The rights of all human beings are being protected by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in which also stated the right of freedom from arbitrary arrest, detention or exile. Denying the rights by arbitrarily detain a person is considered as a violation on the international regime that the UDHR has become. Myanmar government violated it by detaining Aung San Suu Kyi arbitrarily without allowing her to exercise her rights for the total of 15 years of detention within 21 years. The violation has attracted international attention since violating the international human rights regime would interrupt the normal conduct of international relations. The attention given by the international actors, namely the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the United States and the European Union, Amnesty International, and ASEAN, were expected as the reaction toward deviant behavior of fellow subject of the international regime. The purpose of this thesis is to describe the attention given by international actors, both state and non-state actors, toward Myanmar government for their deviant behavior of violating the UDHR through examining the supporting factors that resulted in the violations, as well as analyzing the forms of attention that were given in order to maintain the normal conduct of IR. The data were gained through literature review and content analysis, whilst the analysis was conducted through an illustrative and event-structure method. As a result over the comprehensive analysis over the data, it is proven that the international actors realize the importance of conformity within the international regime in order to maintain the normal conduct of IR. The actors understand that it is within their responsibility to bring back order in IR by giving attention and pressure toward those who violates it. This incident also demonstrated a shift in the concept of authority in sovereignty because it is being challenged by the universality of human rights. The universality of human rights weakened the concept of sovereignty into certain limits, but sovereignty is still able to keep the states’ internal affairs from being interfered by others.