123

Cultural Relativism: An Examination of Asian Values as a Shield

against Human Rights Violations in East Asia
Diwakar Bhatta⊕

Abstract
The question on the concepts of universalism of human rights has been raised by some
of countries in the world. Their version is that the enjoyment of human rights depends
on social and cultural context, and to the extend they permit. The author discusses
the issue of universalism of human rights in the ASEAN context, and scrutinizes that
the debate between the cultural relativism ‘Asian value’ and universality of human
rights is neither of a conflict of cultural value nor is of clash of West versus East
ideology. However, it is not more than an agenda for ASEAN countries by the political
interests.

1.Preliminary
An academic discourse on human rights always moves on with the notion that human
rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and inter-related. For the first time, the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) conceptualized these values and further
reiterated by the UN General Assembly1, the Vienna Conference of 19932 and World
Summit 2005. However, the notion of universality is not beyond the criticism and has
been attacked by those who had very little participation during the adoption of Universal
Declaration of Human Right and were under the colonial rulers, especially the African,
Asian and Latin American Countries.3 Although, the values like human dignity, freedom,
equality, justice, fraternity and solidarity are equally important to all people irrespective
of socio-economic, cultural and political settings, but there exists a huge debate on
defining human rights as value system or culturally relative.4
The question arises: first, are human rights really universal and could anything
be determined as a value system which the rest of the world may accept? Second, does
there any difference exist between ‘the West’ and ‘East’ with regard to human rights as
such or is it just a battle of power politics and economics? Third, can Asian values or
in particular the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries’ ideology
of priority of social interests over the individual rights be a good reason against the
shield of human rights violations in ASEAN countries? So in this essay, these three

⊕
The author holds LL.M (Gold Medalist) from Tribhuwan University, Nepal and he is now a
Deputy Government Attorney at the Office of Attorney General, Nepal and currently pursuing
LL.M Degree in Human Rights at The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
1 UNGA Res 32/130 (17 December 1977).
2 Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, <http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/
(symbol) /a.conf.157.23.en > accessed on 18 November 2009.
3 Council of Europe (Pub), Universality of Human Rights in a Pluralistic World ( N.P. Engel
Publisher: USA 1990 ) 5, 7.
4 Id, 3.
124 NJA Law Journal 2009

questions are tried to answer with the universality versus cultural relativism discourse
in relation to human rights perspective of ASEAN countries. All the elucidations have
been developed to shed light on the topic from political and theoretical perspective of
human rights.

2. Universality of Human Rights and Cultural Relativism

Human rights questions have been on and off the agenda of world politics since the
end of the World War II. The modernity of human rights began with the adoption of
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) 1948 celebrated by the International
Law Commission under the UN. The adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights in 1948 was a testimony to the international commitment to human rights
protection.5 The twin heritage of human rights was further elucidated by the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and International Covenant on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights in 1966 to make such rights enforceable in the world. Similarly, in
building consensus among the international community, the Vienna Declaration of
1993 reaffirms that all human rights are ‘universal, indivisible and interdependent and
inter-related.6 However, the representatives of ASEAN countries and Chinese delegation
at the conference presented the views that human rights are of the consideration of
cultural values or relativism which varies from one to another country.7
For those who do not believe in the universality of human rights, they have
basically two grounds.8 First, there was no participation of the many non-western
states during the adoption of UDHR, and therefore universal human rights are the
origins of ‘the West’. Second, while adopting this declaration, many countries from
Asia, Africa and Latin America were under colonization and thus this ideology was
adopted by some ‘western countries’ who declared their culture as universal culture
and could also be appropriate for the rest.
So, this methodology favors more than one value in the world simultaneously
gives rise to an unsettled skepticism as to whether there is universal consensus on the
concept of human rights or human rights are different considerations for various cultures
and ideologies.9 The universality of human rights has to respond to the question on
how they could be similar in ‘the west’ and ‘non west’, for example, in Europe and the
US, and Africa and Asia.

5
James T. H. Tang, ‘A Clash of Values? ‘Human Rights in the Post-Cold World War’ (Apaper
presented at Proceedings of a Conference held on 28 March 1997 at Hamamatsu, Shizuoka,
Japan, as Part of the First Shizuoka Asia-Pacific Forum: The Future of the Asia-Pacific Region
<http://www.unu.edu/unupress/asian-values.html> accessed 15 November 2009.
6
Id.
7
Roda Mushkat, International Environmental Law and Asian Values ‘Legal Norms and Cultural
Influences’ (The University of British Colombia Press: Canada 2004) 9; See also: Amartya Sen,
‘Human Rightsand Asian Values’, Sixteenth Morgenthau Memorial Lecture on Ethics & Foreign
Policy 9, cf W. S. Wong,‘The Real World of ’ Human Rights’ (mimeographed, 1993) <http://
www.cceia.org/media/254_sen.pdf> accessed 20 November 2009.
8
Supra note 3.
9
Id.
Cultural Relativism: An Examination of Asian.... 125

The proponent of cultural relativism advocates that there is no universal

morality in the sense that the world has a long history of plurality of cultures and the
attempt to assert universality as a criterion of all moralities is a well disguised version
of imperial ideology to rule others of a particular culture.10 Moreover, cultural relativists
dwell upon that the interpretation of human rights varies with culture, both as to their
place in society and as to the hierarchy established among them.
At the forefront of the cultural relativism ‘Asian values’ debate challenges the
core of universality of human rights advanced by Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the former
prime minister of Malaysia, and Lee Kuan Yew, the former prime minister of Singapore
along with several other intellectuals and economists in South East Asian countries. At
the same time, cultural relativists opt to say that diversity may result in sub-national
settings or group movements based on political, social and religious minorities within
a national society.11

3. Asian Values Debate

The ASEAN counties, despite the socio-economic, political, cultural and geographical
differences, have been united under this forum mainly for the objectives: to maintain
peace, security and stability and further strengthen peace-oriented values in the region
and to enhance regional resilience by promoting greater political, security, economic
and socio-cultural cooperation etc.12
The Bangkok Declaration, signed by over forty Asian governments, did not
reject universal human rights, however, the declaration suggested that universality
should be considered in the context of a dynamic and evolving process of international
norm-setting, bearing in mind the significance of national and regional particularities
and various historical, cultural and religious backgrounds.13 So, the claim of “Asian
values” did not limit among the ASEAN political leaders, but some representatives of
some Asian Countries also presented their views by delineating themselves from west
in the Vienna Conference of Human Rights 1993.
Asian values largely rests on differing view that is called “communitarian”
ideology. The prominent of the communitarian viewpoints are namely Lee Kuan Yew of
Singapore, Mahathir Mohamad of Malaysia, Jiang Zemin of China and some others.14
It is thus first considered here whether they have any common culture as such
ASEAN States claim or they are united out of the diversity of social, religious and

10
Id, 5, 9.
11
Takashi Inoguchi and Edward Newman , ‘Introduction :“Asian Values” And Democracy in
Asia’,Proceedings of a Conference held on 28 March 1997at Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, Japan, as
Part of the First Shizuoka Asia-Pacific Forum: The Future of the Asia-Pacific Region <http://
www.unu.edu/nupress/asian-values.htm> accessed on 23 November 2009.
12
The Charter of Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Article 1.
13
Supra note 3
14
GEORGE WIESSALA, RE-ORIENTING THE FUNDAMENTALS, ‘HUMAN RIGHTS AND
NEW CONNECTIONS IN EU-ASIA RELATIONS 38, 40 (Ashgata Publishing Limited, England
2006)
126 NJA Law Journal 2009

cultural aspects under it for the economic and political reasons. It is always argued that
Asian counties have very few common things to share as part of culture. For example,
the Asian countries like Japan, Thailand, China, Singapore and Philippines have nothing
in common to convince the rest of the world that they share the same culture among
them which could give leeway to consider the cultural relativism in relation to human
rights.
Pointing out the inter-state differences in Asia, Amartya Sen argues that the
size of Asia, where about 60 percent of the total world population lives and in this vast
region with such diversity, there are no quintessential values that apply to this immensely
large and heterogeneous population, that differentiate Asians as a group from people
in the rest of the world.15 So in his view, it requires a heroic generalization to see such
a large group of people in terms of the positional view from the European side of the
Bosporus.16
In this way, the claim made by Lee Kuan Yew to show the fundamental
difference between Western concepts of society and their governments is challengeable
in the sense that even within Asian Countries, there is political, cultural, social and
economic difference among the Asians, such as Korea, Japan, China, Vietnam, Thailand
and Philippines are distinct from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Nepal, the
South Asian countries from cultural perspective.
While looking into the cultural phenomena, Asians have a long-established
synctic tradition of “cultural eclecticism and inclusiveness” which is reflected in the
assimilation of Hindu, Buddhist, Arab, and Chinese traditions, eastern origin and other
somewhat blend of Western culture into the their region.17 Likewise, it could be argued
that the traditions extant in Asia differ among themselves, but nevertheless may share
some common characteristics.18 However, in terms of religious belief, Singapore
advocates that they have been influenced by Confucianism.
The idea of Asian value has also been attacked by Yash Ghai, in relation to the
contrasting Asian voices on human rights. He views: [T]he passionate voice of
indigenous peoples whose cultures are destroyed by governments which claim to be
custodians of Asian cultures”, and the “strident voices of ethnic minorities who seek
collective autonomies which challenges governments’ claims of political monopoly
and State sovereignty.19 This version exposes the political reality of ASEAN countries.

15
AMARTYA SEN, HUMAN RIGHTS AND ASIAN VALUES p. 14, cf Fareecl Zakaria,’ Culture
Is Destiny: A Conversation with Lee Kuan Yew’,Foreign Affairs 73 (March/April 1994) 113,
<http://www.cceia.org/media/254_sen.pdf>accessed on 15 November 2009
16
Id.
17
Supra note 7, p. 10. cf. Catherine Powell, ‘Introduction: Locating Culture, Identity and Human
Rights 30 COLUM. HRL REV. 201, 210 (1999).
18
Takashi Inoguchi and Edward Newman, ‘Introduction: “Asian Values” And Democracy in Asia’
(A paper presented at Proceedings of a Conference held on 28 March 1997 at Hamamatsu,
Shizuoka, Japan, as Part of the First Shizuoka Asia-Pacific Forum:The Future of the Asia-Pacific
Region <http://www.unu.edu/unupress/asian-values.html> accessed on 21 November 2009.
19
Supra note 7, 11.
Cultural Relativism: An Examination of Asian.... 127

The ASEAN leaders to forward as their views on Asian values include: the
primacy of social interest over the individual interest, economic development, respect
for aged parents and culture of consensus, team work, law and order, honesty and
discipline. However, all these now require further assessment whether they exist only
in Asian countries or in also other part of world. The primacy of social interest over the
individual is very debatable and a much political debate rather than a debate of cultural
relativism. East Asian Countries preach “Confucianism” to make their point valid as to
Asian value. However, the individual liberty and autonomy are also found deeply
rooted in Western liberal culture and therefore they are not the origin of East in them.
Likewise, the culture of consensus for which Asian countries take credit has
also been questioned whether it is the origin of East or it did exist in the West too. The
westerns claim that it is also a major feature of politics and industry in Germany. Westerns
also challenge that consensus approach is less emphasized in Anglo-Saxon countries,
where decisions are expected to be taken by the majority that apply to the most of the
Asian countries. As to the culture to respect the aged parents is more supportive in
Asian countries than in the West, but it is nothing very peculiar which distinct Asian
countries from the westerns in doing so. At the same time, anyone can’t say that it does
not exist in west. 20
Sometimes, it is said that westerns are the promoters of personal and political
liberty in the non-Western world often see Western values to Asia and Africa bringing
into practice.21. However, it is important to search for parts rather than the whole, why
not a particular country, why Asian region a single whole.22 There is no answer of this
with the ASEAN States.
Apart from other claims, the root of the Asian value debate emphasizes on
economic development and social cohesiveness along with individual obligation to
society in the east against the claim of individual freedoms or liberty in west.
Francis Fukuyama argues that the spread of free market economics and
democratic politics is a process which “guarantees an increasing homogenization of all
human societies, regardless of their historical origins or cultural inheritances”.23 So the
value like human rights, human dignity, freedom, equality, justice, fraternity and solidarity
are as valuable for the non-western as these are for western.
A focus of discussion here is also the Asian value as shield against the
violation of human rights in the region. Asian politicians sometimes seem to be using
“Asian values” to justify infringements of human rights on the grounds that the exercise
of such rights threatens “law and order”, which they think should be paramount.
“Westerns” are also concerned about law and order, but they do not see this as the

20
Supra note 15, 14.
21
Supra note 7, 11.
22
Id, 15, 16.
23
Supra note 18 cf Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man (New York: Praeger,
1992) xiv. <http://www.unu.edu/unupress/asian-values.html> (accessed on 21 November 2009).
128 NJA Law Journal 2009

justification for ignoring the human rights, although in defending society against
terrorism, some limits may have to be placed on the exercise of individual rights.24
In Asia, a large number of populations do not support the authoritarian regime
against the cost of individual liberty and freedom. Asian arguments claim that they are
self-disciplined and cohesive. It is also questioned, if East Asian societies are so self-
disciplined and cohesive, why has it been necessary to maintain authoritarian structures
to rule over a large population who is dissatisfied with the political system in East
Asia ?24 “Asian values” can too easily be a tool to resist change and de-legitimize
external scrutiny.25
The so called “we” approach of ASEAN leader sometimes reflects their
collective goals, but they have no answer for the question why such responsible
governments do not accept the political change as to democratic ideology to flourish
and human rights to grow up in their milieu.

4 West and East Ideology

West and East ideology or values may be categorized as the ‘universalist’ versus
‘relativist’ or ‘cosmopolitan’ versus communitarinism, ‘individual rights’ versus ‘family’,
‘social’ or ‘State interests.’ In this relation, some of the discussions have been made
earlier, but it will be engaged herein from political and theoretical perspectives of the
clash. Again, the debate over “Asian values” is at the heart of this controversy of the
different between East and West ideology.26
In differing the “east” from the “west”, the role of the EU on human rights
emphasis can be seen as ‘Western policy’ in terms of maintenance within and extension
beyond the values and belief of the west. Human rights as being the universal thus are
also named as the product of European culture for the East.27 In other words, the
western ideology can be called as ‘cosmopolitan’ which stresses upon the individual
human rights, the main concern of West or Europe that views is as the value for whole
community of humankind as the basis of right-and-duty bearing units or world politics.
However, the east ideology can be called as ‘communitarinism’ which rather emphasizes
on the belief that individuals are shaped by the communities to which they belong to
and thus owe them a debt of respect and consideration.28

24
Hugh Cortazzi, ‘Asian values may not be so particularly Asian’ <http://www.singapore-window.org/
1014st.htm> accessed on 18 November 2009
25
Takashi Inoguchi and Edward Newman,‘Introduction: “Asian Values” And Democracy in Asia’,
cf Richard Robison, ‘The Politics of Asian Values’ and Garry Rodan, ‘The Internationalization
of Ideological Conflict: Asia’s New Significance’ (1996) 9, no. 3 The Pacific Review <http://
www.unu.edu/unupress/asian-values.html> accessed on 15 November 2009.
26
Id, cf Lawrence E. Harrison, Who Prospers? How Cultural Values Shape Economic and Political
Success (New York: Basic Books 1992); Thomas Sowell, Race and Culture: A World View (New
York: Basic Books 1994) < http://www.unu.edu/unupress/asian-values.html> accessed on 15
November 2009.
27
Supra note 14 30, 31.
28
Id, 37, 38.
Cultural Relativism: An Examination of Asian.... 129

It is therefore realized that ‘culture, power and the political economy, especially
at the global level are the pivotal considerations, factors and forces in shaping values
matters in relation to human rights any everywhere’.29
Saying categorically, the fundamental difference between the two ideologies
as pointed out earlier rests on looking at two viewpoints, i.e. liberal human rights and
development. The Western approach to democracy and human rights places more
importance on civil and political rights and the universality of human rights on the
basis of the liberal tradition, is usually associated with the post-colonial approach.
However, the Asian position on human rights, which stresses the importance of economic
and social rights, as well as cultural differences, has been identified with the neo-
colonial approach. These two approaches provide useful analytic frameworks in
understanding the differences between the Western and Asian positions on human
rights.30
In some of ASEAN countries there has not been complete freedom for
opposition parties, freedom of speech, a separation of powers, or civil and political
rights as conceived in Western political thought. So the ASEAN countries are blamed
for suppressing the individual freedoms in the name of cultural relativism who emphasize
on consensus and harmony.31
In the West, liberal and cosmopolitan individual freedoms are stressed more
than that of East. However, in the East, communitarian, context-dependent rights and
duties commensurate with local needs and conditions which stresses on social and
economic rights.32
As to the vehicle of cultural relativism of ASEAN countries, the primacy of
human rights and their content is different from what they are awarded to be in the
“West.” As said in the beginning of this paper, the division of west and east came to be
apparent in World Human Rights Conference of 1993 when the ASEAN and Chinese
delegation presented their claims as to the dissimilar approach of the human rights.
ASEAN States had also been prepared by Bangkok summit prior to the UN conference.
They were organized and prepared in a way that they would not accept a Declaration of
World Human Rights Conference which put the rights of the individual above the
needs of society and the right to live in an environment of social and political order.33
The difference of liberal human rights ideology and development as the point
of clash between the “East” and “West” can also be critically assessed from cultural,
economic and political terms. Culturally, they assert that the Western approach ignores

29
Id, 33.
30
Supra note 25, cf. ‘Debate over Rights: Rejecting Western Pressure, Asia Tables Its Own Definition’,
ASIAWEEK, 30 June < http://www.unu.edu/unupress/asian-values.html> accessed on 25 November
2009.
31
Id.
32
Id.
33
Id.
130 NJA Law Journal 2009

the specific cultural traditions and historical circumstances of Asian societies, whose
interpretations of human rights are different from the Western tradition.34 Economically,
they maintain that the priority of developing Asian societies has to be the eradication
of poverty: the right to survival must come first. Politically, they think that political
stability cannot be achieved unless there is self discipline, law and order and individual’s
obligations to society. Furthermore, the ASEAN leaders also blame on the “West” that
the Western countries have double standards and often use human rights merely as an
instrument for advancing Western economic or security interests.35
Despite it, the growing pressure on the East Asia for the protection of human
rights comes not only from Westerns, but its importance as being the human race of
twenty first century has also been realized within the East Asian population. It is
therefore said that the current debate over “west” versus “east” is not more than an
oversimplification of the growing complexity of contemporary international relations,
power politics and economic agenda.

5. Can Asian values be a shield against violation of human rights?

ASEAN Governments are blamed that they have been exposing the so called “Asian
values” as a shield against the violation of democracy, human rights and fundamental
freedom to continue the authoritarian regime.
The human rights claim is ever made by dissident political leader, journalists,
organized groups, intellectuals and other large section of society with ASEAN States
for decades. The political voice is divided in many ASEAN States and some ASEAN
leaders and political dissidents raise strong voices for the protection of human rights
as universal and interdependent rights while the ruling leaders still continue to quell
them. The political dissidents, Devan Nair, the former president of Singapore, urges
that human rights and values are universal by any standard, and their violation anywhere
is a grievous offence to men and women everywhere.
Likewise, Aung San Suu Kyi, the Burmese pro-democracy campaigner, who
has been under home arrest for decades advocates for reinstating the democratic
government in Myanmar. So is the case with China, though not within ASEAN, Wei
Jingsheng, a political dissident expelled from China reiterates for his own stand in
politics that human rights and freedoms are universal and thus need respect and
reverence.
All these dissident political leaders are of views that there is no debate in Asia
about the cultural values, rather they argue that some authoritarian leaders want to use
this as trump or shield against their human rights abusive activities and to make the
county as ‘safe heaven’ to rule over majority dissidents.

34
Id, cf Jack Donnelly’s ‘Twentieth-Century Realism’, in Terry Nardin and David R. Mapel, (eds)
TRADITIONS OF INTERNATIONAL ETHICS 85, 111 (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1992). <http://www.unu.edu/unupress/asian-values.html> accessed on 25 November 2009.
35
Id.
Cultural Relativism: An Examination of Asian.... 131

While looking into the facts, the human rights conditions in many East Asian
countries have consistently been rated as poor by international human rights
monitoring groups. For example, Amnesty International has rated most of the Asian
countries as below average. 36 Burma is likely to remain in the international limelight as
a violator of human rights for its continued detention of Suu Kyi and over 2,000 political
activists in the prisons.
ASEAN statesmen consider that human rights are relative matters and therefore
urge that they should not be oversimplified to fit them into others culture. However, the
growing importance of human rights issues in world, ASEAN states are to deal with
human rights within their own domestic jurisdiction to resist international monitoring
on the one hand. Most of the ASEAN countries are also reluctant to sign major
instruments of international human rights protection on the other, such as China,
Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand that are not signatories to the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.37
Similarly, since the end of the Cold War many East Asian states have continued
to adopt an uncompromising attitude towards human rights for mere political and
economic interests and also been denying human rights NGO activities at home when
the issues of human rights violations came.38
In response to the Myanmar’s government oppressive treatment to dissident,
Suu Kyi , EU has issued trade, goods, aid or technical exchange sanction against it for
its incessant violation of human rights and opposition to the liberal democracy. The EU
realizes that many East Asian Countries have suppressed the human rights using their
culture as the normative value against the shield of human rights violation.39 So there
is also a pressure on the East Asian countries to give deference and respect of the
human rights from “west’ in which Europe –Asian economic agenda of discussion has
come at the fore.
With the constant international pressure and internal realization for the
protection of human rights within the region, the establishment of the ASEAN human
rights body has been a milestone in East Asia.40
The 15th ASEAN Summit held from 23rd to 25th October 2009 in Cha-am Hua
Hin, Thailand formally declared that they have constituted the AICHR to promote the
human rights within the region.41 Cha-Am Hua Hin Declaration on the Inter-governmental

36
Id, cf. South China Morning Post, 17 March 1994 < http://www.unu.edu/unupress/asian-
values.html> accessed on 26 November 2009.
37
Supra note 25
38
Id.
39
Surpa note 14, 37, 31.
40
‘AICHR unveiled, for the betterment of all ASEAN peoples’, Press Release <http://
www.15thaseansummit-th.org/PDF/23-04PR-AICHR_ENG.pdf> accessed on 6 December 2009.
41
‘Special Report: AICHR, another milestone for regional human rights protection’, National
News Bureau of Thailand Public Relation Department < http://thainews.prd.go.th/en/
news.php?id=255211040038> accessed on 6 December 2009.
132 NJA Law Journal 2009

Commission on Human Rights inter alia, emphasizes the full realization of human
dignity and the attainment of a higher quality of life for ASEAN peoples.42 Similarly, the
United Nations has urged ASEAN leaders to insure the credibility of their
Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights in light of claims that the group has
fallen short on rights during its 42-year history. In this context ASEAN must review its
policy toward Burma’s military autocracy.43 It is still to see the effectiveness of this
body in East Asia for the protection and promotion of human rights, however the Term
of Reference (ToR) does not provide the role to monitor the human rights violations in
the regions.44

6. An Alternative Approach?
There is a possibility to reconcile between the individual rights and priority on social
interest, by giving priority to democratic value as well as by achieving faster economic
development, which the East Asian Countries interest.45
A blame to westerns by ASEAN States is that the western countries push them
for capitalism, own democracy and western interpretation of human rights as
“missionary” and therefore it is a threat to their economic interest. ASEAN countries
further blame that foreign aid and trade have been conditioned by human rights progress
by the western countries that have posed serious threat to their sovereign rights of the
states, for example, EU-ASEAN agenda.
To oppose the universal value of human rights does not mean that they do not
respect these core norms essential for humankind. In other words, for the Asian
countries, the acceptance of universality should not mean that the reality of cultural
diversity can be rejected. At the same time, it is by no means surprising that some rights
are more important than others, However, it is important to realize that economic and
social rights can’t fully address the demand that is to be fulfilled the guarantee of civil
and political rights.46
Political and civil rights give people the opportunity to draw attention
forcefully to general needs and to demand appropriate public action that in turn helps
mitigate the problem. For example, the role of the media remains at the top which brings
government’s attention to tackle the situation as far as the right to freedom of speech
and expression are concerned.47

42
‘Cha-Am Hua Hin Declaration on the Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR)
<http://www.aseansec.org/documents/Declaration-AICHR.pdf > accessed on 2 December 2009
43
‘UN to ASEAN: Make rights body credible’, Philippine Daily Inquirer <http://
globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20091023-231781/UN-to-ASEAN-Make-
rights-body-credible> accessed 6 on December 2009; Helen M. Stacy, Human Rights for the 21
Century, Sovereignty, ‘Civil Society and Culture’ 162, 163 (Stanford University Press, California
2009).
44
See: ‘Term of Reference of ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR)’
<http://www.aseansec.org/DOC-TOR-AHRB.pdf> accessed on 6 December 2009
45
Supra note 14, 37, 35.
46
Id.
47
Id.
Cultural Relativism: An Examination of Asian.... 133

Amartya Sen argues that this connection is clearest in the case of famine
prevention, the positive role of political and civil rights applies to the prevention of
economic and social disasters in general.48
Asian value can never be accepted as a way to seek the priority of economic
rights over individual freedom. Nor can they be shield against the violation of human
rights and the liberal democratic ideology. So, there is a huge possible to achieve the
economic development by accepting the liberal democracy and giving importance to
political rights and human right agenda simultaneously.
The ASEAN States have failed to show their alternative to west ideology of
human right protection and overall development of society. So the best possible
alternative way for the ASEAN political leaders is to agree on a point that economic
and social rights and economic development can be achieved along with the civil and
political rights.

7. Conclusion
The debate between the cultural relativism “Asian value” and the universality of human
rights is neither of a conflict of cultural value nor is of clash of “west” versus “east”
ideology. But it is not more than an agenda for ASEAN countries motivated by the
political interests of ASEAN leaders. So their treatment towards the dissident’s political
leaders, intellectuals and NGOs seem to be oppressive. In other word, ASEAN leaders
use “Asian value” trump among the international community as a shield against the
violation of human right when they are criticized for their abusive and anti-democratic
activities in their countries. The argument as to the primary of social interest over the
individual rights or freedom or economic and social development over the civil and
political rights does not exist as such in the history, theory and politics of human rights
in the world. This is just a kind of reservation of the East Asian countries on the
universal, inalienable, interrelated and interdependent notion of human rights.
Experiences of many developed countries exemplify that the civil and political
rights help the economic rights boost up and they further enhance the governmental
responsiveness in the economic development and addressing crisis. At the same time,
unless there is well economic development, the liberal democracy and civil and political
rights invite political turmoil. So there is a need to adopt an alternative approach for
ASEAN countries in which they may consider the civil and political rights and economic
and social right exist and be functional together.
In nutshell, all the values need to foster human development and achieve
“good life”. Nothing can be like value that does not serve the best interest of people
and still more oppresses the quintessential fundamental freedoms. So the ASEAN
countries may accommodate their approach of overemphasizing social interest and
development with the human rights agenda as a part of constitutional reformation.

48
Supra note 12
134 NJA Law Journal 2009

This may be done by giving due protection to the human rights in their Constitution
which many countries in transitional have started to do. This possible alternative way
to protect the human rights in ASEAN countries may be called “Constitutional
Arrangement”.