Journal of SouthEast Asian Human Rights
The Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights (JSEAHR) explores human rights realities in South East Asian region from various perspectives. The JSEAHR is a peer-reviewed journal co-organized by the Indonesian Consortium for Human Rights Lecturers (SEPAHAM Indonesia) and the Centre for Human Rights, Multiculturalism, and Migration (CHRM2) University of Jember. The Journal welcomes empirical, multi-disciplinary, and doctrinal approaches to explore historical and recent situation of human rights in South East Asia. The combination of editorial board members from South East Asia, Europe, and Japan creates a unique forum for South East Asian and other scholars to exchange ideas of interest about human rights issues in the region.
Articles
9 Documents
Search results for
, issue
"Vol 3 No 2 (2019): December 2019"
:
9 Documents
clear
<![CDATA[First Post-Legislative Scrutiny in Georgia: Steps Towards Generating Result-oriented Laws ]]>
<![CDATA[Kakhaber Kuchava]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights Vol 3 No 2 (2019): December 2019 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Jember University Press ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.19184/jseahr.v3i2.13600
<![CDATA[The effective implementation of law is a complex process. This process depends on the availability of human resources, public engagement, funding (at least, on the stage of piloting), among others. Often, the focus is on getting legislation adopted, rather than on practical implementation and its impact. To fill in this gap, oversight over the Implementation of Normative Acts (i.e., Post-legislative scrutiny, hereinafter “PLS”) has been introduced in the Rules of Procedures of the Parliament of Georgia (hereinafter, the “Parliament”). This article scrutinises the procedures that are shaping the Parliament’s ability to conduct PLS as well as its interaction with the executive. The working theory for this paper is that insufficient attention has been paid to the review of legislation after its enactment in Georgia. The paper addresses the work that has been undertaken at the national level, particularly through monitoring the effects of adopted legislation in ensuring benefits for constituents in the ways initially intended. Furthermore, it will reflect on the challenges identified in the ongoing PLS process by the Environments Protection and Natural Resources Committee (hereinafter “Environment Committee”) and the lessons learned based on the experience. The article uses a case study of Georgia to explore the context and challenges for effective PLS. For comparision, this research adopted the UK approach, where it is common to review the laws three to five years after enactment.]]>
<![CDATA[Legal Aspects of the Right to Nationality Pursuant to Myanmar Citizenship Law ]]>
<![CDATA[Su Yin Htun]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights Vol 3 No 2 (2019): December 2019 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Jember University Press ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.19184/jseahr.v3i2.13480
<![CDATA[It is universally accepted that everyone has the right to citizenship. Myanmar’s framework on the right to nationality constitutes a unique, exclusive, ethnic citizenship system based on jus sanguinis or the law of blood. Myanmar’s Citizenship Law was enacted in 1982 by repealing the Union Citizenship Act of 1948. As citizenship parameters were changed by the Law, many people in the Kachin, Karen, and Rakhine states lost their nationality rights and consequently suffered human rights abuses. In the Rakhine state, serious communal violence occurred in 2012, 2016, and 2017, and the government declared a state of emergency. This research paper focuses on how Myanmar can adhere to international standards for nationality rights. It provides a historical overview and legal analysis of citizenship laws in Myanmar using a human rights lens and offers suggestions for legal reforms that can help address the problem of statelessness in Myanmar. Specifically, it recommends the use of the jus soli, or the law of the soil, approach to citizenship.]]>
<![CDATA[An Overview of Post-Legislative Scrutiny in Western Australia ]]>
<![CDATA[Sam Hastings]]>;
<![CDATA[Kate Doust]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights Vol 3 No 2 (2019): December 2019 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Jember University Press ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.19184/jseahr.v3i2.13599
<![CDATA[Twenty years ago, the House of Lords Select Committee into the Constitution focused attention back onto the concept of post-legislative scrutiny. Since then, a clear framework and momentum for systematic post-legislative scrutiny has developed which has enabled parliaments to strengthen their role in the legislative process. However, there is a dearth of academic research into post-legislative scrutiny in Australian jurisdictions. Currently, there is no clear picture of the extent of post-legislative scrutiny in Western Australia and the factors in support, and challenges in implementing, systematic review of legislation. This article examines the extent of post-legislative scrutiny conducted by or overseen by the Parliament of Western Australia. An analysis of review reports and parliamentary debates reveals the outcomes of post-legislative scrutiny by the Executive. This article also examines outcomes of post-legislative scrutiny conducted by parliament through the application of the Westminster Foundation for Democracy’s Principles of Post-Legislative Scrutiny. Finally, barriers to post-legislative scrutiny by the legislature and options for reform are explored.]]>
<![CDATA[Unraveling Disability Participation in Indigenous Peoples ]]>
<![CDATA[Isnenningtyas Yulianti]]>;
<![CDATA[Nurrahman Aji Utomo]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights Vol 3 No 2 (2019): December 2019 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Jember University Press ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.19184/jseahr.v3i2.13577
<![CDATA[Abstract The issue of disability in indigenous peoples is closely related to the issue of full enjoyment in development and inclusive citizenship. Indigenous peoples have the potential to face discrimination and exclusion from every development from every aspect of life. This condition becomes more vulnerable if it occurs in persons with disabilities. The issue of disability in indigenous peoples, still often neglected in its environment and its own group, and even in the system of society and state. Toraja, Bali, and Maros became the representation of the research area. Based on facts and analyzes, disabilities in indigenous peoples face various layers of discrimination and violations of gender and disability status. The characteristics of indigenous peoples determine the treatment of persons with disabilities in their communities. Most noticeable is the lack of friendly service for persons with disabilities in their own societies. Therefore, people with disabilities in indigenous peoples need open opportunities to participate in customary institutions and emancipation beyond the scope of protection and the fulfillment of rights by the government.]]>
<![CDATA[Parliamentary Rights Scrutiny and Counter-Terrorism Lawmaking in Australia ]]>
<![CDATA[Sarah Moulds]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights Vol 3 No 2 (2019): December 2019 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Jember University Press ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.19184/jseahr.v3i2.13461
<![CDATA[This paper evaluates the impact of pre and post-enactment scrutiny of Australia’s counter-terrorism laws enacted from 2001 until 2018. Parliamentary scrutiny of rights-engaging laws is particularly critical in the Australian content, as Australia relies on a parliamentary model of rights protection at the federal level. The evaluation framework employed in this Paper considers a range of evidence to provide a holistic account of the impact of legislative scrutiny on the content, development and implementation of Australia’s counter-terrorism laws. This includes consideration of the legislative impact of scrutiny on the content of the law, the role scrutiny plays in the public and parliamentary debate on the law, as well as the hidden impact scrutiny, may be having on policy development and legislative drafting. The results are surprising. This study finds that parliamentary rights scrutiny, particularly by parliamentary committees, has had a rights-enhancing (although rarely rights-remedying) impact on the counter-terrorism laws. Further, this research finds that the hidden or behind-the-scenes impact of parliamentary scrutiny provides a particularly fertile ground for improving the rights-protecting capacity of the Australian legislative scrutiny system. These findings and the evaluation framework employed in this Paper have application and benefits for other jurisdictions seeking to understand and improve the quality of their legislative scrutiny regimes.]]>
<![CDATA[Protection of the Rights of the Victims of Human Trafficking: Has Malaysia done Enough? ]]>
<![CDATA[Renuka Jeyabalan]]>;
<![CDATA[Rohaida Nordin]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights Vol 3 No 2 (2019): December 2019 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Jember University Press ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.19184/jseahr.v3i2.9231
<![CDATA[Human trafficking is a grave threat to human rights. Statistic shows that yearly almost thousands of men, women and children grieve in the hand of traffickers as human trafficking victim, in their own countries or abroad. Thus, there is a need for Malaysia to take the necessary step to combat human trafficking and at the same time to provide effective protection for victims of trafficking as enacted under the Malaysian Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007 (ATIPSOM 2007). The first part of this research examines the international law standards on human rights protection of the victim of human trafficking while the second part analyses any legal and policy measures adopted within the Malaysian context. In this analysis, attention will be made on numerous protection mechanisms such as provision for a shelter, or a place of refuge, appointment of Protection Officers, medical treatment, right to work and safe repatriation. This research further examines and assesses the adequacy and effectiveness of the current measures and laws especially in terms of their enforcement by the relevant enforcement bodies. Analysis on the existing legal framework within other ASEAN States, including Indonesia, is also done so as to provide relevant best practices for consideration and adoption by the Malaysian government. In conclusion, this research provides a number of solutions to address the problems and challenges within the existing legal framework in Malaysia with the ultimate aim at providing better protection for the victims of human trafficking.]]>
<![CDATA[Hierarchical Reciprocities and Tensions between Migrants and Native Moluccas in the Post Reformation ]]>
<![CDATA[Hatib Abdul Kadir]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights Vol 3 No 2 (2019): December 2019 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Jember University Press ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.19184/jseahr.v3i2.8396
<![CDATA[The research subject of this paper focuses on the Butonese, who are considered “outside” the local culture, despite having lived in the Moluccas islands of Indonesia for more than a hundred years. The Butonese compose the largest group of migrants to the Moluccas. This article research does not put ethnicity into a fixed, classified group of a population; rather, the research explores ethnicity as a living category in which individuals within ethnic groups also have opportunities for social mobility and who struggle for citizenship. The Butonese has a long history of being considered “subaltern citizens” or have frequently been an excluded community in post-colonial societies. They lack rights to land ownership and bureaucratic access. This article argues that Indonesian democracy has bred opposition between indigenous and migrant groups because, after the Reformation Era, migrants, as a minority, began to participate in popular politics to express themselves and make up their rights as “citizens”. Under the condition of democratic political participation, the Butonese found a way to mobilize their collective identity in order to claim the benefits of various governmental programs. Thus, this paper is about the contentiousness of how the rural Butonese migrants gained advantageous social and political status in the aftermath of the sectarian conflict between 1999 to 2003. Migrant’s ability to express their grievance in a constructive way through the politics of their representatives and state government policies have led to the new contentious issues between indigenous and migrant populations.]]>
<![CDATA[The Long March in the New Era ]]>
<![CDATA[Qinxuan Peng]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights Vol 3 No 2 (2019): December 2019 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Jember University Press ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.19184/jseahr.v3i2.13465
<![CDATA[China has entered a New Era with an aspiration to safeguard human rights through law. However, implementation gaps are found when comparing the current Chinese domestic laws on non-discrimination with the requirements set by international human rights treaties and international labour standards on eliminating discrimination in the labour market. This article illustrates how rural migrant workers are an underprivileged group in Chinese society, emphasising the inferior treatment they experience due to their agricultural hukou residential status in urban areas. The study identifies several implementation gaps between the international standards and the Chinese domestic legal system on non-discrimination, serving as the very first step to eradicate de facto and de jure discrimination and to achieve Legal Protection of Human Rights in the New Era.]]>
