

179

Context of Human Rights Educationin��������������
Asian Schools
Jefferson R. PlantillaM

isunderstanding of human rights and human rights education, fear ofgovernment disapproval of human rights education, and fear of humanrights education as additional burden to teachers are some of the obstacles
to having open and full support for human rights education in Asian schools. Bothgovernments and educators may find solace in considering certain educations as human rights education, or in teaching human rights under different names, or using
broader educational frameworks that incorporate human rights education. 1
in Japan, or the abuses that children suffer in thehands of parents, relatives, family friends, teachers,
school heads and strangers. Human rights education eventually has to deal with real issues thatstudents face in school, family and society.3

And for those who agree with the teaching of
human rights in schools, they face the problem
of inadequate reference and teaching/learningmaterials, lack of training on human rights andhuman rights education, lack of support from theeducation/school officials, and even lukewarm
support from the parents and community.
Human rights education in schools developed in different periods of time and forms. As
explained in the 1998 consultation workshops
report of HURIGHTS OSAKA, education
programs that relate to human rights arose as
responses

The appreciation of issues considered important in a particular time determined the typeof education that facilitated the teaching andlearning of human rights.

Issuesto problems faced by groups in society whowere disadvantaged or discriminated. Humanrights education in schools can be traced to thetime when schools began to teach the ideas of
democracy, social justice, national independence
and the right of people to their own (human)dignity and well-being.2

International definitions of human rights
education adopted by governments shouldhave settled any debate on how the teaching
and learning of human rights should be done
inside the classroom and the school as a whole.
The UNESCO-organized international conference on human rights education in 1993 inMontreal, Canada, and followed by the 1999
Asia-Pacific conference in Pune, India provide
such international definition of human rights
education.4 The Vienna Declaration and Pro-A second phase in its development occurredwhenschools have to deal with more concrete issues suchas the discrimination against the Buraku people179

180  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

gramme of Action that came out of the 1993
World Conference on Human Rights, and thesubsequent United Nations (UN) General
Assembly resolutions on the UN Decade for
Human Rights Education (1995-2004) andits plan of action also provide the definition ofhuman rights education.5 The variety of formsof human rights education in Asian schools,
however, seems to indicate lack of subscription
to such internationally agreed definitions.
From these international definitions, it isnormal to expect that human rights educationmeans the study of human rights, their concepts
and mechanisms (local and also international).
Others argue otherwise, however, in view ofpractical difficulties of changing curriculums
and syllabuses, and the opportunity provided byexisting “educations” that may indirectly coverhuman rights. In latter case, human rights are
effectively “hidden” or made implicit.
But whether human rights are explicitly
or implicitly/indirectly taught, there are issues
to ponder upon. There are questions on how
other “educations” may or may not actuallyprovide human rights education. I discuss thedifferent “educations” and point out some ofthese issues.
Another set of issues refer to the extent bywhich students learned or not learned humanrights in countries that have formal support
for human rights education. Do students really understand human rights? If so, do theyacquire such understanding in schools? What
do schools do to facilitate such understandingof human rights?
There are also issues relating to the nationaland regional environments that are meant tosupport human rights education in the formal
education system.

Explicit human rights education
Human rights taught explicitly can be in
the form of legal education. The Philippine
experience is instructive in this regard. The

Popularizing The Law Program of the University of the Philippines’ Law Center is basicallyeducation about law in general. But it contains
a component on human rights, a distinct section,
which introduces the international human rights
standards.6 This is an example of the view thatlegal education per se may not properly convey
human rights messages unless explicit mentionof human rights is made. Constitutional provisions, for example, provide very rich bases fordiscussing related international human rights
standards. Legal education can also introduce
specific human rights that the constitutional
provisions do not cover.7
Values education is another vehicle for human rights education. As defined by the �����
AsiaPacific Network on International Education
and Values Education (APNIEVE),8 humanrights����������������������������������������
constitute one of the main issues thatshould be covered in values education. Thisview follows the UNESCO agenda of covering
peace, sustainable development, environment,
and human rights, among other issues, in its
education programs. UNESCO interprets its
own principles of universality, diversity, anddignity as “closely related to the values of justice,solidarity, tolerance, sharing and equity, respectfor human rights and democratic principle.”9However, the interpretation of values education may differ from country to country. It is
possible that the words “human rights” might
not even be mentioned, or related words might
be used. Australia’s ���������������������������
2004-2008 Values Education
Programme����������
based on The National Framework
for Values Education (2003) is an example of thelatter situation. Under the National Framework,
there are nine values to be promoted�.10 The
values of “Freedom” and “Tolerance and Inclusion” are considered human rights concepts.����It���
is not known however whether or not teachers
in explaining these values mention that they are
human rights values too. In countries where human rights are considered too politically sensitive, it is highly possible that values education
does not mention human rights.
In the case of the Philippines, several govern-

Context of Human Rights Education in Asian Schools  181

ment documents put human rights education
under values education. An early list of values
had two sets of values: “core values” and “related
values”. The seven identified “core values” did
not directly relate to human rights. Thus human rights came under “related values”, whichmeant that human rights were subsidiary values.
This violated government orders and even theconstitutional provision on the teaching of human rights in all educational institutions.11 Fortunately, the teaching exemplars subsequently
produced by the Department of Education and
the Philippine Commission on Human Rights
discuss human rights as values to be integrated
in various learning areas and not merely as subsidiary values under values education.12

Implicit” human rights education
Civic education is one form of human rights
education when it is defined in an international
context so that citizens are treated also as individuals “entitled to all the rights inherent in thehuman condition”.13 In promoting civic education with intrinsic human rights component
UNESCO asserts that

Civics education should not barricade itself behind a narrow vision of the nation and citizenship.
What we have to promote is international, andthen worldwide, citizenship.

Another UNESCO statement presents the
new view on civic education in the following
manner:14

Civic education programmes have become anincreasingly important means for countries to
educate citizens about their rights and responsibilities. Increasing pluralism within states has
encouraged the development of civic education
programmes that go beyond simple ‘patriotic’models of citizenship requiring uncritical loyalty
to the nation state. By defining ‘citizenship’ interms of human rights and civic responsibilities,
civic education programmes attempt to avoid
concepts of ‘citizenship’ that define nationality interms of ethnic, religious or cultural identity. The

aspiration is that concepts of citizenship based onhuman rights and responsibilities may make it
more difficult to mobilise political conflict around
identity issues. It has therefore become the norm
for modern civic education programmes to have astrong human rights values base, to make specificreference to children’s rights and address issues
related to diversity and the rights of minorities
within society.

How many of the civic education programsin Asian countries subscribe to this view? How
many of these programs are still in the mold oftraining ‘good’ citizens, and not ‘training human beings and citizens’?
This problem would not exist if civic education were considered part of human rights
education. In expressing concern for the viewthat “human rights” are another item that has
to compete for space in the school curriculum,the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity
Commission of Australia (HREOC) argues thathuman rights education includes civic education. 15 This is the reverse of the usual view that
civic education (arguably considered to be anolder “education” than human rights education)
includes the teaching of human rights.
Civic education and human rights education
can likewise be viewed as separate educations
that lack complementarity. This means that civic
education does not necessarily (or at least notdirectly) promote human rights.
The same concern may be raised in countries that argue that human rights are taught
in schools through religious education, peaceeducation, and moral studies. There is still aneed to ensure that human rights, recognized as
related to religious, moral and other principles,
are taught properly.�

Other educations
In Mongolia and likely in some countries
in Central Asia, “Street Law program” hasbeen the vehicle for human rights education.

182  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

The “Street Law program” can be interpreted
concepts. Students learn human rights concepts
as a combination of legal education and civic
as they practice English using gender-inclusive
education16 with human rights education comwords, and in avoiding words that exclude,
ponent. But the Mongolian experience shows
marginalize or denigrate either sex.20
the problem of adopting an education program
without adaptation to the local context. Thus
the Mongolian legal education program for
Human rights awareness21
secondary schools, based on the “street law program” and probably other education programsHas human rights education in Asian
introduced into the country, is characterized as
schools (in various forms and names) led to
not conforming to “the realities and needs of difhuman rights awareness of students?
ferent communities. This is because most of the
The survey of students in India, Japan andmaterials in this curriculum are translated fromthe Philippines provides an answer to this quesother languages and cultures.” 17 Thus whiletion. The survey covered these countries because
a program might have a strong human rightsof their governments’ support for human rights
education component, it might fail to deliver its
education in schools over a considerable period
message (human rights in particular) because ofof time.
the lack of adaptation to the local context.
Using a 69-item questionnaire, the survey
This brings out the issue of transplantation
measured the human rights awareness of secof education programs. One author explains that
ondary students (with an average age of fifteen
unless an education program takes into serious
years) as well as their experience in learning
account the national context (including national
human rights in school. The results of thehistory) in introducing human rights, the educaresponses in some questions are provided astion program may appear as an alien programillustrative examples.22
transplanted into local educationalsoil.18 Another author expresses Table 1. Knowledge of Human Rights By Countries
the same view in describing the
India
Japan
Philippines
Total
N = 2039
N = 2635
N = 2001
adaptation of an American material
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
on legal education into Taiwanese
KnowledgeofHRcontext by replacing American legal
Yes
2005
98.3
2493
94.6
1928
96.4
6426 96.26
provisions and jurisprudence with
19
No
11
0.5
112
4.3
30
1.5
153
2.29
those of Taiwan.
NR
23
1.1
30
1.1
43
2.1
96
1.44
Global education and multiculTotal
2039
100
2635
100
2001
100
6675
100
tural education (which can include
Knowledgeof
UDHR*
human rights as content) brought
Yes
1353
66.4
1020
38.7
599
29.9
2972 44.52
from another region (North AmeriNo
604
29.6
1570
59.6
1356
67.8
3530 52.88
ca or Europe) into countries in Asia
NR
82
4
45
1.7
46
2.3
173
2.59
might be facing similar problems
Total
2039
100
2635
100
2001
100
6675
100
experienced in Mongolia and other
Knowledge of CRC**
countries on the transplantation of
Yes
1480
72.6
1454
55.2
1134
56.7
4068 60.94
education programs.
No
441
21.6
1133
43.0
813
40.6
2387 35.76
Finally, it is important to conNR
118
5.8
48
1.8
54
2.7
220
3.30
sider subjects such as English
Total
2039
100
2635 100.0 2001
100
6675
100
Language as a vehicle in teaching
Note: Frequency (F); Percentage (%)* Universal Declaration of Human Rights
human rights. Gender-inclusive** Convention on the Rights of the Child
English promotes human rights

Context of Human Rights Education in Asian Schools  183

Almost all secondary students surveyed(average of 96.26%) in the three countries responded that they know human rights. Followup questions on knowledge of specific humanrights instruments show much lower percentages. Knowledge of the Universal Declarationof Human Rights (UDHR) has a general average of 44.52% broken into 30% to 39% in thePhilippines and Japan respectively, but higher
average (almost 67%) in India. The Convention
on the Rights of the Child (CRC), on the other
hand, is more known with 60.94% general average and 55% for Japan, 57% for the Philippines
and a higher 72.6% for India.
Table 2. Sources of Knowledge of Human Rights*
Sourceof knowledgeIndia
N = 2039

Japan
N = 2635

Philippines
N= 1928**

F

%

F

%

F

%

1134

55.6

756

28.7

1510

78.3

1480

72.6

1743

66.1

1165

60

187

9.2

201

7.6

446

23.1

250

12.3

334

12.7

503

26.1

212

10.4

54

2.0

544

28.2

Schools
1632
80
Legal
docu273
13.4
ments
Others131
6.4*Multiple responses.

2172

82.4

1615

83.8

231

8.8

251

13.0

92

3.5

145

7.5

Family/parents
Media
Internet,
websites
Gov’t.
agencies
Neighbors

The total average of responses from the three
countries shows that the schools provide themost knowledge on human rights followed by
the media. But while the respondents in India
and Japan supported this general trend, those in
the Philippines chose the family as the secondary source of human rights knowledge, insteadof the media.23
The internet is a poor source of human rights
knowledge in all three countries. The students

in India and the Philippines obviously face difficulties in accessing internet facilities comparedto those in Japan. And yet the results in thethree countries all have low averages. Does thismean that the internet does not provide enoughinformation on human rights for students? Or,
is the internet unattractive medium for humanrights information dissemination? The results
indicate a need to review the internet as a useful
tool for human rights promotion.
In relation to school environment, 46% ofrespondents in Japan answered that schools“sometimes” respect human rights. 56% of the
respondents from the Philippines, on the other
hand, said the same. Respondents in India,
however, answered that school “often” respecthuman rights with an average of 52% responses,
and only an average of 36% answered “sometimes.” (See Table 3 next page)On the impact of human rights education,
most respondents from India (70.8%) and thePhilippines (59.4%) said that it would lead tothe exercise of human rights. But those in Japan
have lower average of 37.6% supporting thisview. (See Table 4 next page)
Those who answered that students would
invoke their rights to defend themselves range
from 18% (India) to 24% (Japan) to 29% (Philippines). The percentage of respondents saying
human rights education would lead to the “exercise of rights and responsibilities” is higher(54.28%). Combining the “invoke rights” and“exercise rights and responsibilities” responses
results in almost 90% of the respondents in
India and the Philippines and a lower 62% inJapan taking action on their rights.
The results of the survey point to the needto improve the teaching and learning of humanrights in schools. While the survey indicatesawareness of human rights among secondary
students in the survey, this is not necessarilyequivalent to a proper understanding and application of the concepts. Much work remains
even in schools that are supposedly alreadyinvolved in human rights education.

184  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

Regional project

Table 3. School Respects Human Rights
School respects
human rightsof studentsIndia
N = 2039

Japan
N = 2635

Philippines
N = 2001

Total

HURIGHTS OSAKA
adopted a Southeast Asia
project, as a result of the
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
1998 consultation workNever
213
10.4
695
26.4
113
5.6
1021 15.30
shop it organized in IndoSometimes
734
36.0
1205
45.7
1129
56.4
3068 46.00
nesia, that support humanrights education in the
Often
1060
52.0
491
18.6
737
36.8
2288 34.28
schools of the subregion.
NR
32
1.6
244
9.3
22
1.1
298
4.46
The project started with aseries of activities involving
Table 4. Students’ Behavior
educators, education offiIndia
Japan
Philippines
Totalcials and non-governmental
N = 2039
N = 2635
N = 2001
organization workers in
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
Southeast Asia. 24 There
were training workshops
Invoke rights
to defend
365
17.9
638
24.2
582
29.1
1585 23.75
in 1999 and 2002. The
themselves
2002 workshop led to the
Abuse theirdevelopment of human
205
10.1
495
18.8
210
10.5
910
13.63
rightsrights lesson plans that were
Exercise rights
edited and published as
and responsi1444
70.8
990
37.6
1189
59.4
3623 54.28
Human Rights Lesson Plans
bilities
for Southeast Asian Schools
NR
25
1.2
512
19.4
20
1.0
557
8.34
in 2004.25 The publication
was subsequently translated
Total
2039
100
2635
100
2001
100
6675
100
into several languages inSoutheast Asia, in addition
to translation into MandaSupporting mechanisms
rin, and in Japanese and Farsi versions for thelesson plans. The publication now has Bahasa
This brings out the issue of mechanisms thatIndonesia, Bahasa Melayu, Khmer and Vietrespond to the needs in teaching and learning
namese versions, all in printed version. A Thai
human rights in schools. Are there programs
version is also available for the lesson plans.
and resources that directly support teachers in
These translation efforts are also suppleteaching human rights? There are number ofmented by training activities. In Malaysia, theprojects supporting human rights education
Malaysian National Human Rights Commisin schools ranging from material development
sion (SUHAKAM) uses the Bahasa Melayu(teaching aids, reference documents), to trainversion of the publication as one of the resource
ing activities for teachers or teacher-trainors, tomaterials in the human rights component of thehuman rights activities (such as celebration ofcourses for teachers on the new citizenship andhuman rights day) sponsored by government
civic education. SUHAKAM collaborates withagencies, human rights centers and non-govthe Malaysian Ministry of Education (MOE)ernmental organizations.
on training teachers on human rights.26 In
Cambodia, the Ministry of Education, YouthContext of Human Rights Education in Asian Schools  185

and Sports (MOEYS) adopted the "Human
Rights Integration in School Curriculum, Textbook/Teacher's Guide and School Environment– 2005-2007" which considers the Khmer version of the publication as a training material.27 It
introduced the Khmer version of the publication
to the education and human rights community
in Cambodia in the “National Consultation
Workshop for Human Rights Integration
Planning into School Curricula” in 2005. The
Cambodian MOEYS was able to secure funds
to implement the plan in 2007, particularly on
training on how to integrate human rights into
the school curriculum.
In Indonesia, the publication is used inteacher training workshops. And in Laos, thepublication has been used as one of the referencematerials in developing Laotian human rights
lesson plans. In Thailand, the publication’s lesson plans (Thai version) are also used in teacher
training activities.
The Southeast Asia project is an example of asubregional project that has meaning only whenrelated national activities are held. Its impact
depends on the degree of support it provides
to national-level initiatives.

National support system
The research project of HURIGHTSOSAKA on analysis of educational policies andthe survey of human rights awareness of secondary students provides a glimpse of the current
situation of human rights education in schoolsin Asia. The policy analysis component of the
project covers four countries – India, Japan, thePhilippines and Sri Lanka – that are considered
to have substantial experience on human rights
education in schools.
The early government programs on humanrights in schools in Asia can be considered tobe those from Japan (since late 1960s in theform of Dowa Education), Sri Lanka (in theearly 1980s) and the Philippines (in the mid1980s). The research report presents the general
constitutional and legal support for humanrights education in schools existing in the four
countries. The policy support for Japan and thePhilippines are specifically adopted for humanrights education in the form of law/executive
orders, national action plans, and administrative orders.
But while these policies are supportive ofhuman rights education there is much room
for improvement in view of their weaknesses.
In summary, the weaknesses take varied andcontradictory forms, such as the following:28
a. The current general educational policies are
not explicitly supportive of human rights
education. Any change in the basic school
curriculum in support of human rights education is seen as problematic due to the costs
involved, its implication on the academic
requirements, and the fear of neglect of duties in favor of rights (Japan). The reformed
school curriculum, on the other hand, either no longer mentions human rights (SriLanka), or stresses examinations which limit
the space for innovations that human rights
education may bring (India);b.	While some specific educational policies aremeant for human rights education, they lackfinancial support, monitoring, and accountability system (Japan, Philippines);c.	Where the curriculum provides space forteaching/learning human rights, the emphasis has been on “rules and regulations,duties and responsibilities” (Sri Lanka), or
the statement of rights refer to legal/constitutional rights without explicit link tointernational human rights standards (India
and the Philippines);d. The curriculum design is influenced by thestress on “patriotism” and “nationalism”
which demand loyalty and duty from students, and consequently ignore human rights(Philippines, Japan).
Unless these weaknesses are addressed, theeducational policies would inhibit human rights
education in schools in the four countries, in
one way or another.

186  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

These results also show how important educational policies and programs are in implementing human rights education programs inside theclassroom, or in the whole school system.

Global and regional support systems
There are global, regional and subregional
initiatives on human rights that should have an
influence in human rights education in Asian
schools. They are important opportunities forhuman rights education in schools that governments have no excuse to avoid.

Global initiative
The first phase of the UN World Programmefor Human Rights Education focuses on humanrights education in the primary and secondary
schools. Its plan of action encourages countries
to analyze the current state of human rights
education in their schools and come up witha plan to boost the existing efforts, or initiate
activities. The plan likewise promotes the roleof various stakeholders in the education system
including members of the civil society in thisnational planning exercise. The plan provides acomprehensive guide to human rights educationin schools. However, it lacks the mechanism foreffective implementation worldwide. UNESCO
and the Office of the UN High Commissioner
for Human Rights, as main UN agencies responsible for this plan, are still struggling to
get governments to support it through national
evaluation and planning activities.
The UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (DESD) provides anothersupport in the teaching of human rights inschools. T���������������������������������
����������������������������������
he UNESCO Asia-Pacific Bureau of
Education has started a project on the DESD by
identifying and recognizing the key componentsof Education for Sustainable Development(ESD) so that
educators from different disciplines can examine
the curriculum and school activities for existing

contributions to ESD. In addition, educators
can identify potential areas of the existing school
curriculum in which to insert examples that illustrate sustainability and additional knowledge,
issues, perspectives, skills and values related tosustainability.29

Human rights can be integrated as part ofthe socio-cultural pillar of ESD into the school
curriculum through the “larger concept ofsustainability” that the UNESCO Asia-PacificBureau of Education sees as major entry point
for many topics or content.30
The Asia/Pacific Cultural Centre for UNESCO (ACCU) project entitled ACCU-UNESCO
Asia-Pacific Innovation Programme for Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) which
explicitly mentions�������������������������
human rights is anotherimportant initiative in support of human rights
education with ESD.31
This is not to say however that human rights
education will have a prominent part in the ESD
programs in the region. Existing documentsfrom the UN institutions involved in ESD hardly mention human rights, while prominently
focusing on environment and development concerns.32 Among mainstream environmentalists
and development workers, human rights remain
a distant subject despite UN documents linking
environment, development and human rights.33
But due to the interest among the internationaland regional environmental and developmental
networks as well as some governments, ESD
provides a good opportunity for the promotion of human rights education in schools thatshould be maximized.

Regional initiatives
The Asia-Pacific governments had alreadyidentified human rights education as of 1998
as a priority issue for inter-governmental activities under the so-called Tehran Framework34 of
the UN-sponsored Asia-Pacific Workshop on
Regional Cooperation on Human Rights. Human rights education, along with other regional

Context of Human Rights Education in Asian Schools  187

priorities for action under the Tehran Framework,35 should therefore be a major focus ofattention among governments at both regionaland national levels.
The governments were supposed to undertake activities under the Tehran Framework suchas “sharing of information, the establishment ofconfidence-building measures and the development and strengthening of national capacities
for the promotion and protection of humanrights [that] are crucial in the step-by-step process towards establishing regional human rights
arrangements.”36
In the 13th Workshop on Regional Cooperation for the Promotion and Protection of
Human Rights in the Asia-Pacific, the governments declared:
18. Support the Plan of Action … for the firstphase (2005-2007) of the World Programme,devoted to the integration of human rights
education within the primary and secondary
school systems (emphasis mine)

Further, they declared that the Workshop

19. Encourages States to implement the [World
Programme] Plan of Action by strengthening
human rights education programmes in alllevels, types and channels of education in acomprehensive way that not only reviews andintegrates human rights elements in the curriculum, but also addresses educational policies andlegislation, teaching methodologies, the humanrights training and professional development ofteachers and other school personnel, and the fostering of learning environments which encourage
the full development of the human personality;37(emphasis mine)

Among the national human rights institutions in Asia and the Pacific, their network called
Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights
Institutions (APF) is an important source of
support for human rights education in schools.
In the Concluding Statement of the 10th Annual Meeting of APF (Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia,
24-26 August 2005), the member-institutions

stated that

The full realisation of the right to education
should include the provision of human rights
education for all, including for the disadvantaged
sectors of society and those living in remote orrural areas.38

This statement is significant in pointing
out an issue that some governments in theregion use to avoid human rights educationin schools. By arguing that their priority is thefulfillment of the right to education of theirchildren (especially those from disadvantaged
and marginalized communities), they say thatthey cannot undertake human rights education.
Right to education and human rights education
go together, only if the governments are willing to support them at the same time without
necessarily spending more resources. Humanrights education can be integrated in the usual
teacher-training, textbook development, andprogram development that governments undertake every now and then. Resources fromother institutions (be they governmental ornot) can also be mobilized in this regard. But
are governments willing to view the situationin this way?
The regional inter-governmental activities
notwithstanding, there are parallel inter-governmental efforts in South and Southeast Asiaand in the Pacific on human rights and humanrights education.

Subregional initiatives
The South Asian Association for Regional
Cooperation (SAARC) has adopted two humanrights instruments that provide a basis for cooperation in the field of human rights among thecountries involved. The South Asian Convention on Preventing and Combating Trafficking
in Women and Children for Prostitution and
the SAARC Convention on Regional Arrangements for the Promotion of Child Welfare in
South Asia were both signed in January 2002
and were subsequently ratified by the member

188  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

countries.39
The SAARC anti-trafficking convention
provides that

The State Parties to the Convention shall promoteawareness, inter-alia, through the use of themedia, of the problem of trafficking in Womenand Children and its underlying causes including
the projection of negative images of women.
(Article 8)

The SAARC children convention also provides support for human rights education when
it states that governments should

2. Work together with commitment and diligence, to facilitate and help in the development
and protection of the full potential of the South
Asian child, with understanding of the rights, duties and responsibilities as well as that of others…
(Article II - Purposes and Objectives)

The SAARC member countries reiterated their
aim at protecting and realizing the rights ofwomen and children through the Social Charter
that SAARC adopted in 2004.40 During theThirteenth Summit Meeting of SAARC heldin 2005, the heads of government noted the“ratification of SAARC Conventions relating
to Trafficking in Women and Children and Promotion of Child Welfare by all Member States
and called for effective measures for their early
implementation.”41
These subregional human rights instruments
are necessary in at least providing governments
in South Asia a basis for teaching international
human rights standards in schools (even if limited to women’s and child rights).
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations(ASEAN) also adopted a number of documents
related to human rights, namely:• Declaration on the Commitments for Children
in ASEAN (2 August 2001)• Declaration on the Elimination of Violence
Against Women in the ASEAN Region (13June 2004)• Declaration against Trafficking in Persons Particularly Women and Children (29 November

2004)• Vientiane Action Programme (29 November
2004)• Declaration on the Establishment of the ASEAN
Charter (12 December 2005).
The program areas and measures under theVientiane Action Programme include a provision
on promoting education and public awarenesson human rights.42
During the twelfth ASEAN Summit (January 2007), the member-States again adopted
a number of declarations that support humanrights, namely,
1. Cebu Declaration on the Blueprint of theASEAN Charter - which “will serve as a
firm foundation in achieving one ASEAN
Community by providing an enhanced institutional framework as well as conferringa legal personality to ASEAN.” High-levelgovernment officials will submit a draft
ASEAN Charter in the 13th ASEAN Summit in Singapore in November 2007. The
declaration recognizes the proposal for thecontents of the ASEAN Charter that includes human rights.43
2. ASEAN Declaration on the Protection andPromotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers- which provides among others the intensification of ASEAN governments’ “efforts
to protect the fundamental human rights,
promote the welfare and uphold humandignity of migrant workers.”
The planned ASEAN Charter is seen as apositive development in Southeast Asia because
it brings in a rule-based system, similar to theEuropean Union set-up. One editorial sees
the ASEAN Charter as strengthening ASEAN
by “giving it legal authority to make members
honor their obligations and commitment to theorganization in implementing policies and complying with its rules and regulations.”44 Thus itembodies a major policy shift needed to make
ASEAN a “community”.45 Hopefully, if theASEAN adopts the ASEAN Eminent Persons

Context of Human Rights Education in Asian Schools  189

Groups (EPG) proposals on the contents of theASEAN Charter, it will live up to the vision of“vibrant and open ASEAN societies consistent
with their respective national identities, where
all people enjoy equitable access to opportunities for total human development regardlessof gender, race, religion, language, or socialand cultural background.”46 Hopefully too,
the planned ASEAN Charter will make humanrights explicit in its provisions, in line withexisting ASEAN declarations and programs.
The EPG proposes the inclusion of the principle of “the rule of law including international
humanitarian law, and respect for human rights
and fundamental freedoms.”47
In July 2007, during the 40th ASEAN Ministerial Meeting in Manila, the draft ASEAN
Charter was approved with a provision for thecreation of a human rights body. The termsof reference of this body will be developed by
the High Level Task Force of ASEAN, which
drafted the ASEAN Charter that was adopted
during the ASEAN Summit in November 2007
in Singapore. In addition, the 40th ASEAN Ministerial Meeting approved the establishment of
an ASEAN Committee on the Implementationof the ASEAN Declaration on the Protection
and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers. It likewise approved the purposes, functions
and structure of the Committee.
Additionally, Southeast Asia has the Kuala
Lumpur Declaration on Human Rights adopted
by the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Organization (AIPO)48 in 1993. It is a significant document that should have an influence on ASEAN
governments. It supports the universal promotion and protection of human rights albeit undercertain conditions.
Similar to the situation in South Asia, theseinter-governmental declarations are bases forteaching human rights in schools. They relate
to human rights issues that are no longer subjectof debate in Southeast Asia, and thus should be
comfortable for education and school officials
to take up.
The Pacific has also moved towards a subre-

gional system through the Pacific Islands Forumby adopting the Pacific Plan for Strengthening
Regional Cooperation and Integration (PacificPlan) in 2007. The plan identifies as “a way
forward to strengthen human rights and development in the region, … a range of initiatives
for immediate implementation, in the first
three years (2006-2008).” Under the good
governance component of the Pacific Plan, themember-states will undertake “[W]here appropriate, ratification and implementation ofinternational and regional human rights conventions, covenants and agreements and support forreporting and other requirements.” It identifies
as milestone the following:

Regional support mechanism established by the2007 Forum. (Coverage to include the drafting,harmonisation and promotion of awareness ofrights-based domestic legislation within the
Pacific, including: CEDAW [Convention on
the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
against Women] on gender; CRC on children;
CERD on racial discrimination; ILO Convention
169 on rights of indigenous peoples; Article 50 of
the Cotonou Agreement on labour rights; 1990
International Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and their families; the Biwako Millennium Framework for people with disabilities;UNSCR1325 [United Nations Security Council
Resolution 135, 31 October 2000] involving
men and women in conflict resolution; humanrights; and reciprocal enforcement.)49

Both ASEAN and Pacific Islands Forumare discussing concrete steps related to humanrights. Under the VAP, ASEAN has identified
mainly four areas of human rights work:-	Establishment of network among the existing
national human rights institutions (Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines and Thailand)-	Development of a program on human rights
education-	Establishment of committees for women andchildren respectively-	Drafting of an agreement on migrant workers.50

190  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

From the experience so far of ASEAN and
Pacific Islands Forum, several components seemto be important to note. One is the promotionof human rights/human rights education. They
see the need to make the public become awareof human rights.51 They also want their existing
national human rights institutions to work moreclosely, and probably encourage other countries
to consider setting their own. They see the needto create the proper policy environment by
having international human rights instruments
signed and ratified.52
But they also recognize the resources needed
to implement the human rights plans and thus
training on human rights work (documentation, making reports on treaty obligations
compliance, human rights education, protection
measures, investigation and prosecution of violations, role of judiciary, etc.) is important. The
recent roundtable discussion on human rights
education in ASEAN proposes the setting up ofa training center for Southeast Asia.53
In terms of strategies, they want networking
and collaboration among institutions in theirrespective subregions such as the institutes ofstrategic studies (for ASEAN), universities,
non-governmental organizations (NGOs), government agencies, and national human rights
institutions.
To help monitor the extent of implementation of their plans, the development of accomplishment (success) indicators has been
proposed.54
Finally, it is worth noting that ASEAN has
the same process of having an Eminent Persons
Group as in the Pacific, which collected suggestions from various sectors of society and drafted
proposals (such as the draft of the ASEAN
Charter) that governments adopted.
These subregional initiatives parallel theregional workshops sponsored by the UN, butthey do not seem to be formally linked. If indeed
the subregional arrangement approach is morefeasible to create than a regional arrangement,
there is a need to support the former.

National initiatives
The best support that human rights education in schools can get are in the national plansfor human rights/human rights education. In the
Asia-Pacific region, the national human rights
institutions are important players in providing
support in this regard. At least nine national
human rights institutions in Asia and the Pacifichave adopted plans or the so-called “strategicplans” which include human rights education.
Table 5 provides the list of the national humanrights institutions with such plans.
Table 5. National Human Rights Institutions Action
Plans55
NHRI

Year Adopted

Philippines

1994

Mongolia
Fiji
Thailand
Nepal
Korea
JordanNew Zealand

2001

Afghanistan

200556

2001
2001
2003
2003
2004
2005

Additionally, some governments in the region separately adopted national action plans onhuman rights or human rights education.
Table 6. National Action Plans
NatureCountry

NAPHR

Australia
Philippines
LebanonJapan
Indonesia
Taiwan
India
Pakistan

HRE Plan
HRE Decree
HRE Plan/Law
NAPHR
HRE Plan
HRE Plan
HRE PlanYear
Adopted1993/2004
1996
1997
1997/2002
1998/2004
2001
2001
2001

Context of Human Rights Education in Asian Schools  191

NAPHR
NAPHR
HRE Plan

Mongolia
New ZealandCambodiaSouth Korea

2003
2005
2005
2007

NAPHR
Note: NAPHR = National Action Plan on Human
Rights; HRE Plan = National Human Rights Education Action Plan

Of these action plans, six are human rights
education plans. The other plans, though on
general human rights issues, have provisions
on human rights education.
With the exception of New Zealand, general
national action plans parallel those from thenational human rights institutions in several
countries. This indicates a significant focus
on human rights education in the countries
concerned.

Final notes
While the existence of plans and programson human rights education is important, thekey factor is their implementation.
DESD reminds us of the United Nations
Decade for Human Rights Education (19952004). But there is a major difference between
the two in terms of implementation mechanism. DESD has much developed mechanism
at international, regional and national levels.
It has the support of institutions that work on
environment issues – a very large constituency�
worldwide�������������������������������
. It has the support of UNESCO
whose field of expertise is in education, andUnited Nations University that provides thetechnical aspect of creating a network of centers of expertise������������������������������
for ESD in���������������������
various countries
around���������������������������������������
the��������������������������������������
globe. It has also the support of
the Japanese�������������������
government 57 (among many
governments)��������������������������������
which has been providing financial support including the funding of a projectby the ACCU�.58
There is a need to link up the different UN
programs to maximize their impact. As one

report states:59

c. Link among international programs on education. ESD aims to promote Education for All(EFA), UN Literacy Decade (UNLD), andMillennium Development Goals (MDG). But itshould also support equally important initiatives
such as the International Decade for a Culture ofPeace and Non-Violence for the Children of theWorld (2001-2010) and the World Programmefor Human Rights Education (WPHRE). It has
been observed that existing UN literature on
ESD do not include these initiatives which form
a constituent part of the concept of ESD.

The need to link different programs support
that view that “we will not enjoy development
without security, we will not enjoy security without development, and we will not enjoy either
without respect for human rights”60 – the very
restatement of the interrelatedness of humanrights as well as the relation between humanrights and other concerns of the UN. It is thus
recommended that

All UN agencies and programmes must
further support the development of policies,
directives and guidelines to integrate humanrights in all aspects of the UN’s work. The
UN Common Understanding on a Human
Rights-based Approach to Programming andthe UN-wide Action 2 Programme— developed and adopted by 21 heads of UN agencies,
programmes and departments—should provide
useful guidance in this.61

The programs on education of the different
UN agencies/programs/offices would therefore
be served well with the appropriate integrationof human rights education in them.
The same can be said of the “strategicplans” of national human rights institutions
and the national action plans of governments.
The linkages with every relevant institution in
implementing these plans will likely address
issues of mainstreaming, sustainability andprobably effectiveness.
On the same issue of interrelatedness, there192  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

is also a need to clarify the link between right toeducation, quality education and human rights
education. Some governments would like totreat human rights education as a separate issue,
and of lesser priority than right to education andquality education. But a rights-based approachto education provides the link between right toeducation, quality education and human rights�
education ��������������������������������
–�������������������������������
by������������������������������
arguing���������������������������
that�������������������
one cannot be
separated from the others. This is provided forin the Convention on the Rights of the Child,
which complements access to education withthe aims of education. Article 29 of the CRC
provides in part that the:1.
States Parties agree that the education of
the child shall be directed to:(a) The development of the child's personality,
talents and mental and physical abilities to theirfullest potential;(b) The development of respect for humanrights and fundamental freedoms, and for the
principles enshrined in the Charter of the United
Nations;

Thus the rights-based approach to education
is explained as follows:62

A quality education based on a human rights
approach means that the rights are implemented
throughout the whole education system and in alllearning environments. It means that the education systems are oriented towards human values
allowing the realisation of peace, social cohesion
and the respect for human dignity. This implies
reforming national education systems to include
fundamental change of education structures, themanagement of the education system, the teaching/learning practices, the revision and adaptationof learning materials, the adequate preparationof educational personnel, etc. This was also reaffirmed by the CRC: “every child has the right toreceive an education of good quality which inturn requires focus on the quality of the learning
environment, of teaching and learning processes
and materials, and of learning outputs.”

Considering the number of countries withweak (or non-existent) human rights education
programs in the school system, the adoptionof the rights-based approach to education to
be able to promote human rights as part ofthe mainstream education system is one area
to pursue.
While there are notable achievements interms of growth of human rights educationin the formal education systems in Asia, thequestion remains on why such developments
have not influenced many other countries ���inthe����������������������������
region from following suit.
With the rise ������������������������������
in the������������������������
number of institutions
as well as activities on human rights education,
at national and regional levels, why do many
governments still hesitate to implement
their repeated declaration of commitment
to supporting human rights education inschools?
In view of the diversity of the countries
on Asia, there is probably no single answer tothese questions. Each country may have its own
peculiar reason for either supporting humanrights education in general, or neglecting it.
What is important to note is that despite thehesitance of some governments to fully engage
in human rights education in general, and human rights education in schools in particular,
other institutions are continuing the importanttask of making people better their lives with theunderstanding and realization of human rights– theirs and those of others.

Endnotes
1
In general, when Asian governments are asked
whether or not human rights education exists in theirformal education systems the answer may fall under
any of the following:- 	�����������������������������������
Civic education (Vietnam, Malaysia)- Moral studies (Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan)- 	Legal education (Philippines, China, Mongolia)- Religious education (Malaysia, Pakistan)- Values education (Thailand, Philippines, India, South
Korea)

Context of Human Rights Education in Asian Schools  193-

Peace education (Thailand, South Korea, Philippines)- Gender and development education (Philippines).
Other countries not listed above may cite othereducations as vehicles for human rights education in
their school systems.
2
HURIGHTS OSAKA, Schools, Human Rights andSociety - Report of the 1998 Workshops on Human Rights
Education in Schools (Osaka: HURIGHTS OSAKA,
1999) available in www.hurights.or.jp/database/
E/98wsrpt/index.html.
3
Ibid.
4
See World Plan of Action for Education on Human
Rights and Democracy adopted at The International
Congress on Education for Human Rights and
Democracy, Montreal, Canada, 8 to 11 March 1993.
The Pune Declaration on “Education for Human
Rights in Asia and the Pacific” adopted by the Asia &Pacific-Regional Conference on Education for Human
Rights, Pune, India, 6 February 1999.
5
The definition of human rights education under
the Plan of Action of the UN Decade has been reiterated
in the World Programme first phase plan, see United
Nations General Assembly resolution A/RES/59/113,
10 December 2004.
6
See Purificacion Valera Qusiumbing and Lydia
Navarro Agno, editors, Teacher Practical Law – Level
1 (Quezon city: University of the Philippines Law
Complex, 1987).
7
See Lawrence W. Beer, editor, Constitutional
Systems in late Twentieth Century Asia (Seattle:
University of Washington Press, 1992) for a discussion
on how to evaluate constitutions in terms of humanrights.
8
See Learning to Live Together in Peace and Harmony,
Values Education for Peace, Human Rights, Democracy
and Sustainable Development for the Asia-Pacific Region,
A UNESCO-APNIEVE Sourcebook for Teacher Education
and Tertiary Level Education (Bangkok: UNESCO
Principal Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific,
1998).
9
See 2003 Annual Report UNESCO Office,Jakarta (Bangkok: Regional Science Bureau for Asiaand the Pacific).
10
These values are: Care and Compassion,
Doing Your Best, Fair Go, Freedom, Honesty andTrustworthiness, Integrity, Respect, Responsibility,and Understanding, Tolerance and Inclusion. ����See
http://www.valueseducation.edu.au/values/default.
asp?id=8757
11
Richard Pierre Claude, “Human Rights Educationin Asia”, in Michael Jacobsen and Ole Bruun, editors,

Human Rights and Asian Values (Surrey: Curzon Press,
2000), page 289.
12
See Human Rights Education Teaching Exemplars
for Elementary/Secondary Schools (Quezon city/Pasig
city: Commission on Human Rights and Departmentof Education, 2003).
13
See UNESCO, http://portal.unesco.org/
e d u c a t i o n / e n / e v. p h p - U R L _ I D = 4 6 1 1 & U R L _DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
14
Citizenship Education, in http://portal.unesco.
org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID=4732&URL_
DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
15
Submission of the Human Rights and Equal
Opportunity Commission to the Joint Standing
Committee on Electoral Matters regarding Inquiry
into Civics and Electoral Education (2 June 2006).
16
See Mandla Mchunu, Karthy Govender, Edward
L O'brien, Mary Curd Larkin, Democracy for all:education towards a democratic culture (Kenwyn: Juta
and Co. Ltd., 1994).
17
See Ch. Altangerel, “Human Rights Educationin Mongolia Schools: Present State and Challenges”
in Human Rights Education in Asian Schools 9:66. The
Open Society Institute Street Law Network Program,for example, has national programs in Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan.
18
See Sungmi Lee, “Korean National Human
Rights Commission: Spearheading Human Rights
Education in Schools,” Human Rights Education in
Asian Schools 10.
19
See Chia Fan Lin, “Student Rights and Human
Rights Education: Taiwan’s Experience,” Human
Rights Education in Asian Schools 10.
20
See George M. Jacobs, Zhuo Qiong-yan,
Patricia C. Jocson, Marti Sevier, Ong Chye Wah, Maria
Elizabeth D. Austria and Winnie Teo, “Asian Views on
Gender-inclusive English” in Human Rights Educationin Asian Schools 4.
21
The discussion under this section is taken fromJefferson R. Plantilla, “Educational Policies and Human
Rights Awareness – Linking Two Ends of the Human
Rights Education Spectrum,” Educational Policies andHuman Rights Awareness – Japan, the Philippines, India
and Sri Lanka (New Delhi: Academic Excellence,2008) pages 242-264.
22
The Japanese version of the survey questionnaire
has only 29 items. This is due to the disapproval by the
local education board of the issues being discussed in
the other items. See Yoshiro Nabeshima, “Education
Policies and Human Rights Awareness of Secondary
School Students in Japan” in Educational Policies andHuman Rights Awareness – Japan, the Philippines, India
and Sri Lanka, ibid.

194  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS
23
This result however has to be qualified by thefact that the Philippine questionnaire has three related
items – 1) media, 2) television and radio, and 3)
newspapers and magazines – for respondents to choose
from (multiple-choice format). And there is a higher
percentage of responses citing television/radio (82%) assource of human rights knowledge than family (78%).
See Nava, et al., Human Rights Education in Philippine
Schools (Manila: Philippine Normal University, 2007)
page 68.
24
See HURIGHTS OSAKA, “������������������
Training Workshop
on Human Rights Lesson Plans” in Human Rights
Education in Asian Schools 9 for more discussion on theactivities of HURIGHTS OSAKA in Southeast Asia.
25
The Human Rights Lesson Plans for Southeast Asian
Schools, English version, is available in the following
websites:a. UNESCO Asia-Pacific Bureau of Educationwww.unescobkk.org/index.php?id=3125
b. Friedrich Naumann Foundation Manila Officewww.fnfasia.org/news/regionalnews/humanrights_lesson_plan.htm
c. University of Minnesota
www1.umn.edu/humanrts/edumat/
http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/edumat/
SoutheastAsianHRE.pdf
d. Human Rights Education Associates (HREA)
http://www.hrea.org/erc/Library/display.php?doc_
id=2971&category_id=18&category_type=3
e. Amnesty International Australia
www.amnesty.org.au/resources/teachers
f. HURIGHTS OSAKA
www.hurights.or.jp/education_e.html#5
26
Based on e-mail messages of Chiam Heng Keng
(29 April 2005) and Mahmood Maharom (19 May
2005) on the citizenship and civic education courses.
27
Based on e-mail message of Chin Yahan (22 July2005).
28
Based on Plantilla, “Educational Policies andHuman Rights Awareness – Linking Two Ends of the
Human Rights Education Spectrum, ” op. cit., pages
239-240.
29
General�����������������������������������������
Information Paper ���������������
for the��������
UNESCO�������
Expert Meeting on Education for Sustainable
Development (ESD):��������������������������
�������������������������
Reorienting Education to
Address Sustainability������������������������������
(����������������������������
1-3 May 2006����������������
, Kanchanaburi,��������������
Thailand�)
30
UNESCO, Ibid.
31����������������������������������������
See “ACCU-UNESCO
������������������������������������
Asia-Pacific Programme
for ESD”���
in FOCUS Asia-Pacific, issue number 43 ����forthe�����������������������������������������������
����������������������������������������������
announcement����������������������������������
on the project. The announcementisalsoavailable
atwww.hurights.or.jp/asia������������������������
pacific/043/09.html

32
See Jefferson R. Plantilla, “From WPHRE to
ESD: Opportunities and Challenges for HRE” inBuraku Liberation News, number 139, 1st quarter 2006
(Osaka, Japan).
33
See Plantilla, ibid.
34
Annex II, Further Promotion and Encouragementof Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,
Including the Question of the Programme and Methodsof Work of the Commission (E/CN.4/1998/50 - 12
March 1998).
35
The other priorities are national plans of action
for the promotion and protection of human rights
and the strengthening of national capacities; national
institutions for the promotion and protection of humanrights; and strategies for the realization of the right todevelopment and economic, social and cultural rights
36
Ibid. This document mentions the agreement in
the Amman workshop in 1997 regarding the step-bystep approach toward discussing regional arrangement
for human rights in the Asia-Pacific.
37
A similar statement was also adopted in theConcluding Statement of the 12th Workshop on
Regional Cooperation for the Promotion and Protectionof Human Rights in the Asia-Pacific (Doha, Qatar, 2-4
March 2004). This shows either the determination of
the governments to pursue the issue or the need forthem to be reminded repeatedly on what they havepreviously agreed to in order for concrete action to takeplace at the national level.
38
http://asiapacificforum.net/annual_meetings/
tenth/concluding.htm
39
Paragraph 26, Dhaka Declaration, Thirteenth
Summit meeting of the South Asian Association for
Regional Cooperation (SAARC) (Dhaka, Bangladesh
on 12 - 13 November 2005) in www.saarc-sec.org/
main.php?id=159&t=7.1
40
See SAARC Social Charter, www.saarc-sec.org/
main.php?id=13
41
Dhaka Declaration, op. cit.
42
See reference number 1.1.4, Political
Development, ASEAN Security Community, Annex
1 of the Vientiane Action Programme, www.aseansec.
org/16474.htm.
43
The Eminent Persons Group of ASEAN
presented the proposals.
44“ASEAN charter big step forward forrevitalization” editorial of The Nation, 16 January 2007
(Bangkok, Thailand).
45“Will envisioned ASEAN charter change
ASEAN?” Editorial of The Daily Yomiuri, 16 January
2007 (Tokyo, Japan).
46
ASEAN Vision 2020 (Kuala Lumpur, 15
December 1997)

Context of Human Rights Education in Asian Schools  195
47
See summary of proposals of the Eminent
Persons Group to ASEAN on the provisions of theplanned ASEAN Charter, www.mfa.gov.sg/internet/press/16012007/
48
ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Organization(AIPO) 14th AIPO General Assembly Kuala Lumpur(September 1993).
49
See Good Governance, Attachment A.
Implementation Strategy: Initiatives for the First
Three Years (2006-2008), Pacific Plan for Strengthening
Regional Cooperation and Integration (Pacific Plan),November 2007, page 19. Full document of PacificPlan available in www.pacificplan.org.
50
See Annex I of the VAP, pages 28-29.
51
Ibid.
52
Pacific Plan, page 7, op. cit.
53
See report on this roundtable discussion
organized by the ASEAN Working Group (March
23-25, 2006, Bangkok) in FOCUS Asia-Pacific, issue
number 43 (March 2006).
54
See Attachment B. Pacific Plan 2006-2015:
Monitoring and Evaluation Framework of the PacificPlan, page 19, op, cit.
55
Taken from Jefferson Plantilla Creating Synergy:NGOs and NHRIs for HRE, powerpoint presentationin the Regional Workshop on NHRIs-NGOs
Cooperation (30 November – 1 December 2006)
Bangkok, Thailand organized by the Asian Forum for
Human Rights and Development.
56
The date of the Afghan NHRI action plan is notconfirmed to be 2005.
57
The���������������������������������������
Japanese funding support is called JapaneseFunds in Trust.
58
Plantilla, “From WPHRE to ESD: Opportunities
and Challenges for HRE,” op. cit., page 7.
59
HURIGHTS OSAKA, “UNESCO Expert
Meeting on ESD: Reorienting Education to Address
Sustainability” in FOCUS Asia-Pacific, in www.
hurights.or.jp/asia-pacific/044/05.html
60
Cited in the report of the Secretary-General’sHigh-level Panel on UN System-wide Coherence in
the Areas of Development, Humanitarian Assistance,
and the Environment entitled Delivering as One(advanced, unedited version, November 2006) page
26 in www.un.org/events/panel/resources/ pdfs/HLPSWC-FinalReport.pdf.
61
Ibid., page 27.
62
Human Rights Education at the Heart of Quality
Education in http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/
ev.php-URL_ID=4731&URL