A recent complaint filed by the International Federation for Human Rights and the Vietnam Committee on Human Rights has brought attention to whether the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA) upholds human rights provisions, amidst Vietnam’s suppression of activists. VCHR president, Penelope Faulkner, urged the EU to enforce accountability, highlighting the distress faced by defenders who advocate for community rights amidst escalating pressures.
For decades, the EU has incorporated human rights clauses in its trade agreements; however, critics argue that it often fails to enforce these commitments. Ben Swanton from The 88 Project emphasised the contradiction of including human rights conditions if there is no genuine enforcement intention, questioning the effectiveness of such agreements in spurring social changes.
Ahead of the 2020 ratification of the EVFTA, activists pressed for binding human rights provisions and mechanisms to activate suspension clauses for serious violations. Despite these efforts, claims arose that the EU ultimately accepted Vietnam’s assurances without insisting on enforceable measures. Journalist Pham Chi Dung faced arrest shortly after advocating for a delay in the agreement’s ratification due to human rights concerns.
The EU’s advisory system, intended to ensure compliance with human rights and environmental commitments, appears flawed. Independent NGOs, essential for unbiased oversight, found their application rejected by the Vietnamese government, leaving only state-affiliated representatives. This has raised alarms about the reliability of the monitoring process from the very start, with activists facing imprisonment for advocating genuine civil society participation.
Some human rights advocates express scepticism about the EU’s commitment, suggesting that economic interests now overshadow ethical considerations. An anonymous activist pointed out the EU’s reluctance to confront Vietnam, citing the growth of EU-Vietnam trade from €35 billion to €52 billion since the implementation of the EVFTA, starkly illustrating the competing interests at play.
In light of the recent complaint, discussions have emerged on whether the EU should seek alternative avenues beyond free trade frameworks to promote human rights. Concerns have also arisen about EU negotiations with other Southeast Asian nations, such as Thailand, where issues surrounding migrant worker rights are prominent, echoing the EU’s need to reassess its approach amid unsatisfactory enforcement of existing agreements.
Asserting the necessity for enforcement, experts caution that the EU’s failure to uphold EVFTA provisions undermines effective human rights applications elsewhere. Previous instances, such as suspending Cambodia’s trade benefits, demonstrate the EU’s potential to respond to human rights violations, raising questions about why similar measures are not taken with Vietnam, where conditions have deteriorated.
In seeking to reform its approach, the EU has initiated plans for a more rigorous assessment of trade deals’ sustainability and human rights mechanisms. Following a review in 2022, the EU committed to enhancing the enforcement of trade agreements and will implement stronger conditionality. While this new strategy has the potential to rectify previous shortcomings, analysts urge caution, awaiting tangible changes in enforcement efficacy.
The EVFTA faces scrutiny after a complaint raised by human rights groups accuses Vietnam of violating its provisions amid ongoing crackdowns on activists. Despite human rights clauses traditionally included in EU trade agreements, critics argue the EU fails to enforce these commitments. The potential for economic interests to overshadow ethical considerations complicates the situation, prompting discussions on alternative measures for the EU to advocate for human rights.
The unfolding situation between the EU and Vietnam regarding the EVFTA presents a complex narrative of trade, economics, and human rights. While the EU has mechanisms in place to advocate for compliance with human rights standards, its consistent enforcement remains in question. Advocacy groups continue to pressure for accountability, urging stronger actions from the EU to align trade agreements with ethical commitments. As the EU navigates this challenging landscape, its next steps in addressing these concerns will be pivotal in determining its long-term credibility and influence in global human rights advocacy.
Original Source: www.dw.com
