Governance on Extractive Industries in Europe and South East Asia ::

Impacted by the operations of the so called Extractive Industries (EI), rich natural and mineral resources of ASEAN countries are actually not really blessed with their own resources. Ironically, some of those countries, such as Indonesia, Laos, and Philippines, are now even challenged by several crucial problems, be it poverty, law development index, various conflict, high number of corruption, and environment degradation.

Over the years, several large EI have been operated and certainly will continue their operations in Indonesia, Philippines, Cambodia, Vietnam, and East Timor, in which most of those industries, as like Petronas, Chevron and Pertamina, are actually foreign industries where often impact the low number of indigenous countries’ GDP in EI sector.

Meanwhile, in European countries, the EI are present across the Community and are relatively spread over its territory. It is reported that the subsector where production is more concentrated concerns metallic minerals, where Finland, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Sweden together account for some 75% of total EU production. The EU remains highly dependent on imports for its raw materials supply. And it is the world's largest consumer of minerals.

As happened in ASEAN, the extractive operations in EU also certainly raise the environmental impact which is specifically classified into two types of concern: that the use of non-renewable sources may mean that these resources will not be available for future generations, and that extractive operations harm the environment (air, soil and water pollution, noise, destruction or disturbance of natural habitats, visual impact on the surrounding landscape, effects on groundwater levels).

Regarding on the impact of EI’s operations, especially toward ASEAN and EU countries, I also think that the EI, which commonly perceived as the single largest source of green house gas emissions, however need to be urgently well-governed. Considering that good governance will make the exploitation of these resources can generate large revenues to foster growth and reduce poverty.

In term of governance, many believe on the global standard for transparency in oil, gas and mining set by Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) which aims to strengthen governance by improving transparency and accountability in the extractives sector. Considering that EITI strongly supports improved governance in resource-rich countries through the verification and full publication of company payments and government revenues from oil, gas and mining.

In South East Asia, several CSOs from some countries in the Region have been frequently urged their each government to consider the adoption of EITI, as what happened on last February, in which several International CSOs from East Timor, Cambodia, Philippines, Indonesia and Vietnam, meet together in Jakarta, with a direct guide from American Oxfam and Revenue Watch Institute (RWI), discussing the EITI as a preparation for facing the EITI Asian Conference on last March in Jakarta.

While in Europe, along with Africa, Europe has been reaffirming its commitment on EITI through the Action Plan 2008-2010 decided from the meeting of European and African Leaders in Lisbon in 8-9 December 2007.

To this extent, it is assessed the importance of exploring all possible strategic means to assure that the natural resources in both South East Asia and Europe are well governance, and that the natural resources are also transparently used to generate large revenues fostering the growth and reducing the poverty.

Read More......

Enhancing the Legal Protection on ASEAN Migrant Workers ::

The problem of migrant workers have been confronted ASEAN with many challenges over the decades. Undocumented/irregular migration, lack of recognition of domestic workers as workers, trafficking, feminization of labor, and the lack of awareness of information services are commonly identified as some major challenges of migrant workers in the region.

It is reported that about 13.5 million migrant workers from ASEAN Member States have fanned out to work in other countries across the globe. Of this number, over 5 million are working within ASEAN.

Due to this high number of migrant workers, ASEAN member-states should enhance the legal instrument protecting those migrant workers, considering that legal protection would prevent and eliminate clandestine movements and trafficking in migrant workers, while at the same time would also assure the protection of their fundamental human rights.

In last July 2003, the 1990 United Nations Convention on the Protection of the Rights of Migrant Workers and Members of their Family (UNMWC) came into force. This convention principally seeks to play a role in preventing and eliminating the exploitation of migrant workers throughout the entire migration process. This convention basically provides a set of binding international standards to address the treatment, welfare and human rights of both documented and undocumented migrants, as well as the obligations and responsibilities on the part of sending and receiving States.

But what more convinces us if ASEAN does not yet have a legal instrument on migrant workers, that among the member-states of ASEAN only one country (the Philippines) that has ratified the convention, while two countries (Indonesia and Cambodia) just only signed it.

Within the region, ASEAN through the years has frequently undertaken several initiatives related to the migrant workers issue, such as ASEAN Declaration on Transnational Crime (1997), Hanoi Plan of Action (1998), Bangkok Declaration on Irregular Migration (1999), ASEAN Declaration against Trafficking in Persons Particularly Women and Children (2004), Declaration on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers (2007), etc. But what matters most is that those initiatives were merely declaration of intent, not yet a binding convention or agreement.

Furthermore, in South East Asia, the existence of several inter-governmental bodies, like AICHR, ACMW, and ACWC to some extent had also played several roles in solving those migrant workers problems, although those was still not held as a collective agenda that would be able to institute stronger mechanisms to safeguard the rights of migrant workers and their families in the region.

Given the above situation, it is assessed the importance of exploring all possible consensuses urging ASEAN member-states to enhance the legal protection in their region, either with their position as a country of origin or destination, or as a country playing both.

Read More......