info_kontras
 
 TANJUNG PRIOK

Massacre of Tanjung Priok in 1984

Severe case of human rights violation in Tanjung Priok occurred on 12 September 1984, where a shooting occurred to thousands of people who were attending a mass prayer. The routine sermon held on that day was part of the community’s critical respond that refused Pancasila as the sole ideology. At the same time, some of the congregation also came to ideology. At the same time, some of the congregation also came to Military District Commando Operation (Kodim) North Jakarta, pressuring them to release Musholla As Saadah’s officials who were detained shortly after the riot between the residence and Sgt. Hermanu, a member of Babinsa who tore off a pamphlet containing government’s policy with gutter water on mosque’s wall and entering the mosque without taking off his shoes.

The blind shooting made the victims ran to all direction. Those who suffered from gunshot wounds were collected at RSPAD. Other victims were arbitrarily arrested in almost all parts of Indonesia, all at once in the dawn of the following morning. Including in the victims were those who were not involved in the incident, but were actively preaching. Without any notification to the families, the victims were detained and underwent torture, whether those in Kodim North Jakarta, Military police area office (Mapomdam) Guntur or RTM Cimanggis and they underwent a court process and were sentenced to between 1-3 years of prison, change with subversive and resisting arrest.

After the incident, the victims experienced community’s stigmatisms because they were considered as nation criminals. Many of the victims live in poverty because they lost their jobs or had difficult to find jobs or to continue school.

The victims and the community demand for the case resolution, until 1998 Komnas HAM formed a special team and followed with formation of commission for the inquiry of human rights violation in Tanjung Priok (KP3T) in year 2000. Through two investigation process-one of which was pro justicia- Komnas HAM in his report stated that a severe human rights violation has occurred mainly but not limited to killing, arbitrary detention and arrest, torture and forced disappearance. The whole series of incident was the responsibility of perpetrators on the field, the operational command and command responsibility.

Komnas HAM submitted its final report to Attorney General office. The investigation at the Attorney General’s office was extended until they finished it in July 2003. In September 2003 the human rights court started. The court charged 15 defendants who are responsible as the field perpetrators and operasional command. Meanwhile, the President as the highest responsible, LB Moerdani as the Commander of ABRI (armed forces) and Tri Sutrisno as Pangdam Jaya were legally untouchable.

At the same time, the effort to freeze the case can be seen from Islamic reconciliation that was offered by the perpetrators to several victims of Tanjung Priok case on 1 March 2001. As the result, when the court was in process, many victims changed their testimony in favor of the perpetrators. However, some victims are still consistent with their fight to uphold the law in this country through a fair court process to fulfill the truth and justice for the victims.

In 2003, the first trial for Tanjung Priok case was be held with defendant of Sutrisno Mascung and 10 members; defendant of Pranowo and  R. A Butar-Butar and Sriyanto. In 2004, ad hoc trial in the first level sentenced RA Butar Butar 10 years in prison and Sutrisno Mascung got 3 years in prison and 2 yeasr for his members. Meanwhile, the prosecutor did not prove guilty of Pranowo and Sriyanto. In second level of trials in 2005, the judge released of RA Butar Butar and Sutrisno Mascung.  However, up to 2005 to 2006, the cassation in Supreme Court released all defendants.  The important things mentioned in the sentence is the fulfillment of compensation for victims in the first level of trials. However, the release of defendants in second level of trial and cassation has impact of unclear for reparation. The judge did not mentione the problem of victims’ rights in the release sentences. In fact, the fulfillment of compensation was depended on guilty of defendants, but it is not a part of the main rights of victims.

Coming year 2007, the efforts to fulfil victim’s rights has been done by a group of victims to appeal the Central Jakarta Court about compensation for victims of Tanjung Priok Massacre. They appealed compensation as amount 658 million (IDR), and immaterial 357,5 million, the total is 1,015 billion. The court was really confused with this appeal, since it was the first time for the judges to process such this. Unfortunately, the court did not fulfil the defendants’ demand because the primary of appeal came from the statement of human rights court of Tanjung Priok stated that the court already annulled in level of high court and Supreme Court.

On 26 March 2008, there were several victim’s families met to President SBY, representatives of tragedy Semanggi I, May Riots 1998, disappearance activist 1997, Tanjung Priok massacre 1984 and KontraS reported directly to President about the difficulties to resolve the case and who the responsibility of all cases occurred. To respond their report, President would conduct meeting special limited cabinet to be attended all ministers and other assistants of President who handle to the human rights violence resolve. On the meeting, President also promised to ask clarifications from AG, Mr Hendarman Supanji about the statement of lost documents of Trisakti Semanggi, as well as the statement of minister of defence, Mr Juwono Sudarsono on not essential for military officers and former members of TNI to fulfill of Komnas HAM invitation to be witness in inquiry team.

On July 1, 2008, KontraS and IKOHI visited the Third Commission of the Parliament. The group demanded that the Attorney General (AG) be called to explain why he is not implementing the MK decision to conduct further investigation on the four gross human rights violations. Specifically, the group’s calls were: (1) Demand the AG to investigate enforced disapperance cases which occurred in 1997-1998 especially that of 13 persons who remain missing up to this day.  Since these cases are continuing crimes, these should be handled by the permanent human rights tribunal and not necessarily by an ad hoc tribunal; (2) The President must establish an ad hoc human rights tribunal for past cases based on the documents which Komnas HAM have already submitted to the AG.  The victims’ families and surfaced victims are now closely monitoring the developments related to their calls

***

 TALANGSARI

Massacre of Talangsari in Lampung, 1989

On 7 February 1989, a military attack occurred in a village residence of Talangsari Lampung, continued with arbitrary detention and arrest, torture and forced disappearances. The shooting in the series of attack claimed hundreds of victims died, injured, or disappeared. Talangsari residence was also burnt out and closed for public. After the attack, hundreds of people were unfair prosecution. They were charged with subversive, this applied to all victims of Lampung incidents who are in Lampung, Jakarta, Bandung, Central Java, East Java and West Nusa Tenggara.

In 1998 when the national political scene experienced a change, some of the victims and the victims’ families started to litigate the past abuse that were kept all along and demand justice. The fight is carried out through various efforts such as meetings with the fractions in Indonesia’s House of Representatives and the government, or by pressuring the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) to conduct investigation.
In its course, this fight stumbled upon many obstacles, especially politically. Furthermore, there is a strong effort from those responsible for the case –through divide and conquer politics-to take advantage from the victim’s poverty by offering an Islamic reconciliation still choose legal process as a solution. Those who accepted, try to stop other victims from demanding the resolution of this case.

The effort to stop the case resolution was also committed by the government by appointing AM Hendropriyono as the Head of National Intelligent Body (BIN) in 2001. As the impact, there has been military intervention from the military officials to close the case. Afterwards, local military and civil officials, active or retired, started to visit the victims not to bring up the case ever again. The village officials also took part in the guerilla movement in Talangsari to visit the victims one by one and ask them to forget about resolving the case while giving money to the victims.

In 2001, Komnas HAM formed the Inquiry Team for the Talangsari Massacre of 1989 and appointed Mr. Koesparmono Irsan as chairperson.  The investigations, however, were not immediately implemented.  Initially, there were many obstacles to resolving the case of Talangsari.  One such obstacle was the availability of deals made with the victims by parties responsible for the massacre which were based solely on “islah,” or Islamic peace agreements in the form of monetary compensation.  While some victims received “islah,” others preferred to resolve the issue in the legal arena.  In January 2004, the inquiry process for Talangsari began and Komnas HAM appointed Hasballah M Saad as the new chairperson.  The Inquiry Team failed to make progress beyond analyzing pre-existing data by early 2005.  In February 2005, Komnas HAM proceeded to re-establish the Inquiry Team under law No.39/1999.  The team included members Enny Suprapto, Samsudin, Ruswiyati Suryasaputra and Muhamad Farid.  The group conducted field research around Talangsari Lampung and began calling witnesses.  After preliminary witness interviews, the team determined that human rights violations had occurred in the form of summary killings, torture, arbitrary detention and arrest, as well as violations of freedom of expression.  The team did not finish their report until 2006 as they were waiting for replies from the Military Sub-Area Command (Korem) Garuda Hitam and the Commander of Military Area Command Sriwijaya.

The pro-yusticia Inquiry Team resumed work in June 2007, as specified by a letter from the Head of Komnas HAM (National Commission on Human Rights) No: 15/Komnas HAM/V/2007 dated 1 May 2007 (later modified by Letter No: 28/Komnas HAM/IX/2007 dated 12 September 2007).

During a six-month period beginning in June 2007, the team determined that there were at least 94 victims in Lampung, Central Java and Jakarta as a result of the massacre.  The team is currently waiting for permission from the Attorney General to begin an exhumation process in Talangsari Village in search of additional victims. The Inquiry Team has called former members of the military and police department to serve as witnesses in their continuing investigation.  Individuals who have answered the team’s call include B. Suyitno (former Vice Head of Local Police in Lampung), Edward Aritonang (former Head of Regional Police of South Sumatera) and Soedome (former Chief of Command for the Restoration of Security and Order/Pangkobkamtib).  Soedome’s account indicated that the Military Sub-District Command (Koramil), the Military Sub-Area Command (Korem), the Military Area Command (Kodam), the former Chief of Armed Forces Staff (KSAD) and the former Commander of Armed Forces (Panglima ABRI) were responsible for the events of the Talangsari Massacre of 1989 that occurred in Jakarta and Lampung.  Soedome stated that he did not know exactly what had occurred in the field but shouldered the blame on Mr. Hendropriyono, the acting Commander of Military Sub-Area Command at the time.

Subsequently, the Komnas HAM Inquiry Team called three military officials as witnesses: Wismoyo Arismunandar (former Chief of Military Area Command of Diponegoro), Mr. Hendropriyono (former Commander of Military Sub-Area Command 043 Garuda Hitam) and Try Soetrisno (former Commander of Armed Forces).  However, despite multiple calls, none of these individuals appeared.

There has been an effort by Komnas HAM to call the witnesses (subpoena) under law No. 39/1999 of the National Commission on Human Rights article 95 and the Law no 26/2000 on Human Rights Court. Therefore, the Central Court of Jakarta as one of General judicial systems has authority to implement of subpoena. Komnas HAM has met with the Head of Central Court Jakarta, Mrs. Andriyani Nurdin, three times, most recently on 25 June 2008.  In the June 25th meeting, Mrs. Andriyani stated that the Central Jakarta Court does not have authority to implement a subpoena, but the human rights court.

On 26 March 2008, President SBY gave his support to the efforts for resolving cases of past abuse, including the Talangsari Massacre of 1989, in a meeting with several victims and members of KONTRAS.  The campaign still faces opposition however, as evidenced by the Minister of Defense’s statement that he warned the former military officers not attend the meeting with the Komnas HAM Inquiry Team for lack of legal remedy in Talangsari case.

On July 1, 2008, KontraS and IKOHI visited the Third Commission of the Parliament. The group demanded that the Attorney General (AG) be called to explain why he is not implementing the MK decision to conduct further investigation on the four gross human rights violations. Specifically, the group’s calls were: (1) Demand the AG to investigate enforced disapperance cases which occurred in 1997-1998 especially that of 13 persons who remain missing up to this day.  Since these cases are continuing crimes, these should be handled by the permanent human rights tribunal and not necessarily by an ad hoc tribunal; (2) The President must establish an ad hoc human rights tribunal for past cases based on the documents which Komnas HAM have already submitted to the AG.  The victims’ families and surfaced victims are now closely monitoring the developments related to their calls.                  

On 23 June 2008, Kontras sent letter to National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) to ask the progress of inquiry team of Talangsari case which Kontras took note that Komnas HAM still faced obstacles in terms of delivering subpoena in order to call formers official military and police at the time.

***

 KIDNAPPING

Activists kidnapping in 1998

Case of activists kidnapping happened to several youth activists and students who intended to uphold justice and democracy in the New Order Regime. Those who were critical in responding to the government’s policy were considered as a dangerous group who endanger the country. They were seen as threats that would hamper the governance.

It started in 1996 when the campaign for general election started and several members of Indonesian democracy party struggle (PDIP) were kidnapped without any news of their fate. Then, it continued during the riot in May 1998 until the kidnapping activists from Democratic People Party and Indonesia Students Solidarity for Democracy.

The kidnapping of Pius Lustrilanang, Desmond J Mahesa, Haryanto Taslam, Mugiyanto, Aan Rusdianto, Faisol Reza, Rahardja W Jati and Nezar Patria encouraged civil community movement to demand responsibility from the military which was considered the perpetrator. One by one, the victims was returned, but until 2004  there are still 14 people missing. They are Suyat, Yani afri, Sonny, M.Yusuf, Noval Alkatiri, Dedy Hamdun, Ismail, Bimo Petrus, Abdun Naser, Hendra Hambali, Ucok Siahaan, Yadin Muhidin and Wiji Thukul.

The victims and victims’ families started to move and demand the government to take responsibility on the kidnapping in 1998. Asides from forming Indonesian Association of Families of the Disappeared (IKOHI), many advocacy efforts were conducted such as meetings and actions with the responsible instutions and public campaign nationally and internationally.

The strong demand from the victims and the public finally had the government through its Commander of TNI (state army) to form the Council of Military Ethical Office (Dewan Kehormatan Perwira) to carry out an investigation. DKP proved that the kidnapping and forced disappearances were committed by Kopasus (Special arm forces) involving several military institutions and Police. Letjen TNI Prabowo Subianto admitted that he gave an order to kidnap and he also admitted mistake in analyzing an order under the operational control and is willing to take responsibility. As the result, Letjen Prabowo Subianto was released from the military while Mayjen Muchdi PR and Col.Inf. Chairawan were released form their duties.

Late 1998, a military court was held to prosecute 11 members of Kopasus (Mawar Team) who admitted the crime out of their own conscience. This team admitted of kidnapping 9 activits but was unable to reveal the whereabouts of the other 14 victims. The team also denied of torturing the victims. The defendants were sentence 15 to 26 months of imprisonment and release from TNI.

In 1999, the victims and victim’s families submitted their litigation to the East Jakarta state court. the litigation demanded the court to order the Commander of TNI to explain the whereabouts of the still missing victims.

The victims and victims’ family still insisted on the state to be responsible through the investigation conducted by Komnas HAM because the kidnapping classified as severe human rights violation. The victims and victims’ families also fight internationally by joining an organization called AFAD. In mid 2003, Komnas HAM formed a review team on the case of activist kidnapping 1998 but so far there has been no report on the review result.

The recommendation, in January 2005 Komnas HAM formed inquiry team for disappearances people in May Riots 1998 and abduction activist 1998. However, there was no significant progress made from the team until the team was longed in April. Beginning May 2005, the team started to interview victims and families as well as the witness coming from military and special armed forces (esp 3 generals: Wiranto, Prabowo & Syafri Syamsoedin. The team sent calling until three times and used the court to pressure them to present in Komnas HAM, but it failed.

Finally at the end of October 2006, the Ad Hoc Team released the report of inquiry result that mentioned several human rights violation to victims such as arbitrary and arrest detention, torture and enforced disappearance and the last about reparation for the victims and families.

Then, Komnas HAM delivered the report to Attorney General. Until the middle of year 2007, the Attorney General has not followed up by reason that the Ad Hoc tribunal for human rights is not established by parliament. Since for the reason, the debate came up and down between Komnas HAM and Attorney General. The parliament also involved to set up bilateral meeting between both of institutions. In the middle of debating, suddenly Parliament set up special committee (Pansus) to settle the case. Up to now, nothing action came from the committee.

On 26 March 2008, there were several victim’s families met to President SBY, representatives of tragedy Semanggi I, May Riots 1998, disappearance activist 1997, Tanjung Priok massacre 1984 and KontraS reported directly to President about the difficulties to resolve the case and who the responsibility of all cases occurred. To respond their report, President would conduct meeting special limited cabinet to be attended all ministers and other assistants of President who handle to the human rights violence resolve. On the meeting, President also promised to ask clarifications from AG, Mr Hendarman Supanji about the statement of lost documents of Trisakti Semanggi, as well as the statement of minister of defence, Mr Juwono Sudarsono on not essential for military officers and former members of TNI to fulfill of Komnas HAM invitation to be witness in inquiry team.

On July 1, 2008, KontraS and IKOHI visited the Third Commission of the Parliament. The group demanded that the Attorney General (AG) be called to explain why he is not implementing the MK decision to conduct further investigation on the four gross human rights violations. Specifically, the group’s calls were: (1) Demand the AG to investigate enforced disapperance cases which occurred in 1997-1998 especially that of 13 persons who remain missing up to this day.  Since these cases are continuing crimes, these should be handled by the permanent human rights tribunal and not necessarily by an ad hoc tribunal; (2) The President must establish an ad hoc human rights tribunal for past cases based on the documents which Komnas HAM have already submitted to the AG.  The victims’ families and surfaced victims are now closely monitoring the developments related to their calls.                  

On February 21, 2008, the Constitutional Court (MK) issued its decision through Decree No. 18/PUU-V/2007 based on their discussion on Law No. 26/2000 article 43. The MK cited that Article 43 verse 2 is valid and a part of its decree is as follows: “..in deciding whether it is needed to establish an ad hoc human rights tribunal on a particular case according to locus and tempus delicti, this requires the involvement of a political institution representing the people, which is the Parliament.

Meanwhile, on September 15, 2009 the Special Committee of the House of Representative  regarding  the case of abduction and enforced disappeared  of student activists 1997 – 1998 released some recommendations. The recommendations are first, to recommend the president to establish an ad hoc Human Right Court, second, to recommend the President including all government institutions and other related parties to immediately find out 13 people who was announced by National Commission for Human Right that they are still missing, third to recommend the President to facilitate the rehabilitation and satisfy compensation for victims and family of the disappeared, forth, the Government to immediately ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Person from Enforced Disappearances. Eventually, On September 28, 2009 The Plenary Session of The House of Representative agreed to the Special Committee’s recommendation and made a decision and recommendation to president to establish an ad hoc Human Right Court

 

***

MAY TRAGEDY 1998

MAY TRAGEDY 1998

May 1998 was Indonesia’s black history. There were mass riots in almost all parts of Indonesia where shops were destroyed and robbed, houses, vehicles and all possessions were burnt, forced disappearances, killing, abuse and rape to Chinese ethnic. This incident cannot be separated from the context of Indonesia’s political situation and dynamics, which was 1997 general election,kidnapping of several activists, monetary crisis, General Meeting of people’s Consultative Assembly and Massive students demonstration. This riot was closely related to the shift of political elite at that time whch was followed by Soeharto’s step down on 21 May 1998 as a victorious moment for reformation movement.

Many in the community nd international world demanded the government to resolve the case. In 1998 Tim Gabungan Pencari Fakta or Fact Finding Joint Team was formed with the task of revealing the facts and the background of the incident. This team concluded that the riot was not an accidental or isolated incident but more as a part of political shifts and occurring with almost the same pattern all over Indonesia. There was an early indication of severe human rights violation especially crimes against humanity. Lack of follow up to this report made the victims, victims’ family, accompanying NGOs, several community organizations, parties and press demand komnas HAM to investigate the case.

In 2003 Komnas HAM formed an Ad Hoc Team for the investigation of 13-15 May 1998 riots, working pro Justicia. In this report, it stated that this incident was an inseparable part of repressive ways employed by the new order regime in managing the nation’s problems, with the aim of eliminating all potential opposition from the community groups. It had to be seen as a long series of intelligent operation during the end of New Order power. Considering the wide and systematic incidents, sequence of incident, it can be seen that there was a deliberate and designed riot and it occurred in 88 locations in all Jakarta, Bogor, tangerang and Bekasi (Jabotabek).

The systematic nature can be seen from the attack to certain ethnic group, discriminative policies and various criminal acts with certain pattern occurring repeatedly, triggered by a group of people with similar characteristics in every riot location and the pattern of ignorance towards the riots which can  be seen from the fact that there were many officials absence, letting the riots continue. It is therefore necessary to demand a legal accountability towards the parties suspected to be responsible legally for the crimes against humanity in May 1998 incidents, which are TNI, Polri and civil officials.

Komnas HAM report was then submitted to the Attorney General’s office. Early January 2004, the Attorney General’s office stated that the investigation report was incomplete and would be returned to Komnas HAM because there was no explanation on the parties who must be responsible. In mid 2005, Komnas HAM submitted the inquiry report to the Attorney General, but it can’t be follow up because too political and technical law reasons.  No explanation on the parties who must be responsible. In mid 2005, Komnas HAM submitted the inquiry report to the Attorney General, but it can’t be follow up because too political and technical law reasons. This situation continued until two years a head.

On 26 March 2008, there were several victim’s families met to President SBY, representatives of tragedy Semanggi I, May Riots 1998, disappearance activist 1997, Tanjung Priok massacre 1984 and KontraS reported directly to President about the difficulties to resolve the case and who the responsibility of all cases occurred. To respond their report, President would conduct meeting special limited cabinet to be attended all ministers and other assistants of President who handle to the human rights violence resolve. On the meeting, President also promised to ask clarifications from AG, Mr Hendarman Supanji about the statement of lost documents of Trisakti Semanggi, as well as the statement of minister of defence, Mr Juwono Sudarsono on not essential for military officers and former members of TNI to fulfill of Komnas HAM invitation to be witness in inquiry team.

On July 1, 2008, KontraS and IKOHI visited the Third Commission of the Parliament. The group demanded that the Attorney General (AG) be called to explain why he is not implementing the MK decision to conduct further investigation on the four gross human rights violations. Specifically, the group’s calls were: (1) Demand the AG to investigate enforced disapperance cases which occurred in 1997-1998 especially that of 13 persons who remain missing up to this day.  Since these cases are continuing crimes, these should be handled by the permanent human rights tribunal and not necessarily by an ad hoc tribunal; (2) The President must establish an ad hoc human rights tribunal for past cases based on the documents which Komnas HAM have already submitted to the AG.  The victims’ families and surfaced victims are now closely monitoring the developments related to their calls.   

***

TRISAKTI, SEMANGGI I AND SEMANGGI II CASE

Case of Trisakti, Semanggi I and Semanggi II


Close to Soeharto’s fall, a massive student demonstration occurred in almost all parts of Indonesia demanding changes into a democratic governance and total reformation. This student demonstration was handled through repressive patterns such as dismissing the demonstrations, shooting outside the legal process or other acts of abuse.

The biggest tragedy occurred on 12 May 1998 where the perpetrators committed shooting to 4 Trisakti students: Elang Mulia Lesmana, Hafidin Royan, Heri Hartanto and Hendriawan Sie. Meanwhile 681 victims from various universities in Indonesia were injured. The next day a mass riot occurred, crushing every aspect of the people’s life in Indonesia, especially in Jakarta. It was then followed by Soeharto’s resignation from his presidency on 21 May 1998.

Between 8 and 14 November 1998 violence towards student occurred once more. Students’ demonstration to refuse the special meeting which was considered unconstitutional and ask the president to deal with the economic crisis was responded by the officials through the use of real bullets. In the incident 18 students were killed, 4 of them are Teddy Mardani, Sigit Prasetya, Engkus Kusnadi and BR Norma Irmawan. Meanwhile 109 people were injured, students and other civilians.

The plan to apply the Law on Emergency State in September 1999 once again invited the students’ critical attitude. The regulation was supposed to replace the law on subversive that was considered authoritarian but it was also thought as resembling the Subversive law itself. The security officials were again committed shooting to the students, humanitarian volunteers, medical team and other civilians, killing 11 people in Jakarta. One of the victims killed was Yap Yun Hap in Semanggi Jakarta. Meanwhile, 217 people were injured.

The victims’ families, who demanded that the state be responsible for the case, were forced to struggle against various obstacles both politically and formal legalistically.  The military court for Trisakti case which was held in 1998 sentenced 6 officials from Indonesian Police department. In 2002 the military court sentenced 9 members of Gegana (bomb squad)/Regimen II of Brimob Polri (brigade mobile police). In 2003 the military court also prosecuted the perpetrators in the shooting occurred in Semanggi II but the result is still unclear.      

The military court brought disappointment to the victims’ families because it only prosecuted the lower level officials without bringing the main perpetrators responsible for the crime to court.  Moreover, the military court held was an internal court. The students and victims’ families continued with their demand until DPR (the House of Representatives) finally formed a Special Committee for Trisakti, Semanggi I and Semanggi II in the year 2000 with the task to monitor the resolution process of the case. In 2001 the Special Committee concluded that there was no severe violation in Trisakti, Semanggi I and Semanggi II cases and recommended a resolution through the existing on-going process in public court or military court. This result was equally disappointing for the victims’ families.

Reasoning that there has been a systematic and widespread severe human rights violation, the victims’ families and the students continued their demand to Komnas HAM to conduct investigation on the cases. KPP HAM for Trisakti, Semanggi I and Semanggi II was then formed in 2001. However, the investigation process faced various obstacles such as difficulty to access information from the state’s institutions and the uncooperative attitude coming from TNI and Polri towards the investigation of their members. In its report, KPP HAM concluded from the adequate preliminary evidence that there has been a severe human rights violation in Trisakti, Semanggi I and Semanggi II incidents with 50 people as suspected perpetrators. Komnas HAM investigation result was then submitted to the Attorney General office to be processed in accordance with Law No. 26/2000 in April 2002.

The Attorney General’s office returned the documents to Komnas HAM because it was considered unable to fulfill pro justicia procedure. Komnas HAM made some revisions and completion and re-submit the documents to the Attorney General’s office. However, the evasive attitude did not stop there. Based on DPR’s recommendation that there was no severe human rights violation, the Attorney General’s office acted passively by ignoring the case until 2004. Beginning 2005, DPR promised to review and cancel the recommendation.During year 2006, the victims’ family and KontraS still pressured parliament to discuss about this case in BAMUS. Unfortunately, on 9 february 2006  the parliament canceled to discuss again about case of Trisakti/Semanggi I & II due to ethical matter. Again, victims’ family and KontraS pushed BAMUS on 23 february to propose agenda on the case of Trisakti Semanggi to be brought to Paripurna meeting and ask commission of third to discuss on this case. In 2007, there was no significant progress for this case, therefore victim’s family kept to maintain the issue to pay attention from public conducted several campaign in University and other events. During this campaign, the pressure was to demand Parliament to annul recomendation of Pansus in 2001 and to propose next agenda to handover the post card to Agung Laksono, the chairman of parliament. 

On 26 March 2008, there were several victim’s families met to President SBY, representatives of tragedy Semanggi I, May Riots 1998, disappearance activist 1997, Tanjung Priok massacre 1984 and KontraS reported directly to President about the difficulties to resolve the case and who the responsibility of all cases occurred. To respond their report, President would conduct meeting special limited cabinet to be attended all ministers and other assistants of President who handle to the human rights violence resolve. On the meeting, President also promised to ask clarifications from AG, Mr Hendarman Supanji about the statement of lost documents of Trisakti Semanggi, as well as the statement of minister of defence, Mr Juwono Sudarsono on not essential for military officers and former members of TNI to fulfill of Komnas HAM invitation to be witness in inquiry team.

On July 1, 2008, KontraS and IKOHI visited the Third Commission of the Parliament. The group demanded that the Attorney General (AG) be called to explain why he is not implementing the MK decision to conduct further investigation on the four gross human rights violations. Specifically, the group’s calls were: (1) Demand the AG to investigate enforced disapperance cases which occurred in 1997-1998 especially that of 13 persons who remain missing up to this day.  Since these cases are continuing crimes, these should be handled by the permanent human rights tribunal and not necessarily by an ad hoc tribunal; (2) The President must establish an ad hoc human rights tribunal for past cases based on the documents which Komnas HAM have already submitted to the AG.  The victims’ families and surfaced victims are now closely monitoring the developments related to their calls.