Routledge Contemporary Southeast Asia Series. New York: Routledge, 2022. 266 pp. US$160.00, cloth; US$48.95, e-book. ISBN 9781003243816.
Refugee law in Southeast Asia has been largely overlooked in international refugee law literature; Sébastien Moretti’s book brings it out of the shadows. Drawing on arguments made in his doctoral thesis, the book benefits from Moretti’s years of practical experience in the region. In analyzing refugee protection from the 1970s to 2020, the book challenges the narrative of a rejection of international refugee law in Southeast Asia. This narrative is used to explain non-accession to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (Refugee Convention) by the majority of nations in the region. To present a different perspective, the book analyzes law, policy, and practice to protect refugees. It is essential reading for academics and practitioners working on refugee protection in Southeast Asia.
The book is presented in a logical manner and clearly articulated with the author’s overall argument strongly made, including essential sources. The methodology is sound, drawing on general principles of international law to show the contribution of Southeast Asian states to international refugee law. The book fits within recent literature challenging a similar perception (Natasha Yacoub, “A New History of Refugee Protection in Post-World War Two Southeast Asia: Lessons from the Global South” Asian Journal of International Law, 1–24: 2022; Brian Barbour, “Beyond Asian Exceptionalism: refugee protection in non-signatory states,” Forced Migration Review 67: 2021; and, Susan Kneebone, Reyvi Marinas, Max Walden, and Antje Missbach, eds., Refugee Protection in Southeast Asia: Between Humanitarianism and Sovereignty [forthcoming]).
The book is divided into six chapters, including an introduction and conclusion. Chapter 2 sets out the common reasons behind the narrative that Southeast Asian nations have rejected international refugee law: refugees are a threat to national security; hosting refugees is a burden; non-interference in affairs of other states; Eurocentric nature of the Refugee Convention; and manipulation of other states to share the burden (27–40). In chapter 3, Moretti shows the legal framework that applies to protect refugees, including relevant international and regional instruments. He presents in turn the “international refugee regime,” international human rights law, international customary law, and regional approaches.
The next three chapters show state practices to protect refugees. Chapter 4 shows how asylum seekers have been treated, with a trend of admitting refugees temporarily and protecting them from return to serious harm (protection from refoulement). Chapter 5 then examines the definition of a refugee in key refugee hosting states (Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand), applied through national law and practice or by engaging the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) to undertake refugee status determination. Chapter 6 examines refugee protection in Southeast Asia against international refugee and human rights law standards with a focus on access to services and labour rights for refugees.
While recognizing the validity of narratives that justify non-accession to the Refugee Convention, Moretti presents a convincing argument that this cannot be equated with a rejection of international refugee law (26). By articulating the relevant international, regional, and domestic law framework for refugee protection in Southeast Asia, he combats the myth that there is a legal lacuna concerning refugees in the region. In doing so, he contributes to literature setting out the contours of this law in Southeast Asia (Vitit Muntarbhorn, The Status of Refugees in Asia, New York: Clarendon Press, 1992). He acknowledges that states “prefer the development of soft law instruments rather than being bound by formal legal obligations” (58), and the reluctance of ASEAN to address refugee issues through its human rights framework. The management of refugee issues has rather been through a security lens, including the Bali Process on People Smuggling, Trafficking in Persons and Related Transnational Crime (Bali Process).
The real breakthrough in standard-setting, however, was the 1966 Bangkok Principles on the Status and Treatment of Refugees (Bangkok Principles). Moretti explains the importance of this as a soft law instrument guiding state practice and as a step towards developing binding law (59). He emphasizes that the normative value of the Bangkok Principles should not be underestimated (64), and that it may contribute to the opinio juris required to show the evolution of customary principles of international law (80). While the Bangkok Principles are cast in a positive light, they are not presented as a panacea for refugee protection. Drafted in 1966 and re-affirmed in 2001, they rather demonstrate a long-term engagement with refugee rights.
The history of refugee protection is important to show non-linear progress over time. Moretti argues that Southeast Asian states’ position on international refugee law arguably traces its origins to the influx of people from the second Indochinese influx from the mid 1970s (26). This is a position commonly taken in the literature, yet such a scope may be too narrow, since Southeast Asian state practice in hosting refugees has arguably made a valuable contribution to the development of international refugee law since at least the Second World War (Natasha Yacoub, “A New History of Refugee Protection in Post-World War Two Southeast Asia: Lessons from the Global South” Asian Journal of International Law, 1–24: 2022) and even centuries before (Vitit Muntarbhorn, “Discourses and Sources” in Vitit Muntarbhorn, ed., Challenges of International Law in the Asian Region, Singapore: Springer, 2021). Moretti alludes to the importance of a longer view of history (66) but it is a point that could have been emphasized more. It is an area that calls for more research.
Moretti’s book destabilizes the tendency in international refugee law literature to overlook Southeast Asia and explains the normative value of its regional standards. It makes several important contributions to the literature: first, by presenting a more positive narrative about Southeast Asia’s contribution to international refugee law; second, by challenging the notion of a legal lacuna for refugees in Southeast Asia; and third, by evidencing the non-linear development of refugee law standards since the 1970s. If narratives matter, the book is a positive step to enhancing refugee protection in the future.
Natasha Yacoub
The University of New South Wales, Sydney