Answer the two questions below, each question is equally weighted, mark-wise. Answers should each be between 2000-2500 words
(excluding footnotes/endnotes, if any). Footnotes are not necessary but may be used if you feel the need
to indicate source materials, but for no other purpose i.e. no substantive arguments in footnotes. These questions seek to test my mastery of course materials and the ideas we engaged with during
seminars. Your answer should be analytical, critical and reflective rather than descriptive. It is expected, in my responses, to closely engage with and draw extensively from HRA course readings, the relevant human
rights instruments and case studies. The research paper should include information from the course materials and should present a clear, distinct view or an argument that is well-backed up by the course materials. Credit will be awarded where apt and specific references are made.
No further research is needed or expected. I will insert all the course materials in a Google Drive in this assignment listing. (https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1zC7LLWa90dYit6M9FOeNpZn3diYWEqSD?usp=sharing) Take note that the responses SHOULD not plagarise work online because it will be put through an extremely strict plagarism checker. Be careful to paraphrase or restructure points taken from online work or such course materials. 
Q1: ‘Considering the actual or perceived weakness of regional and international regimes for human rights
promotion and protection in Asia, the primary approach for advancing the project of human rights in Asian
states should be through a focus on developing and strengthening the domestic legal system. This would
include aligning constitutional bills of rights and legislation with international standards and empowering
judicial and non-judicial national institutions with a mandate to promote/protect human rights. While not
ideal, given the challenges and limitations national institutions may face in vindicating rights, such a focus
has several advantages. This includes disabusing authoritarian state claims that human rights are a foreign
imposition and intervention in internal affairs, as well as cultivating awareness and consciousness of the
importance of rights amongst state officials and local civil society actors alike.’
Is this too modest a view? What do you think is the best approach/approaches towards advancing human
rights in Asia? Drawing from course materials and discussions, provide examples of successful or
unsuccessful efforts in both national and regional/international contexts to support your argument.
Q2: ‘While ‘religion’ may be a conversation-stopper in Western secular settings, it is a conversation-starter
beyond the West, particularly in Asia, which is the birthplace of all the world’s major religions, where
religion is frequently of political importance and/or important to the daily lives of many Asians.
Should religion and human rights as a ‘secular religion’ be in conversation to find common ground in
the interests of advancing the principle and project of universal human rights in Asia? To what extent
might religion facilitate or impede this project? Discuss, illustrating your arguments with specific
examples.