Entries by aseansc

Internship Program

/in /by

ASEAN Studies Center Universitas Gajah Mada membuka kesempatan magang untuk mahasiswa dari seluruh jurusan di universitas di Yogyakarta yang akan berkesempatan untuk terlibat dalam riset serta program akademik yang diselenggarakan oleh ASEAN Studies Center UGM.

Output dari pekerjaan intern adalah sebagai berikut:
1. Membuat artikel mengenai isu-isu ASEAN sebanyak 1 buah, dalam Bahasa Indonesia atau Bahasa Inggris sepanjang 800 kata per minggu.
2. Berpartisipasi aktif dalam seluruh kegiatan/event yang melibatkan ASEAN Studies Center, UGM
3. Berpartisipasi aktif dalam riset dan program-program akademik ASEAN Studies Center, UGM

Timeline
Pendaftaran : Maret – 13 April 2018
Interview & Pengumuman : Minggu ketiga bulan April 2018
Program Magang : Mei – November 2018

Informasi lebih lanjut (persyaratan-persyaratan) dapat dilihat di foto/hubungi akun-akun ASC UGM (tercantum). #ASC_release

 

Indonesian Foreign Policy under Three Years of Jokowi’s Administration

/in /by

Siti Widyastuti Noor

October 2017, marked the third year of administration for Indonesian President Joko “Jokowi’ Widodo. In the beginning of his administration, Jokowi announced the nine prioritized agendas as Nawa Cita, a program that was initiated as an effort to bring Indonesia into a politically sovereign state, economically independent and cultural personality as a state.

In order to realize the spirit of Nawa Cita, the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs formulates three priorities of foreign policy, namely: safeguarding Indonesian sovereignty, enhancing the protection of Indonesian citizens and intensifying economic diplomacy.

Meanwhile, Dino Patti Djalal, former Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia, notes that at the beginning of Jokowi’s administration, more attention is paid to the domestic affairs, whose policies tend to be inward-looking, as reflected in his focus on developing national infrastructure. There are 225 projects on a national infrastructure based on President Regulation no. 3 years 2016. The project was later improved to as 248 projects based on the President Regulation no. 58 of 2017. This national infrastructure project is one of the highlighted projects at its disposal in order to improve inter-regional ties and as an effort to reduce the gap between eastern and western parts of Indonesia.

A Retreat from Multilateralism

Observing the dynamics of foreign policy for 3 years administration, Jokowi is more likely to emphasize on consolidation at the national level compared with foreign policy of his predecessor, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) which emphasized more on a free and active engagement on multilateralism with an outward-looking policy, “a thousand friends, zero enemy”.

Jokowi is more of a domestic reformer when compared to SBY is actively promoting foreign policy as the spotlight of his government. The most noticeable manifestation of differences is Indonesia’s retreat from multilateralism, which is demonstrated by Indonesia’s inactivity to participate in multilateral forums, particularly ASEAN. He missed three opportunities to present as head of state at the United Nations General Assembly and also in the Developing Eight High-Level Meeting in Istanbul.

Although the domestic development agenda progressed significantly, it should be understood that the success of the foreign policy is also capable of affecting the domestic agenda and the Indonesian people. Jokowi’s foreign policy outlook is considered to be a loss to Indonesia’s position as a leading country in ASEAN that might also have an impact on the regional integration agenda.

In addition, many consider that Indonesia’s withdrawal from Multilateral Forum eliminates the opportunity of Indonesia to participate actively in promoting important issues of concern to Indonesia to other countries, as well as undermining Indonesia’s position as a non-permanent member of UNSC candidate.

Jokowi’s Economic Diplomacy

As one of the focus of his policy, Jokowi plays a significant role to enhance the economic diplomacy. Priorities on the economy are defined in the Strategic Plan of Ministry of Foreign Policy 2015-2019 as the utilization of international politics to achieve the national development target.

One of the policies is the diversification of export market. For most of the time, Indonesia is focusing its export activities on traditional export destination countries, such as United States, China, or European market. Under Jokowi, significant changes can be found from a widening and diverse export destination countries, as Indonesia starts to established economic relations with the Middle East, Latin America, and African countries, such as Chile, Turkey, Egypt, Niger and some other countries. This move resulted in a more positive impact on Indonesia’s export and the surplus of trade balance. According to the data from Central Statistics Agency (BPS), Indonesia’s export in the January-September 2017 period reached $123.36 billion.

Indonesia and ASEAN

As a founding member and de facto leader of ASEAN for the great importance of ASEAN GDP and the largest population, Indonesia’s centrality in ASEAN is valuable. Although Indonesia’s participation in ASEAN is not as big and as large as ever, Indonesia still shows great concern and active participation in the Rohingya refugee story. Recently, the latest issue of human rights issues in Rakhine State, Myanmar, Indonesia, through the Minister of Foreign Affairs visited Myanmar for a bilateral meeting to discuss the issue in Rohingya. This method became effective because it later became one of the ways to attract the Government of Myanmar and humanitarian aid humanitarian aid in the form of daily necessities, set up six elementary school buildings, and one hospital.

In recent news, Jokowi is reportedly sending aid to Rohingya refugees through the ASEAN instruments. The Foreign Ministry’s efforts to approach the Myanmar government and encourage ASEAN Member Countries to provide humanitarian assistance through the ASEAN Humanitarian Assistance Coordinating Center for Disaster Management (AHA Center) is a sign that Indonesia under Jokowi’s government still values ​​geopolitics and relations among ASEAN countries.

Despite of the hard work of the government to introduce the new approaches and development priorities, it is important for Indonesia to continue paying attention to the regional and international cooperation that has been built since the previous presidency, as a form of active participation and fulfillment of Indonesia’s role in international level.

The ASEAN Enhanced Disputes Settlement Mechanism (EDSM): Functional for Economic Growth or Protecting National Sovereignty?

/in /by

Suraj Shah

As the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) seeks to deepen regional economic integration, the Enhanced Dispute Settlement Mechanism must avoid politicisation to optimise successful integration and economic development in the region.

Dispute Settlement Mechanisms (DSM) are fundamental features of economic institutions to ensure optimal outcomes. Governments include DSMs in international institutions to address collaboration problems and enhance the credibility of commitments, through exposing free riding, ascertaining violations and penalizing non-compliance. Economic actors need dispute settlement to be effective, even if not necessarily used, so that they know economic bargains will be honored.

However, in ASEAN, the EDSM suffers from fatal flaws. Fundamentally, a functional DSM that disciplines members who renegade on agreements is incompatible with the ‘ASEAN Way’, particularly given the norms of non-criticism and non-interference. Thus, the institutional outcome of the EDSM is structurally weak in that its instruments reflect the preference for protecting national sovereignty, and is essentially voluntary.

To establish credibility, one can either centralise regulations and institutions, such as the European Union, with a credible threat of referral to the European Court of Justice, or create a legal certainty about the extent of liberalisation with precision from the outset, such as NAFTA, together with the public and private instruments to defends one’s economic rights.

The ASEAN DSM has been active since the 1992 AFTA. Moreover, since the launch of the AEC, ASEAN has sought to enhance the DSM. The Protocol to the ASEAN Charter on Dispute Settlement Mechanisms was signed in April 2010, providing greater definition to the original DSM, known as the Enhanced Dispute Settlement Mechanism (EDSM).

The ASEAN’s EDSM is modeled on the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU), of which all ASEAN members already subscribe to. This includes panels of independents, an appellate body, strict timelines and options for sanctions. However, ASEAN’s EDSM model suffers from practical flaws. The timelines adopted are even more expedited than the WTO DSU, by adopting half the time, which the WTO itself has difficulty following.

Furthermore, the ASEAN Secretariat is tasked to support the EDSM process with administrative and logistical support, yet has inadequate funding and legal expertise allocated to the EDSM process. Additionally, state-induced dispute settlement does not specify the remedy for found violations.

Thus, the EDSM establishes a dispute resolution procedure that cannot practically be followed. This structural weakness means that the EDSM has never been invoked.

Indeed, members favour using the WTO DSU rather than EDSM to resolve disputes, to avoid violating the norms of the ‘ASEAN Way’. For example, in Thailand’s dispute with the Philippines on Customs and Fiscal Measures on Cigarettes in July 2016, the WTO DSU was used, as it was seen as strategically less confrontational and would save face among ASEAN members by allowing third parties outside of the region to participate. Additionally, the WTO DSU was seen to give a more favorable outcome, given that the ASEAN EDSM is untested.

Moreover, effective dispute settlement mechanisms must be independent, yet, EDSM suffers from politicisation. The EDSM recognizes a variety of dispute settlement methods, ranging from ‘dialogue, consultation, and negotiation’, reference of ‘unresolved’ disputes to the ASEAN Summit, to the highest political decision-making body. However, it is possible under the current language of the ASEAN Charter, for an ASEAN member to refuse cooperation with the EDSM in the panel process or compliance proceedings, and thereby create an ‘unresolved dispute’.

The EDSM stipulates that ‘unresolved disputes’ have to be adopted by ASEAN political organs such as the ASEAN Economic Ministers Meeting (AEM), where both parties are already represented. In this sense, dispute settlement becomes politicised rather than independent. Moreover, in light of ASEAN norms of the aversion of conflict, adjudication with political, rather than independent, approval means the EDSM will likely be avoided.

Furthermore, the EDSM only envisages participation by ASEAN member states and does not permit private entities or investors to participate in the adjudicatory process. This minimises the involvement of non-state actors by denying access, disallows domestic courts from seeking a preliminary ruling, and deprives adjudicators of the means to compel compliance.

Essentially, the norms of the ‘ASEAN Way’ result in the structural weakness of the ASEAN EDSM. The outcome is a state-controlled EDSM which is voluntary, as there is an opt-out from the institutions of dispute settlement which is functional for protecting national sovereignty. While this non-confrontational approach may be suitable for diplomacy, ASEAN EDSM decisions behind closed doors by bureaucrats or politicians are not suitable for market transactions where private decisions implying private money or private efforts are based on public obligations or rights.

In light of this, the ASEAN EDSM is unlikely to be functional for optimising ASEAN Economic Integration, nor economic development in the region more broadly. ASEAN must seek to depoliticize the Enhanced Disputes Settlement Mechanism and create an independent regulatory body, as it seeks to deepen regional economic integration through the ASEAN Economic Community.

Suraj Shah is a MSc from King’s College London and former visiting fellow of ASEAN Studies Center.

Day 3: UGM-RUG International Working Conference on Regional and National Approaches Toward Sustainable Development Goals in Southeast Asia and ASEAN

/in /by

The third day of UGM-RUG International Working Conference on Regional and National Approaches toward Sustainable Development Goals in Southeast Asia held on October 5th 2017. With only three session of draft paper presentation left, the international working conference was opened by Dr. Titus C. Chen’s presentation on his draft paper. The title of his work is blue-washing, green coffe, and the sustainable development agenda in Southeast Asia.

The second draft paper presentation was presented by Dr. Helena Varkkey, an expert on the transboundary haze issues in Southeast Asia. Her works, Transboundary Haze, ASEAN and the SDGs: Normative and Structural Considerations.

Prof. Laksono Trisnantoro from Indonesia became the last but not the least draft paper presenter at the UGM-RUG working conference. He presented his draft paper with the title Health Care System Reform and Governance for Sustainalbe Development in Indonesia. The UGM-RUG international working conference finally closed after every participant presented their draft paper.

Day 2: UGM-RUG International Working Conference on Regional and National Approaches Toward Sustainable Development Goals in Southeast Asia and ASEAN

/in /by

The second day of UGM-RUG international working conference on October 4th 2017 was opened by Prof. Dr. Ronald Holzhacker draft paper presentation the relation of multi-level governance and the sustainable development goals. Taking concern on how some persistence issues and also some unfinished agenda from the MDGs, Prof. Dr. Ronald Holzacker then point out at the problem when one issues is tent to be covered by more than one ministry in a country, meanwhile the coordination between the ministries is not good. Prof. Dr. Ronald Holzacker then proposed a solution with multi-level governance approach that would create better coordination between ministries on a specific issues, so the SDGs can be accomplished.

The second presenter is Prof. Ir. Bakti Setiawan MA., PhD from Indonesia. He presented his draft paper, Indonesian Responses toward Goals Number 11: The New Urban Ageda – Habitat 3, which discussed about the gab of the concept of SDGs goal number 11 and the concept of Habitat 3 in order to come up with a better idea in how to design the future urban life.

Protecting Rights of Construction Workers to Safe Working Condition in the Course of Economic Boom: Lesson Learned from Cambodia was the third draft paper that had been presented by Kimsan Soy. Triggered by the fact that the construction worker does not have an employment contact, which mean construction worker does not protected by Cambodia Labor Law, Kimsam Soy explored the possibility in using external resource mobilization to raise the issue so then Cambodia government would acknowledge the issue.

UGM-RUG International Working Conference on Regional and National Approaches Toward Sustainable Development Goals in Southeast Asia and ASEAN Day 1

/in /by

ASEAN Studies Center, Universitas Gadjah Mada and the Groningen Research Centre for Southeast Asia and ASEAN, University of Groningen, organized international working conference on regional and national approaches toward sustainable development goals in Southeast Asia and ASEAN. The conference was opened by welcoming message from Dr. Dafri Agussalim, MA, as the Director of ASEAN Studies Center, Dr. Poppy Sulistyaning Winanti as the Vice Dean of Faculty of Social and Political Science, and also Prof. Ronald Holzhacker as the representation from Groningen Research Centre for Southeast Asia and ASEAN, University of Groningen. Some of the keynote from the welcoming message are the strengthening collaboration between two institutions, the importance of the event, and also the significant contribution that can be made when the output of the international working conference could be published.

There were five session of draft paper presentation from five international working conference participants. The first draft paper presenter was Prof. Julio Teehanke from Philippines with the draft paper title is Measures of Accountability: Monitoring Sustainable Development Target 16.6 in the Philippines using Varieties of Democracy Data. Towards Quality Education: Capacity Building for the Academic Community in Cambodia and Laos then presented second by Dr. Azirah Binti Hashim from Malaysia. The next presenter was Dr. Ulrich Karl Rotthoff from Philippines with that discuss Human Rights and Development: The Philippine Case in the International Context. The forth presenter was Dr. Maharani Hapsari from Indonesia with the title of the drat paper is Reinscribing Space for Citizenship: Grassroots Communities, Sustainable Development Goals and Water Governance in Indonesia. Then the last presenter for the first day of the international working conference was Dr. Dafri Agussalim, MA, with the title Localising Sustainable Development Goals: Assessing Indonesian Compliance toward the Global Goals. After each session of draft paper presentation, there was Q&A session that was aimed to evaluate the draft paper that later on would be revised then published as the output of the international working conference.

Following this international working conference, there would be another international working conference as the continuation of today conference and is scheduled to take place in October 2018 in Brussels at the Holland House along with the publication of the book as the final output of research collaboration.

 

Indonesia Drags Its Feet on ASEAN Haze Treaty

/in /by

Dio Herdiawan Tobing, Universitas Gadjah Mada

In May, I went with my research team to Palangka Raya, Central Kalimantan, one of Indonesia’s hotspots of land and forest fires.

We wanted to know how local administrations view an agreement between ASEAN countries on haze pollution that Indonesia ratified two years ago.

We were surprised to hear that the acting head of Central Kalimantan Environmental Agency, Humala Pontas, admitted he didn’t know much about the agreement. He asked:

What is contained in the agreement? Which part of haze does it regulate? Are there any provisions that contain economic or other means?

Here, as well as in other areas in Kalimantan, Sumatra and Papua, slash-and-burn methods are still commonly used to clear land for expansion of oil palm plantations. Palm oil is Indonesia’s top export.

Slash-and-burn is the cheapest and fastest way to prepare land for planting. But it produces haze that harms the health of humans and wildlife. Emissions from forest conversion in Indonesia contribute to global warming.

The smoke from burning doesn’t only affect the area where land is being cleared. It travels with the wind to neighbouring countries.

Response to haze crisis

In 2002, ASEAN members agreed on the ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution (AATHP). This was a response to a haze crisis after huge forest fires in Indonesia between 1997 and 1998 created a thick smog across neighbouring countries.

At the time, fires burned some 45,000 square kilometres of forests in Kalimantan and Sumatra. The wind swept the acrid smoke across the region, polluting Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore and even Thailand.

The haze crisis happened in the midst of the devastating Asian Financial Crisis. The timing meant countries in the region struggled to cope with this disaster.

In 1998, Singapore’s minister for environment and health, Yeo Cheow Thong, stated:

A repeat of this disaster will surely aggravate the already bad regional economic situation.

Forest and land fires in Indonesia were leading factors why ASEAN countries formed the haze agreement. During the ministerial meeting in Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei, in April 1998, ASEAN members blamed Indonesia for its land-clearing activities.

Hence, the 1997-1998 fires prompted ASEAN countries to try to overcome the economic and health impact of haze crisis together.

Slow implementation

It took 11 years after the treaty came into force for Indonesia to ratify the agreement in 2014. But two years in, Indonesia has yet to enact regulations at the national and local level.

Article 11 of the haze agreement obliged state parties, among others, to:

ensure that appropriate legislative, administrative and financial measures are taken to mobilise equipment, materials, human and financial resources required to respond to and mitigate the impact of land and/or forest fires and haze pollution arising from such fires.

During a closed interview with an expert staff of the Legislation Committee at Indonesia’s House of Representative (DPR), she, who requested to remain anonymous, admitted that the House still views additional regulations at the national and local level as unnecessary.

Lawmakers believed that national laws, such as the 2014 Law on Plantations and the 2009 Law on Environmental Protection and Management, were adequate, she said.

These laws do share the spirit of ASEAN’s zero-burning policy. The ASEAN haze treaty has a provision urging parties to prevent land-clearing using fire. The Indonesian laws mentioned above also prohibit land-clearing by burning.

But none of Indonesia’s national laws make special reference to haze or pollution resulting from slash-and-burn activities.

In fact, Indonesia does not categorise the spread of haze from forest burning as a disaster. For Indonesia, haze is merely a result of forest burning, especially when it’s man-made. Not categorising haze as a disaster prevents the country’s national and local disaster agencies from responding accordingly.

To implement the haze treaty, Indonesia could, for instance, legislate to expand the authority of the country’s Disaster Management Agency (BNPB) and local disaster management agencies at the provincial level to carry out activities to prevent and mitigate any transboundary haze crisis.

Currently, their mandate is limited to emergency preparedness. The local disaster relief fund can be used only when the haze status reaches “emergency standby” status. As a result, national and local disaster agencies cannot prevent and mitigate haze. They can only start work once there are already fires and haze.

Disjointed action

Within the Indonesian government, problems of commitment and co-ordination among agencies at the central and local level persist.

The Ministry of Environment and Forestry – the government body responsible for tackling threats to the environment – does not seem interested in enforcing the ASEAN haze agreement. It’s more focused on “project-based” action, such as distributing firefighting pump machines to the community.

It was the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in charge of international agreements, that actively supported Indonesia’s ratification of the haze treaty.

As a consequence of the discord between the two ministries, two years into Indonesia’s ratification of the agreement, local administrations are still not aware of it.

What’s at stake?

If Indonesia maintains its non-compliant behavior, the regional community will continue to blame Indonesia for Southeast Asia’s haze problems. Previously, Indonesia’s non-ratification delayed the establishment of the ASEAN Co-ordination Centre for Haze

ASEAN has set a goal of a haze-free region by 2020. It may not achieve that goal if Indonesia does not not catch up. In a more general and long-term effect, Indonesia will lose its “natural leadership” position in ASEAN, as one of ASEAN’s founders and the largest economy in Southeast Asia.

It’s important to have a united approach between different government agencies for Indonesia to comply with the agreement.

The ConversationLocal administrations throughout Indonesia should be informed about the policy. Only this way can we ensure that policies are synchronised and implemented effectively at national and local level.

Dio Herdiawan Tobing, Research Associate at the ASEAN Studies Center, Universitas Gadjah Mada

Sumber asli artikel ini dari The Conversation. Baca artikel sumber.

To protect migrant workers, Indonesia should engage multiple stakeholders

/in /by

ASEAN Studies Center UGM held the seventh Bincang ASEAN which discusses some problems that Indonesian migrant workers face in several countries. This discussion is triggered by the recent problems regarding the migrants’ workers. Ezka Amalia, a postgraduate student at Nagoya University, Japan, began the discussion by examining the history of the women migrant workers and the problem they face on a daily basis. She addresses the problems surrouding labor migration in the region, such as the feminization of migration and worker’s rights’ fulfillment, in which the workers mostly became the vulnerable due to their role as a low-skilled labor.

Asia is the region with the largest number of domestic workers, with Indonesia, the Philippines, and Sri Lanka being the largest sender country. According to the ILO 2013 data, migrant domestic workers are vulnerable to long hours (99%), not covered by workers law (61%), and do not have weekly resting rights (97%). Most of the problem originated from the lack of knowledge regarding the right of works in the respective countries.

Ezka noted that most of the governments are still focused on controlling the migrants labor instead of protecting the migrant labor rights. Female migrant workers are not a citizen (in the recipient country). On the other words, they are marginalized citizens, which makes the recipient’s countries feel no need in addressing the problems immediately. There is also a heated debate as to whether Hong Kong government (which is autonomous from the mainland China) and the agency should fulfill the rights of migrant workers, which is yet to reach a conclusion. Women migrant workers have yet to understand their guaranteed rights in employment law.

Ezka also highlighted the nature of the migration of transnational female workers, which is accompanied by advocacy activities by NGOs and trade unions. She said that it needs to be involve all of the international actors working in this issue. Therefore, a transnational perspective is needed in looking at the issue of the protection of female migrant workers

To date, the advancement towards the protection of the migrant’s workers are being made; the advocacy from the NGO namely Migrant CARE and a workers union, in Hongkong, for example, the women migrant workers formed Indonesian Migrant Workers Union (IMWU). She conclude that the protections of migrant workers still needs to be put into the heart of Indonesian government’s program abroad.  

ASEAN Studies Center Introduced at Groningen Fall Conference on Challenges of Governance in Southeast Asia and ASEAN

/in /by

On Tuesday (12/9), M. Prayoga Permana and Dio Herdiawan Tobing, introduced ASEAN Studies Center (ASC) Universitas Gadjah Mada and its the newly established cooperation with Groningen Research Centre on Southeast Asia (SEA ASEAN) and ASEAN at the Centre’s Fall Conference on Challenges of Governance in Southeast Asia and ASEAN.

The conference was opened by an introductory speech from Prof. dr. Ronald Holzacker, the Executive Director of SEA ASEAN, noting that the aim of the conference was to present research findings of the centre’s Ph.D candidates whose research are surrounding most up-to-date topics of governance in Southeast Asia.

The conference was attended by the Ambassador of the Republic of Indonesia to the Kingdom of the Netherlands, I Gusti Agung Wesaka Puja and the Embassy’s Education and Cultural Attache, Bambang Hari Wibisono.

Furthermore, the conference was divided into three tracks, which consists of Economic Challenges to Development in Southeast Asia and Regional Integration, Spatial Challenges to Development in Southeast Asia, and Political, Social, and Legal Challenges to Development in Southeast Asia and Regional Integration.

In the conference, M. Prayoga Permana, the Former Director of ASC and Lecturer at the Department of Public Policy and Management UGM began his presentation by explaining how the two universities agreed initiate collaboration in the field of research, conferences, and student exchanges.

Following his presentation, Dio Herdiawan Tobing, ASC’s Former Research Manager and currently LL.M Student in Leiden University, introduced the ongoing projects initiated by both research centers. He pointed, “we are currently working on a research project covering the ASEAN haze agreement in Southeast Asia, an international working conference which will be held next month, and a book launch which scheduled to happen in November 2018″.

The international working conference will carry a theme of Regional and National Approaches toward the Sustainable Development Goals in Southeast Asia and ASEAN, taking place at the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Gadjah Mada on 3-5 October 2017.

Lastly, the conference was then followed by presentations from SEA ASEAN’s Ph.D. candidates in regards to their dissertation research findings.

 

Indonesia’s refugee policy – not ideal, but a step in the right direction

/in /by

Dio Herdiawan Tobing

The Indonesian government needs to expand a presidential decree to protect refugees, by turning it into law. The definition the decree uses should also be broadened because it leaves out those fleeing disasters, instead referring only to those fleeing persecution.

In December 2016 president Joko Widodo filled a long legal vacuum by issuing a decree to ensure refugees not be arbitrarily expelled or returned to their country of origin.

Some researchers have criticised the decree for not doing enough to protect refugees. For example, Indonesia still hasn’t signed the 1951 Refugee Convention which outlines the rights of refugees and the obligations of governments to protect them.

The decree doesn’t set out ways that asylum seekers and refugees in Indonesia – some 13,800 people, mostly from Afghanistan and Myanmar – can be protected and settled in Indonesia through integration programs.

Nevertheless, this regulation shows a policy shift in Indonesia from a security approach that pays no regard to the safety of refugees into one that honours a customary international law obligation of non-refoulement, or not expelling or returning refugees.

Ignoring customary international law

Even though Indonesia is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, its honour bound to the principle of non-refoulement. It’s considered a customary law that binds all countries, including those who are not signatory to the refugee convention. This means other countries observe it as law, even though its unofficial.

Violating this customary law would bring criticism and condemnation from other nations. Even now, the international community and civil society organisations have been pressuring the Indonesian government to sign the 1951 Refuge Convention.

Prior to the release of the decree, the Ministry of Law and Human Rights’ Directorate General of Immigration had been relying on their own standard operating procedures.

This directorate is the government lead in responding to refugee issues. Without any regulation on how to treat and manage refugees and asylum seekers, officials usually ignore the requests of refugees or detain those without UNHCR refugee identification cards. The immigration agency also does not differentiate between asylum seekers, refugees, or the stateless.

Without a UNHCR refugee identification card refugees are labelled illegal immigrants. And in order to get a UNHCR identification card, asylum seekers and refugees must go through a very long Refugee Status Determination (RSD) process. This process is a very exhausting, the waiting period alone for registration for a first interview ranges from 8 to 20 months.

The lack of action in relation to refugees was most evident during the Andaman Sea Crisiswhen thousands of Rohingya and Bangladeshis were languishing at sea off Indonesia’s northernmost province Aceh in 2015.

The governments of Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand initially refused to save them. Only after local fishermen saved the adrift themselves did Indonesia and Malaysia give them shelter.

The next year, Indonesia reportedly towed a stranded migrant boat in Aceh back to sea. In any case, immigration authorities would arrest refugees entering Indonesian territory.

However, the Indonesian Foreign Affairs Ministry showed a different approach. The ministry, with its clear understanding of international treaties and laws, is more active in responding to refugees. For example, Indonesia’s foreign minister Retno Marsudi has sent humanitarian aid for the Rohingya refugees. She visited two refugee camps of Rohingyas in Ukhia of Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh.

Shifting refugee policy

President Widodo’s decree shows the progress Indonesia has made in adhering to international refugee law. Indonesia now has clear leadership on how to treat refugees. This means the differences in perception and behaviour between ministries can now be avoided.

Through this decree, Indonesia has codified the principle of non-refoulement into its new policy. It also makes Indonesia a pioneer among transit countries in Southeast Asia in policymaking on refugee issues.

Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand are the primary refugee transit countries in Southeast Asia. To this date, only Indonesia has formulated a decree on refugees.

As Indonesia begins to enforce this refugee decree, Indonesia should also promote the values enshrined, in the region. Through diplomacy and negotiation, this may be a step to realise a refugee framework in Southeast Asian region and especially in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations or ASEAN.

This article was firstly published on theconversation.com

 

Dio Herdiawan Tobing is our former Research Manager. Dio currently studying his LLM in Public International Law at Leiden University.