Thailand and Indonesia went to the polls in 2019. In Thailand, military junta leader Prayut Chan-o-cha "won" a questionable election in March and became the civilian prime minister, though it took him months of wheeling and dealing to stitch together a coalition under an electoral system heavily weighted in his favour. The relative strength of Thailand's democratic institutions might seem unimportant to Australians, many of whom might think of the country as just a pleasant tourism destination, but Thailand is an important strategic, trade and defence partner for Australia in the region. A decline in democratic values that leads to the Thai government more closely resembling illiberal regimes in the region – think Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and of course China further afield – should be of concern. Ahead of the East Asian Summit, ASEAN leaders sign a deal with FIFA in Bangkok in November. Credit:AP Indonesian President Joko Widodo won a second and final five-year term as president, to much acclaim, in April.

But the official declaration of the poll results a month later were marred by deadly riots on the streets of Jakarta and Joko's defeated opponent, Prabowo Subianto, launched an unsuccessful court challenge. Joko ended up bringing the former general Prabowo, who has a chequered human rights record, into his cabinet a few months later as his defence minister, to the dismay of many government supporters. Joko also allowed the Parliament to pass laws that weakened the country's respected (and much-needed) anti-corruption commission, stacked his cabinet with political cronies, deadly riots in Papua were violently suppressed, and Christian, Hindu and Buddhist religious minorities were increasingly persecuted in the supposedly pluralist, Muslim-majority nation. Meanwhile, a major political fight is brewing as the leaders of some of the parties in Joko's own coalition want to scrap the direct election of the president – a change introduced only in 2004, and one which the president himself opposes – and revert to political parties choosing a figurehead president through a parliamentary mechanism. Such a move would be deeply unpopular with ordinary voters, and would help ensure that entrenched political oligarchs maintain their grip on power and privilege.

Rights The past year also produced numerous cases of both individual and collective political, civil, cultural and religious rights being trampled on across the region. Notable cases have included Saudi woman Rahaf Mohammed al-Qunun and refugee footballer Hakeem al-Araibi. But these individual cases are just the tip of the iceberg. Brunei announced it would fully implement sharia as law – including the death penalty for extra-marital and gay sex – backing down after an international outcry (Australia protested); Singapore's government used its "fake news" laws for the first time, allowing the government to intervene in the media.

Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte maintained his bloody war on drugs, which Amnesty International says could constitute a crime against humanity, while the continuing persecution of the Rohingya people by Myanmar's regime is now headed to the International Court of Justice in The Hague. Journalists throughout the region continue to be persecuted, including in Cambodia, where authoritarian leader Hun Sen has also maintained a ban on the major opposition party and moved ever closer to Beijing. Malaysia looks increasingly like a democratic outlier, but even it was roiled by internal squabbling including a sex-tape scandal and fevered speculation over when or if the promised handover of the prime ministership from Mahathir Mohamad to Anwar Ibrahim will take place, with racial politics rearing its head time and again too. Australia Which brings us back to what role Australia should play as an advocate for greater political, civil and religious freedoms in the region.

Non-interference in each other's internal affairs is a guiding principle of the ASEAN group, and one the Department of Foreign Affairs seems to have adopted. Loading Critics from groups such as Human Rights Watch argue DFAT's preference to stay shtum publicly – at least initially – when issues arise, hurts Australia's ability to have diplomatic influence. In contrast, the government's decision to speak out powerfully and publicly on Araibi's case appeared to have a major effect on the decision to release the footballer. Australia's relative reluctance to criticise the rights abuses of the governments of Hun Sen and Duterte make us outliers compared with Europe and the United States.

Similarly, the fact that Australia and the US did not request on-the-ground access for their diplomats at the height of the Papua protests but New Zealand, Britain and Canada did looked odd (Canberra's request has since been made, but foreign officials are still banned from visiting). Getting the balance right in south-east Asia is by no means easy. But as China's diplomatic, military and economic importance grows across the region, it's hard not to escape the conclusion that Australia could and should be more influential in foreign affairs – if only we would find our voice more often and use it more confidently.