The Enforcement of universal standardsbased on the UDHR and the 9 core human rights treaties: A casestudy about Malaysia
Author
Dyrby Laursen, Jacob
Term
4. term
Publication year
2011
Pages
109
Abstract
Denne afhandling undersøger, om menneskerettigheder er universelle, og hvordan et internationalt menneskerettighedsregime er vokset frem. Malaysia bruges som case, og den nationale debat om menneskerettigheder behandles som en selvstændig diskurs. Analysen bygger på en realistisk tilgang i international politik, hvor stater ses som drevet af egne interesser, men også påvirkes af internationale regimer og civilsamfund. Indenrigspolitisk er den etniske balance og racedelt politik, med UMNO i front og BN-koalitionen ved magten, afgørende for den malaysiske menneskerettighedsdiskurs. Malaysia er blandt de få lande, der ikke har ratificeret nogen af de to grundlæggende FN‑kovenanter om henholdsvis borgerlige og politiske rettigheder samt økonomiske, sociale og kulturelle rettigheder, og har ikke frivilligt integreret sig i menneskerettighedsregimet. I Mahathirs retorik fremstilles menneskerettigheder som vestlige, ikke universelle, værdier, koblet til idéen om 'asiatiske værdier'. Regimet blev institutionaliseret i 1976, men var svagt indtil efter Den Kolde Krig, hvor det institutionelle pres på Mahathir-regeringen voksede. Malaysia ratificerede to konventioner i 1995 efter Wien-konferencen, trods sin kritik af universalisme. På globalt plan er regimet i dag næsten universelt, med over 160 lande der har ratificeret begge kovenanter, men historisk har de været stærkt omstridte. Nationalt opstod der først et tydeligt pres for integration i slutningen af 1990'erne. Mange restriktive love og høj økonomisk vækst, som forbedrede hverdagslivet, kan have svækket en bottom-up dynamik. Mahathir mistede politisk legitimitet efter finanskrisen og afskedigelsen af sin vicepremierminister. Internet, en mere samlet opposition, et styrket civilsamfund og internationalisering kan samle befolkningsgrupper om at udfordre regeringen og ændre menneskerettighedsdiskursen. I 2010 så Malaysia for første gang ud til frivilligt at ratificere en menneskerettighedstraktat (CRPD), men landet er fortsat tilbageholdende med at ratificere kovenanterne. Trods regelmæssige valg tynger regeringskontrol med medier og erhvervsliv, et skævt valgsystem og retsvæsen, der favoriserer BN, samt et institutionaliseret forbud mod at udfordre den etniske balance. Derfor synes integration i menneskerettighedsregimet lang og vanskelig. Skulle befolkningen samle sig i et oprør for at vælte regeringen, vil det sandsynligvis blive slået ned som en trussel mod etnisk harmoni og national sikkerhed. Dette er den centrale malaysiske paradoks.
This thesis examines whether human rights are universal and how an international human rights regime has emerged. It uses Malaysia as a case and treats the national debate on human rights as a distinct discourse. The analysis applies a realist approach in international relations, in which states pursue their own interests but are also shaped by international regimes and civil society. Domestically, Malaysia’s ethnic balance and race-based politics—with UMNO at the forefront and the BN coalition in power—strongly shape its human rights discourse. Malaysia is among the few countries that have not ratified either of the two core UN covenants on civil and political rights and on economic, social and cultural rights, and it has not willingly integrated into the human rights regime. In Mahathir’s rhetoric, human rights are portrayed as Western rather than universal values, aligned with the idea of 'Asian values'. The regime was institutionalized in 1976 but remained weak until after the Cold War, when institutional pressure on the Mahathir administration increased. Malaysia ratified two conventions in 1995 after the Vienna Conference, despite its critique of universality. Globally, the regime is now nearly universal, with more than 160 countries having ratified both covenants, though they have been historically contested. Nationally, clear pressure to integrate did not emerge until the late 1990s. A combination of restrictive laws and rapid economic growth that improved daily life likely dampened bottom-up dynamics. Mahathir lost political credibility after the financial crisis and the dismissal of his deputy. The internet, a more unified political opposition, an empowered civil society, and internationalization may bring communities together to challenge the government and shift the human rights discourse. In 2010, Malaysia appeared to voluntarily ratify a human rights treaty for the first time (CRPD), yet it remains reluctant to ratify the covenants. Despite regular elections, government control of media and business, a biased electoral system and judiciary that favor BN, and an institutionalized ban on questioning the ethnic balance continue to weigh on society. As a result, integration into the human rights regime is likely to be long and difficult. Any mass uprising would probably be suppressed as a threat to ethnic harmony and national security. This is the core paradox of the Malaysian case.
[This abstract was generated with the help of AI]
Documents