IT is time for Malaysia and its Asean neighbours to rethink the “regressive” and outdated non-interference policy within the regional bloc as it has become a stumbling block in resolving cross-boundary issues, including smoke from forest fires, said experts.

The policy that came into force in the 1967 Bangkok Declaration allows the 10-nation regional bloc to work together on affairs of common interest and regional stability without foreign intervention into a member state’s domestic affairs.

As a result, Malaysia is unable to act against perpetrators of fires that have caused the transboundary smoke as it falls solely under the jurisdiction of Indonesia. This is because the act was committed in Indonesian territory.

Suhakam commissioner Jerald Joseph, who was also the chair of the Asean People’s Forum in 2015, said the non-interference policy is regressive for serious regional cooperation as it can work as a “veto power” to disable the ability to move forward with a decision.

“You only need one of 10 member states to say ‘no’ and it stops. Any member country that doesn’t want critical comments or positions by Asean will resurrect this position that is an easy cop-out for countries involved.

“Even Malaysia has asked others to keep out of its internal affairs when criticised,” he told The Malaysian Insight.

He said Asean’s inability to move forward on the Rohingya crisis and the ongoing smoke situation are clear examples of this outdated mode of decision-making in the region.

He said it is time for Asean to wake up and be real if it is serious about the regional bloc.

“Of course, tip-toeing to appease thy neighbour means finding the lowest common denominator, or sometimes that means no action at all,” he said.

Malaysian representative to the Asean Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) and prominent human rights lawyer, Eric Paulsen, meanwhile said the criticism against Asean’s founding principles of consensus and non-interference are legitimate.

He said the non-interference policy has slowed down action against issues that required urgent action or intervention.

Paulsen said although such founding principles have served Asean well, especially in terms of economic cooperation, it has nevertheless become difficult to find solutions to serious and sensitive issues.

“It is time for Asean to recognise that these principles cannot be applied in all instances as some matters are too serious to be dismissed by the veto of one, for example, serious human rights issues and transboundary matters like the smoke that affects other states,” he told The Malaysian Insight.

“Member states must adjust and balance their national interests in a genuine and realistic manner – and they must be concerned with the legitimate demands and interests of the region and the rest of the world,” he added.

Paulsen hopes Asean leaders will be able to make some tough decisions in the years to come, including reforming their decision-making process and applying a different formula when a consensus cannot be reached.

“Hopefully in the years to come, Asean leaders will be able to make some tough decisions for the sake of Asean’s longevity and relevance, and reform their decision-making process and apply a different formula when consensus cannot be achieved. That is the only way forward,” he said.

Sahabat Alam Malaysia president Meenakshi Raman said the non-interference policy is a major challenge in finding a resolution to the transboundary smoke.

She said it is logical to have a non-interference policy if the issue affects other countries across the border.

“If there are no transboundary ramifications, then it appears logical for a member state to tell another state to keep out of its domestic affairs.

“However, when something happens in one country that causes grave public health and economic effects (to other countries), it does not seem right and fair for the countries feeling the adverse impacts to remain helpless,” she said.

She said a resolution has to be found at the Asean level, especially when affected members are willing to cooperate and help address the root cause of the problem.

“Some dispute settlement mechanism ought to be developed within the Asean states in giving teeth and bite to the Asean Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution,” she said, referring to the 2002 agreement which Malaysia is also a signatory of.

Another prominent human rights lawyer, Andrew Khoo, said the principle of protecting a country’s domestic affairs from the scrutiny of other Asean member states is sacred .

“The principle of non-interference in the domestic affairs of an Asean member state (AMS) is a ‘sacred’ principle within Asean. It has served to ‘ring-fence’ a country’s domestic issues from scrutiny by Asean as a whole,” he said.

However, it is time to do away with the outdated principle, he said.

“In cases of refugees, trafficked persons, cross-border criminal syndicates and environmental pollution, where what happens in one country has an immediate and direct effect on a neighbouring country, an AMS cannot use the principle (of non-interference) as a shield to hide behind.

“This is totally unacceptable. Only combined regional cooperation can help solve these issues,” he said.

The yearly massive forest and land clearing fires in Indonesia often leaves the country, Malaysia and Singapore enveloped in smoke.

Indonesian authorities have implicated several Malaysian plantation giants in starting land-clearing fires in the country, which the firms have denied. – September 24, 2019.