ASEAN’s Indigenous Rights Challenge: Can Malaysia’s Leadership Spark Change?

Across Southeast Asia, the rights of indigenous peoples remain perilously overlooked, despite their critical role as custodians of biodiversity and cultural heritage. As Malaysia assumes the chairmanship of ASEAN in 2025, the bloc faces a pivotal moment to address this long-standing neglect. With a region home to diverse indigenous communities—from the Orang Asli of Malaysia to the ethnic groups of Indonesia’s Kalimantan—there is growing urgency for meaningful policy reform. Could Malaysia, under Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, lead the charge to elevate indigenous rights within ASEAN’s agenda?

The record of ASEAN member states on indigenous rights is, at best, inconsistent. Only a handful of countries, such as Malaysia and the Philippines, formally recognize indigenous groups, while others, including Indonesia, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam, lag behind despite international commitments. All ASEAN nations endorsed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) in 2007, yet implementation remains patchy. Indonesia, for instance, amended its constitution in 2000 to acknowledge traditional communities under Article 18b-2, but legal protections for indigenous groups are still inadequate, leaving many vulnerable to land encroachments and cultural erosion.

Malaysia itself is not without challenges. As the current ASEAN chair, it bears a unique responsibility to set a regional example. The country recognizes indigenous peoples as Orang Asal or Orang Asli, yet struggles persist. In Sabah, for example, the Rungus communities of Bangau Beach in Kudat district face displacement due to a silica sand mining project led by China-based Kibing Group. Touted as an energy transition initiative for solar panel production, the project has disrupted local marine ecosystems and customary lands, including mangroves and coastal areas vital to the community’s livelihood. Reports of indigenous women being falsely charged with trespassing for accessing their own forests highlight the stark power imbalances at play.

Beyond national borders, the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration—a document already criticized for its lack of teeth—barely addresses indigenous rights, rendering it ineffective for the region’s most marginalized groups. Indigenous peoples are not merely stakeholders in cultural preservation; they are key to achieving global targets like the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of Agenda 2030. Their traditional knowledge of ecosystems positions them as indispensable allies in combating climate change, yet their voices remain sidelined in regional policymaking.

Malaysia’s Opportunity: A Turning Point for ASEAN?

Malaysia’s leadership of ASEAN offers a rare chance to shift the narrative. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has the opportunity to champion a broader debate on indigenous rights, particularly as the bloc drafts the ASEAN Declaration on Environmental Rights. This forthcoming document, intended to outline the region’s commitment to environmental protection, has raised concerns among advocates for failing to address indigenous land rights, resource management, and the principle of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC)—a cornerstone of UNDRIP that ensures communities are consulted before projects impact their territories.

Robeliza Halip, interim executive director of the Right Energy Partnership with Indigenous Peoples (REP), emphasizes the need for Malaysia to push for stronger protections. In correspondence with this correspondent, she expressed hope that Malaysia’s representative to the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), Edmund Bon Tai Soon, would advocate for a robust protection mandate rather than vague promotional rhetoric. “We must strengthen engagement with indigenous peoples through consultations to understand their situation,” Halip noted, underscoring the AICHR’s potential role despite its limited influence within ASEAN’s complex bureaucracy.

Halip and other advocates argue that the ASEAN Declaration on Environmental Rights must explicitly recognize indigenous rights to ancestral lands, waters, and coastal resources, as well as their traditional knowledge systems. Without such provisions, the declaration risks becoming another missed opportunity. Lobbying environment ministries across ASEAN member states is critical, she added, given their central role in shaping the document.

Regional Disparities and Shared Struggles

The challenges faced by indigenous peoples vary across ASEAN but share common themes: land dispossession, lack of legal recognition, and exclusion from decision-making. In Indonesia, despite constitutional nods to traditional communities, indigenous groups like those in Kayan Mentarang National Park—recently honored with the UN Equator Prize for their conservation efforts—still face systemic barriers to securing land titles and protections. Their recognition on the global stage contrasts sharply with domestic neglect.

In Vietnam and Laos, indigenous ethnic minorities often lack formal acknowledgment, with state policies prioritizing national development over cultural preservation. Thailand, meanwhile, struggles with tensions in its southern provinces, where indigenous and ethnic communities face overlapping issues of identity, land rights, and political representation. Even in the Philippines, which hosted an AICHR workshop in December 2024 on indigenous knowledge and climate change, progress remains incremental against a backdrop of broader human rights concerns.

These disparities underscore the need for a unified regional approach—one that Malaysia could spearhead. A bold proposal gaining traction among activists is the creation of a permanent, autonomous mechanism for indigenous peoples within ASEAN. Such a body, led by indigenous representatives, could serve as a platform to address critical issues like land rights, cultural preservation, and climate resilience. While its resolutions might not be binding, formal interactions with ASEAN organs could amplify indigenous voices in policymaking, setting a precedent not just for Southeast Asia but for the wider Asian continent.

Conditional Hopes Amid Structural Barriers

The path forward is fraught with obstacles. ASEAN’s consensus-driven model often stifles bold reforms, and member states remain protective of national sovereignty, wary of external scrutiny on domestic issues like indigenous rights. Malaysia’s chairmanship, while promising, operates within these constraints. If Anwar Ibrahim’s administration prioritizes indigenous issues, it may inspire incremental progress—perhaps through enhanced AICHR consultations or stronger language in the ASEAN Declaration on Environmental Rights. However, without sustained political will across the bloc, such efforts risk remaining symbolic.

There is also the question of enforcement. Even if a permanent indigenous mechanism were established, its effectiveness would hinge on member states’ willingness to engage. As Halip cautioned, high-level political engagement—not just with AICHR but with ASEAN’s top leadership—is essential. Without it, indigenous communities may continue to face violations, from land encroachments in Sabah to cultural suppression in remote areas of Laos and Vietnam.

A Vision for ASEAN 2045

Looking ahead, the draft of ASEAN Vision 2045—a strategic roadmap for the bloc’s future—offers another avenue to embed indigenous rights. Advocates argue that it must reaffirm the role of indigenous peoples in shaping a sustainable and inclusive Southeast Asia. Malaysia could push for language that acknowledges their contributions to environmental stewardship and cultural diversity, aligning regional goals with global frameworks like UNDRIP and the SDGs.

The stakes are high. Indigenous peoples are not just victims of neglect; they are active agents of change, preserving ecosystems and traditions that benefit the region as a whole. Malaysia’s chairmanship is a test of whether ASEAN can evolve beyond its reputation for prioritizing economic growth over human rights. If successful, it could mark a turning point, inspiring other regions to follow suit. If not, the bloc risks perpetuating a cycle of marginalization that undermines its own aspirations for a cohesive, sustainable future.

For now, advocates like Halip remain cautiously optimistic. The Philippines’ recent workshop on indigenous knowledge and climate change, while limited in scope, signals that dialogue is possible. Malaysia must build on such initiatives, ensuring that indigenous voices are not just heard but acted upon. As the region grapples with the twin crises of environmental degradation and social inequality, the rights of its first peoples cannot remain an afterthought. The question is whether ASEAN, under Malaysia’s stewardship, will rise to the challenge—or let another opportunity slip through its fingers.