近年來，國際人權規範在東南亞地區出現了正面的發展趨勢，並引發了學界之興趣。然而現有研究多聚焦於東協區域人權機制的創建與後果，對於人權公約承諾的關注相對不足，所提供的解釋亦未能盡如人意。本文企圖透過量化資料的實證分析，探詢影響東南亞人權公約承諾的主要因素。透過觀察東南亞十國自1981年到2015年間對主要國際人權公約的承諾紀錄，本文驗證了主要理論觀點所歸納出的四項假設，實證分析結果顯示，規範論與理性論觀點在不同的人權公約中產生了一定的促進效果，然而並無證據支持一普遍性承諾機制的存在。此外，同化論觀點在東南亞脈絡下並不存在，顯見對於國際人權公約以及區域人權機制的理解，無法一概而論。東南亞區域人權政治的複雜圖像，在不同層次，不同議題，不同階段均有可觀之處。

The last few decades witnessed positive developments in terms of human rights across Southeast Asia. It is widely believed that progresses such as the creation of ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission of Human Rights (AICHR) suggested the willingness of regional countries to identify themselves with universal human rights. Nevertheless, no consensus has been reached in academia yet regarding human rights treaty commitment of regional countries. This article intends to make contribution to the knowledge of human rights treaty ratification in Southeast Asia. Using the empirical data between 1981 and 2015 of ten regional states, hypotheses derived from major theoretical explanations are put into examination. The findings show partial support to both normative and rationalist perspectives, while the logic of acculturation fails to sustain in Southeast Asian context. Moreover, the empirical findings suggest that the motive of ratification could vary according to the character of human right documents.