Press Release
[ dilihat 128 kali ]

SBY-Boediono’s 100-Day Performance:
Chief of Police, Attorney General & Minister of Law and Human Rights Must Prioritise Human Rights

A. Introduction
In evaluating SBY-Boediono government’s 100-Day performance, KontraS focused on the performance of its Minister of Law and Human Rights Patrialis Akbar, its Chief of Police Gen. Bambang Hendarso Danuri and Attorney General Hendarman Supandji.

Polri’s performance will be seen from the improvement of its accountability, especially in terms of the way it handles cases. The performance of the Minister of Law and Human Rights will be seen from its priority of programs in the field of human rights promotion while the Attorney General will be evaluated from the way it handles grave human rights violations and corruption cases.

B. Evaluation of Polri’s Performance 
Amidst the chaos related to Polri, the government’s special programs with regards to human rights failed to be implemented. Such programs were included in the 100-day program with the intentions to 1) Uphold professional, objective, proportional, transparent and accountable law to guarantee legal certainty and a sense of justice by promoting human rights; 2) Conducting counseling and promoting discipline and code of ethic for police profession. The relevant targets to those objectives are 1) Create transparency between police and community; 2) Improving discipline, attitude, behavior and performance of Polri officials across Indonesia.
The objectives and targets are encompassed in a 100-day action plan in the following fields: 1) Counseling: placement of internal supervisor to monitor and follow up on community’s complaints; 2) Operational: handling of inquiries in a prompt, accurate, transparent and inexpensive manner; improvement of services for witnesses and evidence; decent treatment to alleged perpetrators; improve services towards community’s complaints.

Unfortunately, on the 100th day of SBY government, Polri remains in the spotlight of a negative review by the public. Polri started a national controversy with its statement of “lizard versus crocodile” with regards to anti corruption investigation. With such conviction, Polri institutionally moved against public’s belief and trust about its conflict with KPK. The public was further shocked when Comr. Gen. Susno Duadji testified during Antasari Azhar’s trial and stated that he doubted Polri’s credibility as an institution. Around the same time, the public also learned about an arbitrary arrest and torture against JJ Rizal, a historian from the University of Indonesia, perpetrated by Polres Depok’s official. The allegation towards JJ Rizal was not previously informed and it was later determined unfounded. The latest shock was the allegation of judicial mafia perpetrated by Polda Maluku, which proves the existence of judicial mafia and lack of institutional dependency in Polri’s professional performance.

KontraS recorded that there is still discrimination in handling cases reported in public complaints. The police are able to move promptly when the cases are crimes perpetrated by community members, but there is a lack of clarity in the internal mechanism used when there are cases of violence or power abuse perpetrated by Polri officials. The suspension of internal investigation against Susno Duadji shows such lack of clarity in implementing Polri’s code of ethic.
Polri’s 100-day program is not yet effective and has not shown any positive impacts to victims or complainants. This can be seen from the following:

1. Handling of inquiry in a prompt, accurate, transparent and inexpensive manner.
When KontraS was handling a number of public complaints where police officers were involved, KontraS rarely received SP2HP, a letter informing case progress. Such information was only given when KontraS sent follow up request letter. Therefore, the information letter sent by Polri was a response to KontraS’ follow up letter, instead of Polri’s own initiative. There were also other circumstances where complainants or their legal counselors must actively chased up the case if they want Polri to handle it promptly, such as by visiting the investigators, sending letters and calling intensively.

2. Improving investigators’ capability.
This objective is the opposite of what was found in reality. The police was often passive in searching for evidence. Police frequently left it to the complainants to find their own witnesses if they want their case to be dealt with. An example can be seen in the case involving Priscilia, who was allegedly held captive and raped in Semarang by a hotelier named Bambang. The investigators from Polda Maluku examined Susandhi, a former employee of PT Maritim Timur at Artha Graha office instead of at the police station.

3. Decent treatment to alleged perpetrators.
There are still police officers who use violence and inhuman treatment when handling alleged perpetrators. Between November – December 2009, KontraS received 23 complaints of violence and power abuse perpetrated by Polri officers. This is without a doubt contrary to Polri’s commitment to protect human rights as stated in its Chief of Polri Decree No. 8/2009 regarding the Implementation of Human Rights Principles and Standards in Performing Polri’s Duties.

4. Conducting counseling and promoting discipline and Polri’s code of ethic.
KontraS questions the effectiveness of counseling and education on discipline and Polri’s code of ethic. We see lack of effective mechanism, especially in two prominent cases namely legal actions against Polri officers in Susno Duadji’s case and assault against Susandi by Polda Maluku’s investigators at Artha Graha office. It is of grave concern that in both cases, there was no clear and transparent information given to public. Different information was given by two different Polri officials.
KontraS concluded that the whole process convinces the public that something is “not right” internally within Polri’s institution. If nothing is done about it, such belief can destroy Polri’s strategic plan to build public’s trust (trust building)as targeted this year (2005-2010). Polri’s mandate to succeed in its duties with community support and trust is therefore disrupted by the controversial cases surrounding them.

C. Evaluation of the Attorney General’s performance
Based on the Attorney General’s Decree No. KEP - /A/J.A/11/2009, Attorney General Agung Hendarman Supandji formed a Coordination and Monitoring Team whose job is to monitor the 100-day Program of the Attorney General. Their duties are: 


Revising and restructuring the 100-day program of the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia to be adjusted to the action plan contained in the 100-day Program (Selective Program) under the coordination of the Coordinating Ministry of Politics, Law and Security. Such programs are Synergy between the Ministry / Central and Regional Institutions in Accelerating Public Services; Reformation in Legal Field particularly in the Aspect of Human Resources and Institutional Resources; and the Elimination of Corruption and Judicial Mafia.


Conducting Internal and External Coordination to follow up on the agreed action plan;


Conduct Monitoring and Evaluation on the Implementation of 100-Day Program of the Attorney General and presenting monthly reports and incidental reports regarding any problems / obstacles to the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia;


Preparing a concept for the Attorney General’s monthly reports and final report to the President of the Republic of Indonesia regarding the implementation of the Attorney General’s 100-Day Program.

KontraS notes three important issues from the above plan with regards to human rights promotion:
1. The Attorney General’s performance has not shown any sense of urgency towards the issue of justice, even after the public has highlighted it. An example is the complexity of the legal mechanism in dealing with the alleged corruption in Bank Century case.

2. The Attorney General did not have original initiative in the issue of justice for past human rights violations although these cases have been politically decided by the House of Representatives plenary meeting. An example is the enforced disappearances against 13 activists. Not only does it express old excuses, the Attorney General does not present any clever arguments either.

3. The Attorney General repeatedly promises to do legal follow up on the release of Muchdi PR at cassation level. Munir’s assassination was an important case and serves as public’s parameter of justice, but there has not been any new legal breakthroughs from this institution.

Another grave concern is the lack of clear commitment from the Attorney General in SBY-JK government.

D. Evaluation of the Minister of Law and Human Rights’ performance
Development plan in the field of law must have human rights perspective. However, the ministry’s program has not shown its attention to the main issues of human rights such as resolutions of grave human rights violations. Ideally, RPJMN 2010-2014 specifically in the field of law must be able to prioritize the issue so that it will have major impacts in supporting human rights policies in general, including economy, social, culture, domestic and foreign politics, health and education.

Attention to human rights main issues is essential because sufficient legal equipment is available. Development of law specifically legislations has undergone an evolution according to national needs. It is also the result of Indonesia’s participation in various international conventions which later influenced the adjustment of the national legal system.
KontraS supports the national legislation program which prioritizes several strategic bills to be drafted such as Intelligent, Criminal Procedure Code, Penal Code and Legal Aid.

Unfortunately, such legislations are not prioritized in the 2010 National Legislation Program (Prolegnas) although they have been discussed by the government and the House of Representatives in the previous years. Furthermore, they have been stated in several other legal products. Some of them have even been through a long debate and their discussions are almost completed. Therefore, we request that the government prioritizes the following legislations in its 2010 Prolegnas:

 1. Ratification of Rome Statute and Convention on Migrant Workers
The ratification of Rome Statute and Convention on Migrant Workers was made into a priority in 2004-2009 RANHAM agenda. However, the agenda seemed to be halted since it was not made into priority any longer in the 2010 National Legislation Program (Prolegnas) despite the objectives of the Statute to strengthen State’s capacity in combating impunity in the future. On the other hand, draft ratification of Rome Statute is available for discussion at the Department of Law and Human Rights, Department of Foreign Affairs, Komnas HAM, House of Representatives, academia, civil society and victim community. The Convention on Migrant Workers is intended to provide protection for almost 1 million Indonesian citizens who are currently overseas as migrant workers. The draft ratification of this Convention has been discussed as well by the government, the House of Representatives and civil society. It is also one of the recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur for Migrant Workers, Jorge Bustmante, when he visited Indonesia in 2006.

2. Revision of the Draft on Military Court Bill.
Revision on the Military Court Draft Bill must be a main priority in the military reform agenda. The lack of resolutions in many human rights violations cases in the past has left a basic problem: the ineffectiveness of TNI’s institutional accountability mechanism. This problem contributes a lot to the strong prevalence of impunity. Although the Special Committee of the 2004-2009 House of Representatives did not complete their discussions, it should not reduce the urgency of revising Military Court Draft Bill in 2010.

3. Revision of Draft on Truth Commission
The mechanism of truth commission is one of the mandates of the People’s General Assembly’s Decree No. V/MPR/2000 regarding National Unity and Integrity and Law No. 26/2000 regarding Human Rights Court. The mechanism serves as a complementary one to the current Human Rights Court. The lack of clarity in past cases resolutions indicates the urgency in enacting the draft. The same mandate to resolve past cases through the Truth Commission must also be integrated in the Law regarding Aceh Administration and Law on Papua Special Autonomy.  Mainstreaming of human rights values and principles within the Truth Commission especially in truth revelation and victims’ rights fulfillment is non-negotiable.

4. Legalization of the Convention on Anti-Enforced Disappearances
Families of disappearances victims are in a particularly difficult position. Not only do they have to wait indefinitely for a clarification about the whereabouts and the fate of their loved ones, they also have to struggle with more current issues such as civil administration. The government has expressed its commitment to legalize the convention on enforced disappearances, as stated by the Minister of Law and Human Rights in 2006 during State Officials Forum in UN Security Council. The statement was then disseminated to several relevant departments by the Department of Foreign Affairs. Confirmation of the statement was further made in meetings between victims if human rights violations and Komnas HAM, Department of Foreign Affairs and Department of Law and Human Rights as well. At the end of the 2004-2009 period of the House of Representatives, the Special Committee for Disappeared Persons within the House recommended the legalization of the convention on enforced disappearances.

E. RPJMN 2010-2014 is worse than RPJMN 2004-2009
In the field of law and human rights enforcement, RPJM 2004-2009 was focused on handling and resolving main issues as follows:


Many human rights violations that still occurred;


Many perpetrators of human rights violations who were not prosecuted and could not be punished (impunity);


State institutions responsible for human rights promotion did not function well;


Law enforcement and legal certainty had not been enjoyed by the Indonesian community in general;


Law enforcement that was discriminative, unjust and lacking in clarity;


Handling of corruption cases by the Attorney General in 2001–2004 was not informed well to public;


Public had high expectations and demands towards the performance of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and the National Corruption Court (Tipikor) to uphold law and provide legal certainty; and


Legal actions taken against corruptors were often incomplete.

 Meanwhile, RPJM 2010-2014 does not specifically regulate law and human rights enforcement. Instead, human rights issues are placed in the political field without any detailed and specific explanations about the resolution of human rights violations, especially past cases.

F. Recommendations
We request the Chief of Police, the Minister of Law and Human Rights and the Attorney General to give special attention and priority to efforts to uphold and protect human rights in their institutional work. Mainstreaming of human rights values and principles should be made an integrated part in their institutions’ strategic programs.
In the framework of law and human rights promotion, we specifically request the following:


The Chief of Police is to prepare a new vision for the agenda of improving Polri’s accountability both internally and externally. Such agenda must encompass all Polri officers.


The Minister of Law and Human Rights is to prepare a portfolio in which human rights mainstreaming is constructed more clearly. The Minister of Law and Human Rights must play an active role in suggesting to the President to follow up on the House of Representatives’ recommendations for cases of enforced disappearances as well as proposing legislations that protect human rights.


Attorney General to follow up on Komnas HAM recommendations by conducting investigation on past human rights violations as well as ensuring a judicial review on Munir case.

Jakarta, 29 January 2010
Working Committee,

Usman Hamid, Coordinator    
Indria Fernida A, First Deputy Coordinator        
Sri Suparyati, Head of Politics, Law and Human Rights Division              
Yati Andriyani, Head of Impunity Monitoring Division