Democratic Deficits: Is there Hope for Free Speech in ASEAN?

Across much of Southeast Asia, free speech liberties have come under attack. While the value of free speech and assembly have historically been a point of contention among the region’s governments and their citizens, the advent of social media and the rise in liberal beliefs associated with younger generations have greatly shifted the region’s landscape. Singapore’s first prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew, once insisted that foreign journalists could not be allowed to “assume a role in Singapore that the American media play in America. That of invigilator, adversary, and inquisitor of the administration. If allowed to do so, they will radically change the nature of Singapore society.”

As exemplified by Lee Kuan Yew’s remarks, many of the region’s leaders value upholding social harmony over protecting free speech rights. However, the perception of free speech and social harmony as opposing values should not incentivize governments to employ anti-democratic practices toward their citizens. Worrying restrictions on press freedom and dissent toward government officials are part of a growing trend of authoritarian-leaning governments curbing citizens’ human rights, in turn reflecting an erosion of democratic norms.

Unpacking the region’s declining freedom of speech landscape carries implications for the United States’ engagement in Southeast Asia. Given that the United States is the region’s largest source for foreign investment and a key partner in political cooperation, Washington should recenter its focus on human rights concerns while working to strengthen its regional partnerships amid great power competition. Beyond focusing on fortifying ties with Southeast Asia’s leaders, the United States should equally prioritize the legitimate beneficiaries of U.S. economic contributions: the region’s citizens. To ensure the region’s political stability, the United States should prioritize long-term goals by documenting restrictions on free speech and partnering with local stakeholders to encourage citizens’ liberatory speech. 

Southeast Asia’s Legislative Landscape

Regional sociocultural perceptions have significantly shaped countries’ ability to regulate expression. In the World Press Freedom Index, all the countries in Southeast Asia—other than Timor Leste—sit at the bottom half of the index, with Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam all ranked below 150 in the 180-country list.

The members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have a wide spectrum of regime types that correlate to their free speech environments. The member states’ political landscapes results in measures that curb free speech, variously justified by a deference to monarchy, national security concerns, or religious conservatism.

Lèse-majesté Laws

A significant contributor to the region’s perception of free speech are lèse-majesté laws in several countries. Lèse-majesté, or laws prohibiting speech criticizing members of the monarchy, applies in four countries with established monarchies: Brunei, Cambodia, Malaysia, and especially Thailand. 

Thailand’s lèse-majesté laws impose the harshest penalties, with a maximum term of 15 years in prison. Prosecutions under lèse-majesté in Thailand have shot up in recent years, with at least 272 people charged since 2020. The rise in charges has coincided with youth-led protests in 2020 and 2021 advocating for the reform of Thailand’s monarchical system. By preventing citizens from criticizing the constitutional order, Thailand restricts their ability to dissent in a transparent and democratic manner. Thailand’s Constitutional Court on August 7 disbanded the reformist Move Forward Party, which won a plurality of seats in 2023 national elections, for attempting to “overthrow the [...] government” by campaigning to amend the lèse-majesté law.

National Security Concerns

In the cases of Singapore and the Philippines, national security concerns are cited as a primary reason for curbing citizens’ speech, with government leaders pointing to the threat of terrorist organizations as justification for restrictive laws on free expression. 

While Singapore’s constitution formally enshrines citizens’ freedom of speech, the parliament is legally obliged to restrict speech “in the interest of the security of the country [...], friendly relations with other countries, [and] public order or morality.” These restrictions have been applied in cases of law enforcement operations, which allow police officials to restrict photos or videos if they breach the pursuit of an operation. Additionally, press outlets are forbidden from publishing any work that could spur disobedience or incite violence, resulting in news outlets’ self-censorship of potentially controversial content. In addition, protests are heavily restricted to a designated area, in turn removing the ability for citizens to engage in political action in a spontaneous manner. 

In the Philippines, the Anti-Terrorism Act passed under former president Rodrigo Duterte uses the specter of terrorism as a basis to prosecute government critics and activists. According to the law, individuals who “propose, incite, conspire, and participate” in an act of terrorism face imprisonment of up to 12 years and can be detained without a warrant for up to 24 days. Political activistscommunity organizers, and local journalists have all fallen victim to the Anti-Terrorism Act, further reinforced by the government’s practice of “red-tagging” opponents—accusing them without evidence of being involved in the communist insurgency. Spearheaded by the National Task Force to End the Local Communist Armed Conflict, accusations of an individual’s affiliation with communist organizations have resulted in high-profile arrests and killings by vigilante groups. The Philippine Supreme Court in May finally ruled the practice a violation of citizens’ rights. 

Religious Conservatism

Religious conservatism has also been used as an excuse to curb free speech. In Indonesia, the religious sensibilities of its Muslim-majority population have at times been weaponized

Blasphemy laws are increasingly used for political purposes, most famously the 2017 arrest of then Jakarta governor Basuki “Ahok” Tjahaja Purnama. In another case, an online influencer produced a viral video wherein she ate pork while reciting a prayer, culminatingin her being sentenced to two years in prison for “inciting hatred” against religious groups. The severity of blasphemy convictions has prompted the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) to recommend that the State Department place Indonesia on a Special Watch List due to violations of religious freedom.

A Toolkit for a Transparent Information Environment

It is imperative for the United States to collaborate with public and private stakeholders to reframe Southeast Asian countries’ understanding of free speech as a net positive for political stability. By promoting democratic liberties, the region opens itself up to economic growth by ensuring the allocation of public goods in an equitable manner, reducing social unrest among citizens, and incentivizing external partners to invest in democratic societies.

The U.S. government practice of reporting human rights conditions on the ground is a positive precedent in shaping future engagements with the region. In particular, the USCIRF and State Department publish reports on the state of religious freedom and human rights practices in countries within the region. Further, through professional exchange programs, the United States pursues journalist-centered tours and youth engagement initiatives to facilitate knowledge transfer between the United States and Southeast Asia. The United States should do more to encourage liberatory speech and protect activists and journalists from government suppression.

Reforms in the region’s information environment not only boost people-to-people ties, but also enhance economic cooperation with the private sector. Restrictions on the flow of information are significant hindrances for U.S.-based companies, resulting in higher barriers of entry for foreign investment due to the costs of compliance with countries’ censorship policies. By promoting a culture of self-censorship for companies directing investment to Southeast Asia, the region risks foregoing significant revenue that could accelerate economic development.

But efforts by the United States to convince regional leaders to reassess illiberal legislation surrounding free expression is often met with hostility, as perceived violations of national autonomy and the principle of non-intervention. As such, the United States must strike a fine balance by empowering countries to act of their own volition in reforming legislation. 

To circumvent this dilemma, the United States should continue to engage with civil society actors in the region to encourage the growth of a critical and media-literate population as the key to reforming the region’s information environment from the bottom-up. U.S. engagements should include:

  • Assisting in information and civic literacy programs among local media groups;
  • Increasing funding to support local journalism outlets;
  • Contributing to public audits of the region’s social media data, which consist of investigations of both algorithms and platform content by independent bodies to regulate legitimate instances of disinformation and track online discrimination
  • Providing dialogue opportunities for youth to encourage political engagement;
  • and providing resources for journalists and activists to engage in exchanges in the United States.

By leveraging the United States’ historical legacy of championing democratic liberties, Washington can work closely with stakeholders to promote liberatory speech. Existing measures curbing speech based on a deference to monarchy, national security concerns, or religious conservatism severely limit public discourse. More than ever, the United States should seek to reinvigorate Southeast Asia’s marketplace of ideas, where values affirming freedom of expression, fact-driven reporting, and mutual respect exist in an egalitarian framework.

Amelie De Leon is a research intern with the Southeast Asia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.

Amelie De Leon

Research Intern, Southeast Asia Program