eight out of the 10 AMS shared their practices and experiences and answered questions related to the promotion and protection of human rights.

The AMS also discussed measures to address issues related to fundamental freedoms, civil, political, economic and social rights, the Sustainable Development Goals, racial discrimination, business and human rights, and the impact of COVID-19 on human rights. They also discussed strategies for implementing the recommendations of the United Nations Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR).

Accordingly, Indonesian Deputy Foreign Minister Mahendra Siregar highlighted that the ASEAN Human Rights Dialogue 2021 was a testament to the increased maturity of the AMS to move forward the issue of human rights in the region.

He also emphasized that regularly convening a human rights dialogue among the AMS, with the AICHR as the facilitator, would elevate the role of the regional grouping’s human rights commission.

The ASEAN human rights dialogue was also mentioned by Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi in her annual press statement in January of this year as one of Indonesia’s diplomacy priorities in 2021, namely to contribute to the strengthening of human rights promotion and protection in the region.

Actually, the idea of holding an ASEAN human rights dialogue is not new.

In 2013, Indonesia initiated a human rights dialogue and presented the progress it had made in promoting and protecting human rights since political and economic reform in 1998, as well as in implementing the National Human Rights Plan. This dialogue was said to be a good example of a discussion on human rights that was conducted effectively without naming and shaming.

A similar dialogue was organized in Thailand in 2014 that focused on issues related to trafficking in persons.

Moreover, the AICHR has engaged human rights stakeholders, including sector-specific ASEAN community councils and other bodies, civil society, academia and national human rights institutions, as well as ASEAN’s dialogue partners. The AICHR needs to continue enhancing the process and quality of its human rights dialogue with stakeholders from time to time.

As for institutional development, the AICHR has incorporated a specific agenda in its regular meetings for country representatives to discuss recent developments in human rights.

The importance of dialogue, therefore, cannot be underestimated.

The ASEAN Community’s Forging Ahead Together blueprint for 2016-2025 mentions the term “dialogue” 35 times and emphasizes dialogue as the central component of ASEAN’s overall strategy to promote sustainable development, peace and stability in the region. It is safe to say that dialogue is part of ASEAN’s DNA.

The ASEAN five-point consensus on Myanmar also underscored the significance of dialogue among all concerned parties and called for the appointment of a special envoy to facilitate mediation through dialogue in seeking a peaceful solution to the Myanmar crisis.

Listening with empathy is at the heart of dialogue. The process involves efforts to seek common ground, explore new ideas and perspectives, and to respect the principles of no harm, gender balance, inclusiveness, transparency and voluntary participation.

As for Myanmar, it can begin by building trust among all who agree to take part in dialogue and negotiations through actions such as ceasing violence, releasing all political prisoners and ensuring personal security and protection against reprisals.

The ASEAN special envoy to Myanmar must ensure that all voices are heard, including those that have been marginalized and affected the most by the political crisis in Myanmar, such as women, children, youths and minority groups.

Unlike a debate, dialogue commonly does not involve arguing a point of view, defending a set of assumptions or critiquing the positions of others. It is also not a process to reach agreement or arrive at a decision.

Dialogue should not be confused with negotiation or consensus-building either, as it can only emerge when the participants trust and respect each other, suspend their judgments and listen fully to all points of view.

Undeniably, whether it is to find a peaceful solution to a political crisis or to discuss human rights, dialogue is more than a talk or a promotional tool. It is, indeed, a radical idea.

***

The writer is the 2019-2021 Indonesia representative to the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights.