'Asian Values' and the 'ASEAN Way' in the Case of Human Trafficking of Fishermen

Abstract

This paper arises from the observation that in certain Southeast Asian states, governments have failed to harmonise their politico-legal responses to human trafficking as required under the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, Arts 6, 9 and 10 and its parent instrument, the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, Arts 7, 13, 26 and 27. Focusing on the specific issue of the trafficking of fishermen for forced labour between Cambodia, Myanmar, Thailand and Indonesia, this paper makes the argument that “Asian values” are not a uniting force in the context of human trafficking, but are instead a dividing force. I argue that in the Southeast Asian region, it is the “ASEAN Way” which defines state-level approaches to human trafficking, and that this lens – with its focus on state security and sovereignty – can be used to understand the lack of harmonisation between states in the region. To make this argument, I examine the work of ASEAN – one of the core politico-legal institutions of human trafficking governance in Southeast Asia. I conclude that whereas the “ASEAN Way” is drawing state policy toward isolationism and securitisation with respect to human trafficking, external actors working in the region have an opposing influence, and are able to promote an approach more in line with the collectivism advocated by “Asian values”, while at the same time indirectly promoting individual rights.