A BOOK REVIEW ON

ACCESS TO JUSTICE:
THE STRUGGLE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN SOUTH EAST ASIA
EDITED BY HARRY M. SCOBLE & LAURICE S. WISEBERG

Submitted By:

KHRISTINE JANE EJERCITO

MASTER IN INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE
UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
DILIMAN

Submitted To:

DR. CAROLINA HERNANDEZ

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE
UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
DILIMAN

18 OCTOBER 2010
Introduction:
 The book, ACCESS TO JUSTICE: THE STRUGGLE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN
SOUTHEAST ASIA, is a product of a conference held in Tagaytay, Philippines,
from February 14 – 19, 1982. The workshop was attended by almost 40
participants from different ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations)
member countries namely the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand.
There were also few participants from India and the United States.
The main purpose of the conference, initiated by the Human Rights
Internet (HRI) and co-sponsored by the International Human Rights Law Group,
Washington D.C., and the University of the Philippines College and Center of
Law, with the co-operation of the Third World Studies Center of the University
of the Philippines, the Indonesian Legal Aid Institute, and the Human Rights
Institute of Lucknow, India, was to discuss ‘Procedures for the Implementation
of Internationally-Recognized Human Rights in the ASEAN Region’. The
discussion was further analyzed by looking into some issues that needed to be
focused on. The Asian participants looked into three major themes: (1) Asian
Perspectives on Human Rights; (2) the Present State of Human Rights in the
ASEAN Nations; and (3) Particular Rights, Special Problems. These main
subjects were further divided into sub-topics. Meanwhile, the non-Asian
participants served as resource people, especially with regard to information
about international mechanisms and organizations.
The seminar was conducted in such a way that there was no
government intervention involved. The organizers of the conference assured
that the said event will not be politicized and free from influences by any
government. They made it “conducive to a free and frank exchange of
information and viewpoints (page xii)”.
With the aforementioned reasons, they set ground rules for every
participant to follow: “that there would be no difficulties in obtaining visas for
any invitees; that no government officials, from any country, would participate
in the workshop; that the workshop would take place outside Manila with no
publicity; and that every effort would be made to keep the discussion free and
pointed, and to focus discussion on concrete problems without, however,

2|Access to Justice
leading to any public resolutions castigating some, or praising other,
governments (page xiii)”.
Despite these ground rules, however, some still did not participate,
either because the funding was sponsored by the US government or because
the meeting was co-sponsored by the University of the Philippines Law School
and Center of Law, which are government institutions. Nevertheless, the
project was pursued with the encouragement of lots of people who knew
about it. It is also important to highlight though that the sponsors did not
agree to a joint publication of the book, therefore the editors have the sole
responsibility of the published material.

The Book
The book is actually three years older than I am. It was published in
1985 which makes it outdated in terms of contemporary developments of
human rights in Southeast Asia and in ASEAN as well. However, it is still a
good and relevant material because it offers historical facts that happened
even before I was born. Most parts of the book are case studies from different
ASEAN states. It is important to keep in mind that this was written when
ASEAN was only composed of the five founding members – Thailand, Malaysia,
Indonesia, the Philippines and Singapore (although Singapore has no
representative). From the pieces of information presented, one who studies
present-day human rights situation can clearly distinguish the advancements
(if there is any) of the state of human rights since the 1980s.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

This book critic will deal with the developments and advancements that
happened from 1980s to the present in terms of the struggle for human rights
in Southeast Asia. However, as a Filipino, I feel that I am more credible if I will
be offering comparative data using the Philippines as a case study.

3|Access to Justice
Access to Justice: The Struggle for Human Rights in Southeast Asia
In general, the book presented contentious issues raised during the
Access to Justice Conference. The most prominent topics were the following:
“the powerful versus the powerless; the protection of detainees; freedom of
the press; the right to freedom of association; the rights of indigenous peoples
and minorities; economic rights; and lastly, the relevance of international
norms on – and of intergovernmental institutions and procedures concerning –
human rights (page 201).”
Human rights or simply rights of a man are considered to be essential to
the development of every individual. “The purpose of human rights is, above
all, to provide a set of rules for the relationship between the individual and
government, bearing in mind the fundamental inequality of power between
those two poles. This inequality is inherent in the state system (page 22)”.
The early parts of the book tackle the perception of ASEAN (Association
of Southeast Asian Nations), a Third World region in general, on the concept of
human rights. In this region, the claim that the human rights concept is
universal is often rejected, in whole or in part, by the following three main
counter arguments.
First, the orthodox Communist Party members claims that “human rights
– defined as individual civil and political rights – are nothing more than a
residual bourgeois contrivance, an individualistic and legalistic formula which
permits, while it simultaneously conceals, the continued collective rule of the
most wealth and powerful class in society (page 3).” The second counter-
claim is raised by Western economistic developmentalists and vulgar Marxists
who believe that “human rights are inherently incompatible with economic
development (ibid).” Finally, the last argument is presented by Asian elites
who asserts that the “entire concept of human rights, and indeed the concept
of ‘rights’ is alien to Asia (ibid).”
These arguments were generally rejected by the participants of the
Access to Justice Conference. They offered different views with regard to the

4|Access to Justice
human rights situation in Southeast Asia and presented various explanations
why it is so.
Saneh Chamarik directly opposed the first counter-argument of the
orthodox communists. According to Chamarik, human rights defined as ‘civil
and political rights’ is hollow. It should always be interconnected with ‘social
and economic rights’ because it is “indeed questionable how human freedom
and dignity can be promoted and protected without both categories of rights
(page 13).” Moreover, R.N. Trevendi offered a ‘three-tier generation’ of
human rights which involves 1) civil and political; 2) economic, social and
cultural; and 3) the right to development. He emphasized that the right to
development, which is the right for an improved standard of living, is already
implicit in Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In fact, “there is a link
between human rights, development, governmental power, and participation
in decision-making (page 202).” Thus, the claim that there is a conflict
between, and that a trade-off is necessary, between economic development
and political rights should be exposed and destroyed.
Another argument was introduced by C.G. Weeramantry who pointed
out that the Western conception of human rights is inappropriate with the
Third World and stressed that the issue of ‘inequality’ as the most relevant to
the needs and problems of Southeast Asia. He notes that there is a “pressing
need to seek a view of equality which means more than the perpetuation of
inequality – a view of equality more substantial than one which means the
equal right to remain unequal (page 14).” His argument might be true but the
belief that human rights are merely a Western liberal-democratic ‘bourgeois’
cultural artifact that is utterly irrelevant to the Third World should be
debunked (page 202).” The Third World may still be in the process of state-
building and can be seen as ‘immature’ in terms of institutionalizing peaceful
settlement of conflicts. This is very evident to most of ASEAN states which
lack ‘rules and regulations’, sanctions, and necessary processes to resolve
social and political conflicts. However, it shouldn’t be denied to them that
promotion and protection of human rights are attainable.

5|Access to Justice
 It also suggested in the book that “political action, mass participation,
and democratization are essential tools for the promotion and protection of
human rights, because legal and procedural protections are by definition and
in fact absent from non-democratic political systems (page 201).” They came
up with a proposition that “democracy is necessary to serve as the basis for
human rights (page 19).” In the Philippines context, this suggestion was
applicable because at the time of the Access to Justice Conference, the
Philippines just gone through a martial law regime of President Ferdinand
Marcos. However, it is very evident that even after martial law was lifted in 17
January 1981, “all restrictions and limitations on human and civil rights of the
people under martial law still subsist (page 104).” This might be the biggest
irony of it all. Until today, now that the Philippines is already democratic,
there are still numerous human rights violations. Extra-judicial killings remain.
It is very apparent that repression, political repression in particular,
continues to be one of the main causes of human rights violations. In the
Philippines, from the time of martial law until the Aquino Administration,
political killings continue. People who struggle against the government are
often labelled as enemies of the state or those who belong to the ‘left-wing’.
“The central problem, in both politics and economics, is to find effective
means for shifting power from the powerful to the powerless (page 201).”
Another point that is well-established in the book is that pressures from
both government and non-government organizations (NGOs) of First World
countries work as double-edged sword. On one side, they are proven effective
in lessening human rights abuses in the Third World, but on the other side,
their economic and political dominance hinders the genuine growth of
developing states. “Greater regional co-operation among existing NGOs on
human rights issues of mutual concern is both feasible and desirable (page
202).”
Based on the case studies presented by each country representative,
the national situations of the five ASEAN nations have much in common. The
major similarities are: “a centralizing executive power; a military

6|Access to Justice
establishment readily tempted to displace civilian politicians, especially
popularly elected legislatures; easy reliance on states of exception (i.e. martial
law, state of emergency, of siege); weak civilian judiciaries and bar
associations; criminal code legislation permitting harsh punishment of
dissidents as ‘subversives’; maldistribution of income, reflecting large
inequalities in power and wealth; exploitation of the rural poor, by both the
national government and foreign multinational corporations; repression of
indigenous minorities, and often of non-national minorities as well; and the
need for basic structural reforms (page 201).”
Participants of the Access to Justice Conference also shared the same
sentiments that there should be a regional mechanism that will oversee
human rights situation in Southeast Asia. Most of them, most specially the
human rights activists, were having doubts on the capacity of international
institutions like the United Nations (UN) because it was difficult for ASEAN
states to access UN due to “physical and financial distance, cultural and
linguistic distance from the official languages of these institutions and even
from alleged national traits which inhibit disclosure of domestic violations to
international scrutiny and possible condemnation (ibid).”
Also, they also empathized that although international human rights law
is relevant, it is not a “self-executing” solution to the human rights violations
in ASEAN states or in anywhere in the world. But of course, it “creates one
more arena, provides one more set of techniques” which can be utilized by
human rights advocates in further promoting and protecting human rights in
Southeast Asia.
In sum, the book suggests that the universality of human rights is a
collective effort. Human rights in general transcends several issues, may it be
political, social, and economic. Thus, individuals, governments, NGOs,
international organizations and institutions and all of the international actors
should work hand in hand for the realization of human rights internationally.

7|Access to Justice
8|Access to Justice