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
128 Documents
<![CDATA[Towards Post-Transitional Justice ]]>
<![CDATA[Sri Lestari Wahyuningroem]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights Vol 3 No 1 (2019): June 2019 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Jember University Press ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.19184/jseahr.v3i1.11497
<![CDATA[When democratization took place in 1998 after three decades of authoritarianism in Indonesia, transitional justice became one of the agendas for the country. With the nature of compromised political transition, transitional justice brought together the interest of the elements who wished to challenge the repressive regime, and those who wished to distant themselves from the old regime in order to return to politics. As the result, transitional justice measures were successfully adopted in the beginning of political transition but failed to achieve its goals to break with the old regime and bring justice to victims. Today, after twenty years since reformasi, elements of the politics are consolidated, including those coming from the old regime. Transitional justice is undergoing a period I refer as “post transitional justice”. The main character of this state is the extensive roles of civil society. I argue in this paper that civil society, in particular the human rights groups, have important roles since the beginning of the transition in setting the agenda for transitional justice until today when state-centered mechanisms failed and led to post-transitional justice situation. These groups shift strategies to work from below and from the margins, which give strong character for post-transitional justice in Indonesia.]]>
<![CDATA[Narrating Human Rights in the Philippines ]]>
<![CDATA[Ma. Rhea Gretchen Arevalo Abuso]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights Vol 3 No 1 (2019): June 2019 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Jember University Press ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.19184/jseahr.v3i1.8411
<![CDATA[The 2016 national elections in the Philippines have been regarded as the most revealing and consequential democratic practice to the human rights situation in the country for two reasons. First, the overwhelming election of Rodrigo Duterte to the presidency was because of his campaign promise to rid the country of drugs and criminality within “3 to 6 months” through bloody and violent means. Second, the son and namesake of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos, whose authoritarian regime in the 1970’s was responsible for countless human rights violations, narrowly lost his vice-presidential bid by a mere 270,000 votes. These turns of events beg the question: how could Filipinos, who experienced a bloody and violent regime at the hands of a dictator, choose to elect national leaders widely associated with human rights violations? This paper addresses this question through the use of in-depth interviews with Filipino college students in key cities in the Philippines in order to describe the Marcos regime from the perspective of the generation that did not experience the period. The research aimed to understand how memories of past human rights violations are formed and shaped, how these memories are crucial to the improvement of the human rights situation in society, and how to ensure that mistakes of the past are not repeated. The study found that widespread revisionist notions about the Marcos regime can be attributed to the absence of meaningful martial law and human rights education in the country. However, the study also found that young Filipinos regard the social institution of education as the most trustworthy bearer of information on human rights and violent regimes. This highlights the crucial role of schools and educators in promoting human rights in society.]]>
<![CDATA[Application of the Cambodian Constitution ]]>
<![CDATA[Vandanet Hing]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights Vol 3 No 1 (2019): June 2019 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Jember University Press ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.19184/jseahr.v3i1.8406
<![CDATA[Studies conducted on the constitutional law-making process have shown that public participation is a key element of the relationship between the government and its citizens, and legitimizes the whole process. The present paper discusses the relationship between the people and the government on the basis of the Cambodian Constitution, both de jure andde facto. As assessments, it takes the 1993 constitutional making process and the public’s participation thereto. This paper aspires to answer the following questions: firstly, how does the constitutional law-making process impact the exercise of constitutional rights in Cambodia, and, secondly, to what extent does public participation play a role in public affairs, especially insofar as the constitution and law making processes are concerned. It further suggests that the concept of meaningful public consultation on constitution and law making should be incorporated in the Cambodian Constitution.]]>
<![CDATA[Detention of Refugee Children in Malaysia and Thailand ]]>
<![CDATA[Samitra Parthiban]]>;
<![CDATA[Khoo Ying Hooi]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights Vol 3 No 1 (2019): June 2019 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Jember University Press ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.19184/jseahr.v3i1.10142
<![CDATA[The refugee issue in Malaysia and Thailand is one of the most protracted human rights issues that both countries face. Regardless of abundant requests and advocacies by non-state actors, both locally and internationally, to persuade the governments of Thailand and Malaysia to provide protection to refugees, the fate of these refugees remain uncertain. One of the key limitations for the human rights protection of the refugees is that both countries did not sign the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol, moreover, both Thailand and Malaysia do not treat the refugee issue as a domestic problem. This paper examines the detention of refugee children in Malaysia and Thailand with the main intention to advocate for the method of Alternatives to Detention (ATD) as a solution to the shortcomings in a legal method. Based on that, this paper first explores the human rights situation of refugee children in detentions by looking into the current detention practices of both countries. Secondly, this paper examines the strategies and tactics of how the local Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) advocate and convince their governments to adopt the approach of ATD.]]>
<![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.]]>
