MANILA, Philippines—It turned out that ASEAN Secretary-General Surin Pitsuwan’s confidence was not misplaced. While on a visit to Manila last July, the Thai politician who now heads the Jakarta-based secretariat of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, said he was fully confident the Philippine Senate would ratify the ASEAN Charter. He expressed his view despite the lack of assurance from any of the senators he had spoken with and despite the lack of a sense of urgency among senators about calendaring a vote on the charter.

On Wednesday, the Senate voted for the measure 16-1, with the lone dissenting vote cast by Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr.

The ratification brings the 10-member regional grouping one more step closer to the next stage of organizational integration. Only Indonesia has yet to ratify the charter, which was passed in Singapore last year and is scheduled for promulgation in Bangkok at the end of this year. (In Jakarta, however, ratification gained a boost on Wednesday following the endorsement of a legislative committee. Indonesia is expected to ratify the charter by next week.)

The charter opens a new chapter in the history of ASEAN. Essentially, it allows the regional association, which has ever-closer economic ties, to speed up integration on the political front. It seeks to uphold democratic ideals and to protect human rights—a giant leap forward, considering the history of the member-countries.

But it is precisely because of this complex history that Pimentel voted against ratification. His no vote is a protest against the human rights situation in Burma (Myanmar), and in particular against the lack of a real ASEAN mechanism for enforcing human rights or of real sanctions in case of violations.

Pimentel’s concern is echoed in Indonesia, too, the largest ASEAN member. “At first, we felt that if countries like Myanmar are not obliged to comply with what they sign, then ratifying the charter would be worthless,” Indonesian Foreign Ministry spokesman Teuku Faizasyah said.

Call it the curse of the junta. The adverse consequences of the decision to allow Burma entry into ASEAN continue to haunt the regional alliance. Membership was predicated on the assumption that constructive engagement would work. As far as we can see, it has worked only in the aftermath of the devastating calamity that killed hundreds of thousands of Burmese citizens, when the junta needed both to source outside aid and to save face by coursing the aid through ASEAN. In other instances, such as last year’s crackdown on protesting monks or the never-ending detention of democratic icon Aung San Suu Kyi, the military generals who rule a once-great country have almost always turned a deaf ear to ASEAN.

Thus, the ratification of the charter is yet another gamble that the policy of constructive engagement will work. In the rationalizing words of the Indonesian foreign ministry spokesman, “But Myanmar’s ratification is progress. We’re counting on Myanmar to gradually comply with the charter.”

To be sure, keeping Burma aligned is not the only reason for ratifying the ASEAN Charter. A generation ago, when China remained inward-looking and Japan was ascendant, ASEAN filled a real need: It served as the regional broker. (Or, in the imagery current then, it sat “on the driver’s seat.”) Some of the lasting legacies of ASEAN, such as the annual 10+3 summit meetings or the highly influential but largely uncredited ASEAN Regional Forum for security issues, carry that broker’s character. But in the new world order, ASEAN’s place in the sun has become less than assured.

Economically as well as politically, it needs to integrate closer to remain relevant. That is the real reason the charter needs ratifying.