It is a publicly-known fact that Malaysia is a wonderful ‘diplomat’ when it comes to the upholding of our human rights image and reputation in the international level.
We are now ostentatiously re-elected as one of the 47 members sitting in the United Nations Human Rights Council for the second term covering 2010-2013. We also ‘passed with distinction’ in the newly-established Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism in February and June last year. The UPR could be well understood as a peer-to-peer review. We have however, yet to see the concrete follow-up actions by the government in many areas as promised.
When it comes to the human rights promotion and protection in the national level, I am afraid there is no need for a lengthy description or explanation on how much we have fared. This leads to the main focus of the discussion in this article — the need for a national human rights action plan (NHRAP). A NHRAP for Malaysia will provide a fundamental reference and guidance for action on many human rights issues facing by the country.
The ideal that every country should have its own NHRAP was initially advocated at the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna.
In Malaysia for example; with the NHRAP, the human rights commitments could be well-put in the context of public policy, so that the government can further practice and implement the human rights goals step-by-step, through the engagement with all relevant sectors.
There are now quite a number of countries in the Asia Pacific region that have established their own NHRAPs. The latest is the Chinese government. In the Southeast Asia region itself, three countries with the existing national human rights institutions have established their NHRAPs, i.e. Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines.
Elements not to be missed
So why exactly we need the NHRAP for?
There are numerous benefits for having a NHRAP. Such a plan is able to foster a more comprehensive assessment of the human rights needs in the country.
Not to mention, such a plan could be practical in orientation which means it allows the room for achievable targets and realistic activities aimed at improving the human rights protection of its citizens. In short, a NHRAP could help in strengthening the rule of law and enhancing the management of the country.
In the normal practice, a NHRAP needs to be consistently referred to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 and other international instruments and standards. Most plans provide for an all-inclusive approach embracing civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights and many of it accords priority to the needs of vulnerable groups as well as thematic issues of major concern within the country.
The role of SUHAKAM and the non-governmental organisations
It is of course very important for the plan to emphasize the importance of broad public participation in the processes associated with the plan. In many cases, the planning for such a plan involves the establishment of a national coordinating committee.
As early as in 2001, SUHAKAM has highlighted the importance for the government to draft a NHRAP in its Annual Report. Subsequently in February 2006, SUHAKAM presented a draft NHRAP for the government’s consideration. As reported, the response received at the time was that there was no need for such a plan because the Federal Constitution is deemed as sufficiently covers the area of human rights.
Nevertheless, SUHAKAM in various occasions reiterated the need for the government to produce its own NHRAP. The latest, it has further raised the importance of such a plan in its UPR 5-page statement last year.
There is a need for the mutual understanding that although such a plan could be initiated by the national human rights institutions or the non-governmental organisations, it should still be clearly recognized that the commitments in the plan impose obligations on the government to take suitable actions.
Lessons to be learned
In 1994, the Australia was the first country to adopt the idea of establishing its own national human rights action plan following the recommendations made from the Vienna Conference. The plan was developed by an inter-departmental committee of governmental officials, including the Attorney General’s Chambers. The plan at that period of time was highly comprehensive and provided much attention to particularly the economic, social and cultural rights as well as specific consideration for the vulnerable groups.
Nevertheless, one of the glaring weaknesses was that the Australia Plan did not specify a clear time-frame for its implementation period, although later on, the Australian government officials indicated that it was intended to be applicable from 1994-1998. Also only limited consultations with the civil society groups took place.
The first Philippines Human Rights Plan applied from 1996-2000 which later on extended to 2002. Also resulted from the Vienna Conference, the Commission on Human Rights of Philippines (CHRP) in 1994 has independently initiated the proposal to have a NHRAP for the country. Following the proposal of the CHRP, a President Memorandum was issued in the following year, and that paved the way for the establishment of the specific team to spearhead the plan which led to the official adoption of the plan in 1996.
Mr. Prime Minister, we need the plan
Of course there will be many who are not quite optimistic and rather skeptical with the commitments of our government in drawing up such a plan for the country. But come to think about it rationally, it is better than no plan at all to promote and protect the human rights in the country.
At least if we have this plan in place one day, it could be utilized as the platform for the public to ensure the government implement on what it has promised.
The idea of such a plan focuses on encouraging change within the country and thus, it is concerned with mobilizing the will to change and developing appropriate mechanisms.
One of the main challenges of a NHRAP is to move the human rights activities from the idealistic sphere into the practical sphere. If Najib administration is serious in making a reform, I would suggest the government to start drawing up such plan.
