• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Department of Theology Spring Term 2021 Master's Thesis in Human Rights 30 ECTS Emergency Powers & Human Rights: Shield or Sword? Analysing the emergency powers paradox in a Southeast Asian context Author: Paola Zuleta Supervisor: Helen Lindberg Abstract The state of emergency – the governmental provision of imposing exceptional powers applicable to emer- gencies – is a characteristic shared by a majority of national governments. The possibility to invoke emer- gency provisions, albeit necessary, is inherently vulnerable to abuse. Despite established restrictions on emergency powers in national and international law, some states have been found to act beyond these limi- tations, infringing on human rights in an overly disproportionate and excessive fashion. Such an exercise of emergency powers is contrary to their general aim: i.e., to protect essential human rights in the face of a crisis, be it political, social, economic, or a natural disaster. As such, the state of emergency can be seen as a paradox: both a protection of, and threat to human rights. The present thesis, departing from an observed presupposition of existing and stable liberal-democratic structures for the established checks and restrictions to apply, placed the scope of analysis in a Southeast Asian context, a region featuring a broad variety of democracy levels. As such, the undertaken comparative study charted continuities, developments and changes pertaining to the enactment of emergency powers vis- à-vis human rights in Thailand and the Philippines between 1996 and 2021. Moreover, motivations behind the declaration of a state of emergency were also observed, as the identification of a situation as exceptional is incidentally the process through which a state of emergency is constructed and becomes usable, which in turn guides the formulation of emergency measures and their eventual impact on human rights. The observed instances of states of emergency in Thailand and the Philippines illustrate how emergency powers are often followed by a militarisation of the political agenda, and pose a challenge for social trust, especially in contexts such as Thailand and the Philippines, whose legacy of military rule has shaped how political life is enacted in contemporary times. Moreover, said legacy becomes yet another dimension of the state of emergency in that emergency powers are invoked to stabilise the political system so as to protect human rights, but ultimately the former is stabilised through repression of the latter. In this regard, repression of human rights is at its highest when the exception has entered several dimensions of the social fabric, i.e., becoming the norm. Within the framework of the regional War on Drugs and the Covid-19 pandemic, the cases further illustrate not only the intricate links between the juridico-political vis-à-vis repressive and re- strictive consequences, but also how they interact in a context of perpetual emergency. As such, the frequent invocation of emergency powers in the observed contexts encouraged the exercise of discretionary power through a reconceptualisation of the interaction between the political and the social, rending certain individ- uals, deemed a potential future threat, politically mute, overpowered by the sovereign decision. In this way, the implementation of emergency provisions were found to produce, portray, and maintain a largely fictional sense of security in the society. 2 Síntesis El estado de emergencia – la provisión gubernamental a través de la cual se dicta poderes excepcionales pertinentes a una situation de emergencia – es una característica que contempla el sistema jurídico de una mayoría de gobiernos nacionales. La posibilidad de declarar un estado de emergencia, a pesar de ser ocasionalmente necesario, es sin embargo altamente vulnerable ante un probable abuso de autoridad. Dado dicho riesgo, no obstante restricciones establecidas en leyes nacionales e internacionales regulando su uso, las medidas excepcionales adoptadas por algunos países han trascendido la serie de límites y controles contemplados, resultando en violaciones de derechos humanos de carácter inconmensurable y excesivo. Dicha adopción de poderes excepcionales contradice la prerrogativa original de los mismos, es decir, la proteción de derechos humanos fundamentales en caso se presenten graves circumstancias que perturben o amenacen perturbar en forma inminente el orden político, social, económico y ecológico del país en cuestión. Por ende, el estado de emergencia puede ser calificado como una paradoja: simultáneamente actuando como protector y amenaza a los derechos humanos. La presente tesis localiza su punto de inicio en la identificada presupocisión de una estructura estable propia de un estado democrático de derecho para un funcionamento certero de los establecidos controles y límites. A manera de investigar la validez atribuída a dicha presupocisión, el ámbito de analísis concierne el contexto del Sudeste asiático, una región seleccionada dada su observada variedad de niveles de democracia. El estudio, de carácter comparativo, traza continuidades, desarrollos y cambios pertinentes a la aplicación de poderes de emergencia y sus repercusiones en materia de derechos humanos en los casos de Tailandia y las Filipinas entre 1996 y 2021. Además, las motivaciones tras la declaratoria también fueron observadas e investigadas, dado que la identificación de una situación como excepcional es incidentemente el proceso a través de cual el estado de emergencia se construye y se torna usable, lo que a su vez guía la formulación de las medidas de emergencia y consigna una eventual restricción de derechos humanos. Los estados de emergencia observados ilustran como los poderes excepcionales en varias instancias conceden una militarización de la agenda política, lo cual circunscribe un reto en lo que concierne la confianza social, particularmente en contextos como Tailandia y las Filipinas, cuyo legado militar forma la vida política contemporánea. Además, dicho legado forma parte de una dimensión adicional del estado de emergencia, de acuerdo a la cual un sistema político inestable amerita la declaración de un estado de emergencia con el propósito de estabilizar el sistema político y proteger derechos humanos. Sin embargo, al final, el primero termina siendo estabilizado a través de la represión del último. En este contexto, la violación de derechos humanos es más prominente cuando la noción de la excepción se vuelve la norma. De esta manera, frecuentes declaratorias resultan en una reconceptualización de la interacción entre lo político y lo social, así silenciando políticamente a individuos considerados una posible futura amenza. Así, se observó que la implementación de poderes excepcionales produce, representa, y sostiene una sensación de seguridad social en gran parte ficticia. 3 Acknowledgements The present thesis constitutes a great personal achievement, and the culmination of an academic journey that started some years ago. Here, I would like to extend my gratitude to the Department, for facilitating the necessary support amidst a global pandemic; and to my supervisor Helen Lindberg, for the inputs, the guidance, and the encouragement. A big hug directed to my three programme ride-or-dies, thank you for all the laughs and the company. Finally, my moral pillars; mamá por todo el Ñeq'e, to my siblings, and to my main inspiration Peter. Gracias. 4 Table of Contents Abstract ....................................................................................................................................................................2 Síntesis .....................................................................................................................................................................3 Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................................................4 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................7 1.1. States of emergency and human rights: A paradox .............................................................................................. 7 1.2. Purpose and research questions ........................................................................................................................... 8 1.3. Scope conditions and delimitations ...................................................................................................................... 8 1.4. Definitions and terminology ................................................................................................................................ 10 1.5. Previous research ................................................................................................................................................ 10 1.5.1. The human rights dimension ...................................................................................................................... 14 1.6. Research gap ....................................................................................................................................................... 17 2. Methodology .................................................................................................................................................20 2.1. Scientific premise ...............................................................................................................................................

Load more

  70

Copy Link