Sy represented the Alternative Development Program (AltDev) of the Center for Integrative and Development Studies (UP CIDS) of the University of the Philippines, which are included in this paper as part of a discussion of criticisms lobbied against ASEAN. Cultural identities and histories have also been used in the region to deny the existence of LGBTQ+. Internationalization is a foundation in the history of queer liberation and rights movements around the world.
But where are the peoples in ASEAN’s community?
Notwithstanding the sincere efforts of civil society to initiate efforts for constructive dialogue, ASEAN. What happened in Bangkok reflected the Thai government's determination to limit the rights of civil society to organize meetings independently.
The future of ASEAN and civil society dialogues
Beginning in 2009, ASEAN officials decided to make this interface optional, instead of a permanent meeting between ASEAN summits (Nesadurai 2012). These episodes of failed conflicts only reflect how the people of Southeast Asia are always outside the ASEAN political circle. If more than a decade ago ASEAN left the door closed for civil society to present its views on how ASEAN can be people-oriented (Collins 2008), this door could now be considered closed.
Gerard (2015) further explained that these spaces for token engagement with CSOs were reflected in ASEAN-CSO ad hoc consultations, which were otherwise treated as informal dialogues with no guarantee of effecting policy change. These dialogues, held under the auspices of ASEAN, have effectively implied power relations that pervade the civil society space for engagement. Although the ASEAN Charter, signed in 2007, contains critical elements such as democracy, human rights, good governance and the rule of law (Nesadurai 2008), civil society expressed disappointment when their recommendations were not incorporated into this regional policy (Collins 2008). .
This top-down state-centric personality of ASEAN, evident in the Charter, made no mention of the institutionalized roles of civil society organizations and their space to provide input into the ASEAN decision-making process. It is therefore not surprising that the respective plans of the pillars of the ASEAN Community follow the same path.4.
Interrogating the “ASEAN Way” and ASEAN’s human rights mechanism
ASEAN simply cannot give up its idea of non-interference in the interests and well-being of everyone in the region. As a result, ASEAN as a regional bloc has been silent on many human rights issues and violations. The region's LGBTQ+ sectors have consistently suffered discrimination and a crackdown on human rights.
Various LGBTQ+ groups in the region recently mentioned that Southeast Asian states generally have a low rate of ratification of international human rights instruments (see TABLE 1). As a regional body, ASEAN operates its own human rights mechanisms through the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), which is mandated to address human rights issues in the region under international law. While it has a number of independently minded representatives on its roster who are serious about pursuing this mandate, the AICHR remains ineffective, incapacitated and toothless in protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, primarily due to ASEAN's principle of non-interference and emphasis on consensus (Piromya 2019).
The AICHR, since its inception in 2009, was not really able to stand up for the rights of citizens in Southeast Asia (Piromya 2019) because three fundamental elements of human rights protection are missing from AICHR's operations: (1) a process or procedure for receiving complaints, (2) the right and facility to investigate such complaints;. AICHR has blamed religion and culture for holding back its commitment to recognize that all human beings have human rights and that LGBTQ+ rights are human rights.
Understanding the ASEAN agenda
In the 1990s, the dialogue partners expanded to include South Korea, Russia and China, paving the way for the formation of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in 1994 as the first multilateral security forum (ibid.). Under the AEC, ASEAN is opting for the business community to wind down its ambition for regional integration and give in to the demands of the 21st century global economy. These three pillars connected with the adoption of the ASEAN Community Vision 2025 and its three associated blueprints that extensively discussed the content of each of these pillars (ASEAN Secretariat 2019).
Of the three pillars, ASEAN is tirelessly channeling most of its energy into the AEC, as clearly reflected in its 2019 Integration Report, which purported to build on the success of the first AEC Blueprint that culminated in 2015 (ibid. ). ⁵ The RCEP was still being negotiated during the development of this document. During this time, India was still part of the original negotiating states until it withdrew from the RCEP on November 4, 2019.
Notably, the ACSC/APF saw a de facto downgrade in its status vis-à-vis ASEAN, as the mention of “ACSC” in the 2009 version of Chapter E (Building ASEAN Identity) of the ASCC Blueprint, Section E4 (Engagement with the community) was removed from the 2015 version (referring to Vision 2025). As the situation describes, ASEAN's language on market and economy goes against the human interest of the region's people.
Solidarity in the LGBTQ+, queering development ASEAN for elite heteropatriarchy?
This political and economic interaction in ASEAN deserves much-needed appreciation as we push for democratization in the region. From the post-Cold War transition period to the era of neoliberal globalization, the global market has exerted increasing pressure on this regional bloc in the name of economic stability and global competitiveness. As it stands, human rights sensitively address the negative impact of neoliberalism, which is well entrenched in ASEAN's regional economic commitments.
This suggests that the LGBTQ+ community, which is part of this phenomenon of marginalization under the neoliberal order, will remain unheard as it will continue to be invisible in the eyes of ASEAN leaders. Some LGBTQ+ activists in the Philippines have tried to continue this on numerous occasions. While these institutions have contributed significantly to the queer liberation movement (for example, ILGA), many feminists and queer scholars have criticized the rhetoric developed and used by these institutions: human rights.
The regional diversity of Southeast Asia further challenges us to disrupt the hegemonic configuration of formal equality as a human right that aligns with the nuanced cultural differences of queer identities and experiences in the region. TAC's bold steps have made it the epicenter of the fight for global justice against drug patenting by pharmaceutical companies and the World Trade Organization's free trade agenda under international neoliberalism.
Queer spaces within alternative regionalism
In other words, the identity of the region is based on the starting point of peoples who self-identify as Southeast Asians, or those who live in this geographic region, but are constantly excluded from ASEAN and mainstream development perspectives (ACSC/APF 2018). Although not the only representatives of the diversity of practices in the region, ASC, Arcoiris in Timor-Leste and 100% Yogyarkat in Indonesia illustrate how queer solidarity is formed with the poor, oppressed and marginalized sectors and civil society. political, social and cultural alternatives. ASC is undergoing a process of re-evolving the value of collective memory in increasing the demands of the LGBTQ+ community, which seeks to bridge other demands of civil society.
They explained collective memory as a reference to their cultural narratives that focus on a shared identity in relation to a shared imagined past and a shared vision of the future. The performance in Indonesia deserves interest given the participation of a transman, along with other LGBTQ+ members. Such a choice, which draws attention to the existence of unique queer challenges, places LGBTQ+ within the diverse panorama of marginalized sectors, each with its own predicament that together recognize socio-economic structures that sustain inequality, such as heteropatriarchy and concentration. of wealth in the elite (male) little.
100% Yogyakarta places, underlines and unites the struggle of the LGBTQ+ sector with that of other marginalized sectors. The ASC promotes networks and engages in unusual yet promising projects that systematically respond to the governments' claims that LGBTQ+ people's lives, allegedly influenced by "dangerous Western values," are in conflict with so-called "traditions" and "norms."
Conclusion
Arcoiris provides a safe space for LBT people, practicing "safety" not only as a shelter, but also as a platform for lobbying for LBT rights. ASC's memory activism, along with a host of practices across the region, decolonizes LGBTQ+ and reimagines the sector's solidarity with other groups.
The Yogyakarta Principles on the Application of International Human Rights Law in Relation to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity.” The Yogyakarta Principles. Spaces for Change?: The Politics of Participation in New Democratic Arenas.” In Spaces for Change. Transforming Families and Communities: LGBT Contributions to an Alternative Development Path.” In Routledge Handbook of Queer Development Studies, edited by Corinne L.
The Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State." Marx/Engels Internet Archive, accessed 13 April 2020. Group of men allegedly burn transgender woman to death, escape murder charges." The Jakarta Post, 10 April 2020. Pride is Struggle Against Hate: LGBT Pride in the Philippines Twenty-two Years Past Stonewall Manila.” Murphy Red (blog), 25 June 2016.
The ASEAN People's Forum (APF) as an Authentic Social Forum: Regional Civil Society Networking for Alternative Regionalism.” In Routledge Handbook of Asian Regionalism, edited by Mark Beeson and Richard Stubbs, 166–75. ASEAN civil society bodies boycott government-run conference venue after being told to submit list of participants for review.” September 10, 2019. Editorial: Lower Ground Floor, Ang Bahay ng Alumni, Magsaysay Avenue, University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City 1101.
The responsibility of the editor-in-chief and the program editors is towards high scientific standards, the generation of new knowledge that can be used for the benefit of the public, and the dissemination of such information.
