7 years to 2020: thoughts on achieving the Malaysian dream
2020 is significant because it is the year in which Malaysia expects to leave the crib of developing nations and enter the world of developed nations.
Rama Ramanathan, The Malaysian Insider
10th December was International Human Rights Day. This year, the date marks the 65th anniversary of the adoption by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in 1948.
This year, the date has been chosen to also mark the 20th anniversary of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action adopted by the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993.
The Vienna Declaration defined the vision. The Programme (plan) of Action created the means for making real progress towards that vision.
One of the things the UN excels at – and which makes it slow to release any document of significance – is working consultatively and collaboratively. The UN Secretary General’s Message for 2013 Human Rights Day noted that preparation of the Vienna vision and programme “involved the participation of more than 800 NGO’s, treaty bodies and academics.”
To observe the date this year, the UN and Suhakam (Malaysia’s Human Rights Commission) hosted a discussion in Kuala Lumpur titled “Road to 2020: Human Rights and Development”.
The title is pregnant with meaning. Consider this: Why 2020? Why “and Development,” instead of “Human Rights Development”?
In the context of Malaysia, it is important to recognize that we are one of the few nations which publish and implement 5 year National Development Plans. We are on our 10th plan (2011-2015) since independence. Less than a week ago, on 5th December, the Economic Planning Unit in the Prime Minister’s Department held the kick-off meeting for developing the 11th Malaysia Plan (2016 -2020).
2020 is significant because it is the year in which Malaysia expects to leave the crib of developing nations and enter the world of developed nations.
In public discourse, the goal of Vision 2020 is measured in average per capita income, with a goal of $15,000 per head of population.
The focus on income is not surprising in a country with burgeoning debt (according to the BBC, 60 Malaysians declare bankruptcy daily), and credit markdowns by international ratings agencies (Fitch and S&P).
Public discourse needs to reintroduce into the conversation all 9 strategic goals of Vision 2020 – goals which give much consideration to Human Rights. Here’s a quick summary of the goals:
– A united Malaysian nation with a sense of common and shared destiny.
– A psychologically liberated, secure… society with faith and confidence in itself.
– A mature democratic society, practising… consensual, community-oriented… democracy.
– A fully moral and ethical society… imbued with the highest of ethical standards.
– A matured, liberal and tolerant society… free to practise and profess… religious beliefs.
– A scientific and progressive society… innovative and forward-looking.
– A fully caring society and a caring culture… strong and resilient family system.
– An economically just society… fair and equitable distribution of the wealth.
– A prosperous society, with an economy… fully competitive, dynamic, robust and resilient.
The discussion was pregnant with meaning. The passion and patriotism of the panellists was crystal clear. Vision 2020 was recognized as the shared national vision and a note of urgency permeated the discussion.
The following paragraphs provide consensus assessments of where we are on our journey to 2020, and what we need to do to recover the direction and resume the pace of the journey.
7 years to 2020: assessments and recommendations
1. GTP and MDG. At the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in Geneva in October we convinced our peers that our Government Transformation Program (GTP) is moving us forward in economic development, in particular creating 3.3 million jobs. Malaysia has achieved its Millennium Development Goals (MDG) ahead of time. This should mean good news in terms of right to housing, health and security. We must all be vigilant that public discourse about the GTP doesn’t focus on economic prosperity at the expense of Human Rights.
2. UN Treaties. Vast attention is being given to restrictions on Human Rights in Malaysia due to the awakening of civil society. At the UPR, our peers gave overwhelmingly told us to ratify UN instruments. Yet, we still have not set dates for ratifying 6 of 9 core Human Rights treaties. We have even placed reservations on the treaties we have ratified. We must set targets and implement processes to ratify all the treaties and remove more reservations.
3. 11th Malaysia Plan. Although Suhakam is established by law, by the Yang di Pertuan Agung, to advise the government on human rights, the government doesn’t listen to Suhakam. This is said by Suhakam, vast numbers of NGO’s and international observers. We continue to think of Human Rights Plans as auxiliary to Development plans, not integral to them. The government must work with Suhakam and ensure the 11th Malaysia plan is based upon clearly spelt out (using UN language) Human Rights principles.
4. The people are ready, but the government is lethargic. The issues and concerns raised during the 13th General Elections are clear, thanks to the ease with which the New Media can be monitored. Citizens – who are better educated, urbanized and have moved into the middle class with its associated values – have expressed their hopes and expectations: the rakyat say they are ready for change, yet the government says otherwise. The government must tap the mood and energy of the people by more effectively engaging civil society.
5. The government still behaves like it’s superior to NGOs. National leaders and heads of Government departments continue to view those who criticize current policies, implementation and results, as adversaries. They do not welcome members of civil society to discussion tables as equal partners; rather, they see them as people to be superficially consulted, e.g. by drinking tea together and having a meal together, rather than working together to craft new approaches to solve long-standing problems. The government must set clear measures to assess the outcomes of dialogue sessions – policy changes must be traceable to inputs from civil society.
6. Human rights defenders. The vilification of Comango by a handful of vocal NGO’s and by some members of the government – including one Minister – signals disrespect for Human Rights on the part of the government. It also signals a lack of seriousness in pursuing all that is in Vision 2020. It will not do for the government to invite NGO’s to share the burden, and then vilify the NGO’s for doing so. National leaders must speak up to protect the UPR process and the participation of NGO’s.
7. Political will. A recurrent theme was the recognition that change cannot happen without political will, i.e. a readiness to take firm positions, even if such decisions mean loss of perceived or actual popular support. It is not possible to please everyone all the time. National leaders must stop encouraging identity-politics and must start dismantling it.
8. A litany of embarrassments. On the world scene, we are amongst the last to ratify international covenants; we do not debate Suhakam’s report in Parliament; we do not have a National Human Rights Action Plan; we pursue development at the cost of Human Rights (especially in the area of land rights); we tolerate the vilification and demonization of Human Rights defenders.
The way forward
