Civil society participation in the universal periodic review in Malaysia / Sarune Beh

Sarune , Beh (2022) Civil society participation in the universal periodic review in Malaysia / Sarune Beh. PhD thesis, Universiti Malaya.

	PDF (The Candidate's Agreement) Restricted to Repository staff only Download (197Kb)
	PDF (Thesis PhD) Download (1863Kb)

Abstract

Malaysia underwent three cycles of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) since 2009 and accepted 60.2%, 64.66%, and 54.85% recommendations. The recommendations with the less controversial issues such as Persons with Disabilities (PWDs) received a positive response from the state, while the recommendations on the controversial issues such as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) received none of the acceptance although they both are vulnerable groups. The state responded differently to the CSOs in the UPR process. Meanwhile, CSOs interact differently with the state in the UPR in cooperative and highly-contested relationships. This has created questions on how CSOs establish relationship with the state to influence in the UPR? What is the nature of CSOs that make the interaction between CSOs and the state cooperative but at the same time, highly contested? And, why do the state and CSOs respond differently to the UPR process over the issues of PWDs and LGBT? The research focused on these two issues and compared the interaction between PWDs and LGBT CSOs with the state in the UPR process. There is a lack of literature on understanding the CSOs-state relationship in a decision-making process in the context of human rights and with the influence of international parties. Therefore, this research aims to fill in this literature gap. The study employed a qualitative research method with in-depth interviews, secondary data collection and, thematic analysis. 20 informants from the state, CSOs, and National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) were interviewed. Social capital and counter-hegemony theories were applied to understand how CSOs create the relationship with the state in the UPR process. While the approaches of CSOs-state relationship proposed by Lewis (2013) and Young (2000) were utilised to explain the causes leading to the formation of CSO-state. The key factors that contribute to the state’s decision-making in the UPR have analysed based on the four policy perspectives proposed by Bekkers. et. al (2017), namely Rational, Institutional, Political, and Cultural. Findings show that PWDs CSOs apply the social capital approach in developing relationships with the state through three elements, namely Trust, Norm, and Network while LGBT CSOs utilising the approach of counter-hegemony through the elements of Organisation, Ideology, and Action. PWDs CSOs enjoy wider chances to participate in the policy process while LGBT CSOs have no door to participate in the policy process. Thus, UPR plays a more significant role on the issue of LGBT rather than PWDs. PWDs CSOs have not expanded their involvement in the UPR broadly because they are comfortable with the channels provided by the state. While LGBT CSOs commonly act in a rights-based approach and they have limited chances to access the state. UPR provides an opportunity for LGBT CSOs to appear themselves in the policy process.

Actions (For repository staff only : Login required)