To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.


This article will argue that there are three related issues of concern regarding the Rohingya crisis: (1) a singular focus on persecution and nationality in Myanmar; (2) statelessness and displacement in the region; and (3) grave human rights violations amounting to international crimes including genocide and crimes against humanity. This article will discuss active steps that ASEAN should take. To ensure that Myanmar will willingly accept the responsibility to address the source of the problem, the international community, particularly ASEAN, has to stand firm against Myanmar's gross violation of human rights. At the same time, ASEAN must deal with the refugee crisis by formulating a workable regional framework. This article will deal with the underlying conflict paradigm in all refugee issues: how to reconcile state sovereignty vis-á-vis responsibility and how to ensure protection of both human rights and state security.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.

... In so doing, such states perform a revisionism that harks back to fantasies of pure pasts to rationalise modern forms of brutality against their own citizens (Binder, 1999). The persecution of the Rohingya by the Myanmar government (Mutaqin, 2018), the castebased violence meted out against India's Dalit citizens (Bob, 2007), and the debates around the 1993 Bangkok Declaration on Asian Values (Ciorciari, 2012), are instances of the perverse use of the relativist argument. Both universalism and relativism are thus hegemonic forms of knowledge that are used to reproduce and reify existing structures of oppression at both transnational and domestic levels. ...
The Covid-19 pandemic inaugurated a new global order of public life and health marked by death, despair and alienation. As a crisis of a global scale, it made the task of (re)imagination simultaneously necessary and extremely difficult. It is this double bind of the difficulty and imminence of imagination that motivates the curation of this special issue. In this introduction, we map the connections between the theme of this volume and the key ideas that constitute its varied contributions, which we organised under three broad mobilising ideas: Rights and Resilience; Sexuality, Health and Justice; and Politics of Knowledge Production and Collaborations. Contributions cover myriad issues, engage in methodological innovations and play with diverse genres. Alongside more traditional academic writings, there are community-based research papers, activist conversations, visual essays, reflective pieces and interviews. The geographical span of the contributions brings insights from around the world and the number of topics covered in this issue are equally vast including, among others, mental health, disability, environment, sex work, violence, queerness, LGBTQ+ experiences, love and anger. The aim of this special issue, then, is to challenge the Manichean distinctions that are often drawn between research and activism, and by extension, between theory and practice.
This chapter explores the relationship between statelessness and displacement. Statelessness can be both a cause and a consequence of displacement, and it can significantly impact displaced persons, their families, and the wider community. As such, statelessness is a phenomenon about which social work practitioners working with displaced populations should be knowledgeable. However, as the relationship between statelessness and displacement is only recently being recognized, there are limited guidance and best practices from which practitioners can draw. This chapter seeks to address this challenge by providing a foundation of knowledge and suggested resources to assist social work practitioners in understanding statelessness, identifying when clients may be at risk of statelessness, and mitigating the challenges it creates.KeywordsStateless migrantsRisk of statelessnessSocial work practitionersToolkitIdentifying statelessness
Full-text available
This study examines how Rohingya refugees in Aceh in 2015-2016 received assistance and the role of Islamic philanthropic institutions in providing aid. The paper shows that through the media, Islamic philanthropic institutions have successfully advocated for Rohingya rights and raised the issue as a religious issue so that they have collected large donations. Also, this paper finds a discrepancy between the information conveyed by the media and the reality in the field, showing significant efforts in the commodification of humanitarian aid and abuse of religion.[Artikel ini membahas bagaimana pengungsi Rohingya di Aceh periode 2015-2016 mendapatkan bantuan dan peran dari lembaga filantropi Islam dalam penyediaan bantuan tersebut. Artikel ini menjelaskan bahwa lembaga filantrofi Islam berhasil mengadvokasi hak Rohingya melalui media dan mengkaitkan dalam isu agama sehingga mendapatkan donasi yang berlipat. Selain itu dalam artikel ini juga menunjukkan ketidaksesuaian antara informasi di media dengan kenyataan di lapangan, bahkan terdapat indikasi komodifikasi bantuan kemanusiaan dan penyalahgunaan agama.]
This article examines the ASEAN doctrine of non-interference and whether it aligns with the international law principle of non-intervention. The author also examines why the doctrine of non-interference is so fundamental for ASEAN members, and whether the individual ASEAN State conduct complies with the doctrine of non-interference and the principle of non-intervention. It concludes by discussing the potential effects of ASEAN States’ practice on the international customary law of non-intervention. Article available at
The responsibility to protect (R2P) comprises each state's responsibility to protect its own populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, the international community's duty to assist states in this endeavour, and a responsibility for the international community to take timely and decisive action in situations where the host state has manifestly failed. At first glance, the latter two elements of this principle seem to require behaviour that contradicts the principle of non-interference. This raises questions as to why R2P was endorsed by Southeast Asian governments and whether it can be localised in a region whose politics are underpinned by non-interference. This article argues that processes of norm localisation are producing an accommodation between the two principles. This accommodation involves the formal retention of both principles but the subtle realignment of each in order to make them compatible and make support for both coherent. It is this third explanation, we argue, that best explains the relationship between R2P and non-interference in Southeast Asia: R2P has been revised to limit its capacity to legitimise coercive interference, whilst non-interference is in the process of being recalibrated to permit expressions of concern, offers of assistance and even the application of limited diplomatic pressure in response to major humanitarian crises. Thus, whilst the region remains largely hostile to doctrinal revisions to non-interference, subtle changes are evident in practice. This article outlines the evolution of R2P as a challenge to traditional notions of state sovereignty, provides an overview of non-interference and past efforts to revise the principle, and examines two case studies to understand how the two principles are being accommodated in practice.
Synthesis: Human rights, Non-Intervention, and the asean Human Rights Declaration
  • Mathew Davies
Mathew Davies, 'asean Synthesis: Human rights, Non-Intervention, and the asean Human Rights Declaration' (2013) 14 Georgetown Journal of International Affairs 51;
The Dilemma of Non-Interference: Myanmar, Human Rights and the asean Charter
  • John Arendshorst
John Arendshorst, 'The Dilemma of Non-Interference: Myanmar, Human Rights and the asean Charter' (2009) 8 Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights 102; Lee Jones, 'asean's Unchanged Melody? The Theory and Practice of "Non-Interference" in Southeast Asia' (2010) 23 Pacific Review 4, 479-502;
In the context of asean and the recent refugee crisis, see Sangeetha Yogendran, 'asean Failure to Implement the Customary International Law Principle of Non-Refoulement during the 2015 Boat Crisis
  • See Nils Coleman
See Nils Coleman, 'Non-Refoulement Revised -Renewed Review of the Status of the Principle of Non-Refoulement as Customary International Law' (2003) 5 European Journal of Migration and Law 23. In the context of asean and the recent refugee crisis, see Sangeetha Yogendran, 'asean Failure to Implement the Customary International Law Principle of Non-Refoulement during the 2015 Boat Crisis' (2017) 26 Human Rights Defender 13.
Malaysia's Prime Minister Leads Protest Against
  • Eileen Ng
Eileen Ng, 'Malaysia's Prime Minister Leads Protest Against "Genocide" Against Muslims in Rohingya' Independent (London, 4 December 2016) < news/world/genocide-of-rohingya-burma-aung-san-suu-kyi-malaysian-pm-najib-razak -leads-protest-against-a7454656.html> accessed 6 December 2017.