Press Release
[ dilihat 128 kali ]

The Human Rights Situation 2010: Void Protection Against Citizens Human Rights

This end of year note was made to assess the situation of enforcement of human rights (HR) in Indonesia during 2010.  The assessment was done by looking to the extent of state activity to respect, to protect and to fulfil human rights in its jurisdiction. To respect presupposes recognition of legal rules on human rights. Meanwhile protection presupposes existence of active role from state in protecting individual citizens from threat of violence or human rights violations. Furthermore, fulfillment can be seen as the State effort to provide facility and access for its citizens to obtain their rights.  The measurement of these trias obligation not merely yield quantitative description, but also qualitative. Frrom these three obligation measurement KontraS found that in 2010, the State failed to provide Human Rights protection to its citizen. This can be seen from a number of specific human rights situations;

1. Assault on Workers of Human Rights and Democracy
The issue of safety and protection towards human rights defenders such as journalist and anti corruption activists, has not became a main focus of Human Rights respect by the government and legal enforcers in Indonesia.  Lately, on 17th December 2010, Alfrets Mirulewan Journalist from Pelangi in Southwest Maluku allegedly murdered. His death adds a long row of violence against journalists.  Forms of violence against journalist in KontraS records are murder that were suspected to begin with act of violence (e.g torture); Beatings or ill treatment during work of coverage as well as the destruction of working tools, such as camera. Allegations of motives behind the violence against the journalists certainly due to news reporting or coverage they have done. Based on the area distribution, some violence incidents occurred outside the capital. Based on communication done by KontraS with the law enforcers and the victims family, those cases has not been solved legally. Many of the settlements were done through off court settlement by the perpetrators towards the journalists, especially in the form of replacing destroyed tools. Overall overview based on overview from advocacy organization such as KontraS, LBH Pers and AJI, throughout 3 years (2008-2010/ mid august) there were at least 141 journalists received violence threats both physically or non physically during their work in the field. Beside violences, other ill treatment against Human rights and democracy workers occurred in other form; criminalization and the lack of legal process. This can be seen in the case of Tama S Langkun (ICW staff) that were beaten up. His case did not show any progress though police claimed they have worked, SBY has expressed his support to the case and elected head of Indonesian Police, Timor Pradopo stated that this case is a priority. Criminalization also occurred against farmers legal consult, for example the case of Eva H Bande Toili Banggai in South East Sulawesi. In addition this year were nullified with lack of progress on Munir’s case.  

2. Weak Police Accountability
Throughout 2010, Indonesian Police performance drawn into the public spotlight. Public trust eroded since th police could not bear the function of law enforcement and provide security. The consequence is the absence of guarantees for the secure feeling of the Indonesian citizens.   In KontraS note, during the last 12 years, Indonesian Police have been through many stages of institutional reforms. Both in paradigmatic level, as well as empiric. Various important instrument to guarantees law enforcement and security also been made available by Indonesian Police, such as Head of Police Regulations on Human Rights Num.8/2009.

Throughout 2010, there were 34 violences commited by the Police. Eight of them which results in civilians killed by gunfire. The practice of violence generally cases of torture. Opportunity to torture usually appears in the case investigation stage. KontraS also recorded several major cases, such as Buol (8 died, 26 heavily injured, gunshot wounds, minor inuries and beatings) and arrest of accused Papuans as member of the rebel TPN OPM (16 detained, 1 died, 2 gunshot wounds: 4/10 and 21/11). Police officers frequently uses excessive use of forces that is also seen in the cases of criminalization in the business sectors. Record shown that there were 7 cases occurred in Sumatera, Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Papua; whereas the land and natural resources became the source of conflict between capital owner and the people. Generally the police siding with the business interest.

Institutionalization of violence does not stop there. Special detacement 88 Anti Teror known to have a mandate to eradicate terrorism was not free from this practice. In year 2010, there were 24 people killed by Densus 88 operation in several regions. Cases with striking public attention includes; terrorist raid operation in Jantho Aceh mountains, terrorist raid in Cawang and Cikampek, The arrest of Abu Bakar Ba’asyir, Anti terrorism operation of Bank CIMB Niaga robbery and the attack against Hamparan Perak police sector.

The lack of clarity in the anti terrorism operation procedure has been a potential to cause Human Rights violation. Steps taken by Densus 88 usually tangent to this occurance: first, every anti terrorism operation always cause life casualties. The officers did not put forward persuasive efforts first. Second, the officers often paralyze the victim without first verifying their identity. Third, action of shooting the target, not intending to paralyze even though the suspect was not in a position of resisting. Fourth, People suspected involved in terrorism activity never received a warrant for their arrest or detention. Fifth, in several specific case, Densus 88 officers often arrest falsely. These actions bring detrimental to the property of the residents and giving physical pressure to the residents. Beside of that, agenda of deradicalisation of criminal justice system against the detainees of terrorisme crime act is still running in place, even a potential setback, when 72 alleged terrorist suspect that were cought by Densus 88, 16 of whom were former terrorist convict (data BNPT 2010).

Vast practice of abuse done by the police, one of the reason, was caused by the weak control both internal or external. Such as minimalist role of the National Police Commission. 

3. Treatment against Political Prisoners
Throughout 2010, Police force keep arresting some people in Maluku and Papua allegedly conducting separatism political activity; RMS (Republic of Southern mollucas) and OPM (Organization for Free Papua). These arrest were carried out using article 106, 110 Criminal Code and Government Regulation no. 77 year 2007 on State symbol upon alleged activity, among others flag raising, allegedly planning a demonstration, and possessing the organizations flag. Even the arrest was also based on Human Rights campaign tools, such as poster “Free Political Prisoners”. In the the arrest process, based on the monitoring, reporting from family and investigation by KontraS, was found many procedural errors, such as absence of  arrest warrant, violence of torture and other ill treatment during detention period of political prisoners, both in Mollucas and in Papua. Those ill treatment includes restrictions of access for family to visit the prisoners, restrictions of public access to visit the prisoners, lack of access to legal consult, and poor conditions of detention and health services.  Many among the prisoners and detainees had health deprivation caused by poor sanitation system and result of torture during custody. Exception was given to Filep Karma (Papua), who went to a hospital in Jakarta, for further intensive care. But in contrast with Yusuf Sipakoli, RMS detainee in Nania correction institution, Ambon. Rapid response were not carried out by the correction institution officers, that lead to his death, after passing through intensive care in Kudamati general hospital, Ambon. Health treatment were given after the correction institute gave Yusuf to his family to be treated, on the first week of September 2010.

This series of violent act involve several personel from the police (including densus 88), the military, civil authorities (village chief) and prison officers (correction institute). As in the the case of arrest, detention and torture strongly allegedly done by Densus 88 AT, against 15 people in Ambon and 6 people in Saparuam were done by vice chief of police sector Saparua, Iptu Frans Siahaya alongside with other member of Saparua police sector.

Refering to KontraS record, during 2010 there were 34 Papua political prisoners. They were detained in several prison, such as Abepura, Biak, Wamena, nabire, Fak-fak, Serui and Timika. Head of the Regional office of the Departement of Law and Human rights, Nazarudin Bunas, SH, MH have sent a request to the Minister of Law and Human Rights Patrialis Akbar, to grant pardon over 25 Papua political prisoners. However, Filep Karma on 14th august 2010 had deliver his remission rejection to the minister of Law and Human Rights. Furthermore, four political prisoners were acquitted conditionaly and Yusak pakage had received pardon from the president on 7th July 2010.

Furthermore, 83 people were still registered as Moluccas political prisoners/detainees. They are spread out in 8 prisons, such as Kuning Nusa Kambangan, Permisan Nusa Kambangan, Malang, Porong, Semarang, Kediri, Nania Ambon and Waiheru Ambon.

4. Freedom of Religion, Faith and expression Still under Threat
Throughout 2010, Religious and faith freedom still inherits state’s failure from the previous years. The adherents of Ahmadiyah and Christian minority are in appaling condition where they were left face to face with other community groups using violence to oppose their existence and house of worship.  Based on KontraS monitoring there are tendency, first, that the community groups whom against the existence of those minority used Islamic identitiy and conduct demonstration and physical assault also hate speech.  Even these actions occurred in the vicinity of Constitution Court, when several organization propose Judicial Review upon Act Num 1/PNPS/1965 (Religion blasphemy act). Second, state actors play role through the policy of Joint Decree (SKB) of three minister: Religion minister, Attorney general and minister of interior, that are used for legitimation by those perpetrators organization, to extend their act of violence.

There are rising tendency that the state conduct a politic of omission over series of violence against freedom of religious. We can see on the violence case against HKBP Church Ciketing Bekasi on September 2010. The police officers were unable to prevent violent act by FPI. We can also refer to the latest violent act of locking in Hasanah Kautsar orphanage, Tasikmalaya, West Java. The locking in involves Tasikmalaya district attorney and the Tasikmalaya Police resort (9/12). Similar case also occurred against Yasmin Church Bogor, that were done by police personel and Satpol PP (19/9).

On several discussion events that involve victims of political and human rights violation of 1965-67 the law enforcers also actively collaborating with anti democracy civil organization requesting those discussion to be dissolved.  This is a threat against freedom to assemble and expression. Fortunately, the constitution court on 13th October 2010 declared Act no 4/pnps/1963 on the authority of banning books should not implemented without decision/court order first.

5. Violence in Papua
Securitization policy in Papua had a direct implications against Human Rights protection guarantee. Throughout 2010, occurred 11 violence, including enforced disappearance. Violence incident usually involves military and police in an operation under the name of security to find Free papua adherents (TPN/OPM) and their weaponry logistics. Violence in Papua not only suffered by man, but also by woman and children. They usually receive physical and phsycological threat including rape.

On of the violence case in Papua that catch the attention of international public, is the torture video viraling in the Youtube site, one of them is Yawan Wayeni torture video, a Papua political activist accused as a member of Free Papua Army/movement (TPN/OPM). Other torture video involves Tingginambut Papua resident that were tortured by military officers (Victims on the video: Goliat Tabuni, Kotoran Wenda and Tives Tabuni).

In the case of Yawan Wayeni torture case, members of mobile brigade of Papua district police were strongly alleged as perpetrator of torture. Meanwhile, in the Tingginambut residents torture case, the army were allegedly became the main perpetrators of torture.  Trial was held in military court III-19 Military District Command (Kodam) XVII/Cendrawasih, Jayapura on November 2010 and prosecute four defendants (Private Syaiminan, Lubis, Second private Joko Sulistiono, Dwi Purwanto and Second Lieutenant Cosmos); but still exist many omission upon the incident facts and victims sense of justice. In the middle of poor human rights situation, the central government, the president still keep silence upon the suffering of the Papuans.

6. Prolonging Impunity against Gross Violation of Human Rights
Throughout 2010, lack of accountability towards previous human rights violations is still ongoing and kept growing, this indication were clearly seen from incidents occurred during 2010, this includes; first, low political commitment, this can be proven with the ongoing ignorance of four recommendations from Special Committee (Pansus) DPR RI for the kidnapping and enforce disappearance 1997/1998 to the president and government institution 1 . Government respons , both President and his administration,still in a level of discourse, if it is not charitatif.  Second, legal process of Gross violation of Human Rights case that were under investigation by The National Commission on Human Rights still stalled and without clear legal standings. The new Attorney general, since elected, have not publish any policy to end the situation’s stalemate. Meanwhile from the side of Ministry of Law and Human Rights exist no synergy concept and clear framework in the legislation process for completion of past Human Rights violation cases such as; Draft Act on Commission on Truth and Reconciliation (KKR), Human Rights court 2  ( Act num 26 year 2000) and Human Rights Court in Aceh,  3 also ratification of International Convention for the protection of all person from enforced disappearance.

 Third, there is no justice agenda against post conflict settlement such as in Aceh and Timor Leste. In Aceh, even though the effort to build peace is still ongoing, this situation is not in balance with accountability of Human Rights violation in Aceh. The debate of forming the truth and reconciliation commission  in Aceh throughout 2010 still depends on the formation of national truth and reconciliation commission. Likewise with the formation of Human Rights court in Aceh that is totally undiscussed. Furthermore on Timor Leste, KontraS observed that there is no effort on implementing recommendation from the Truth and Amity Commission reports, which one of it is to form commission for the disappeared in order to search those who disappeared during the violent periode in Timor Leste.

Situation above is different with controversial names; whereas the late Soeharto almost granted a title of national hero. Sjafrie Sjamsoedin allegedly responsible for several incidents were given the post of vice minister of defence and Timor Pradopo which is present during the Trisakti 1998 incident became head of police. Also Eurico Gutteres, on of the chief of Integration fighter army (PPI) acquitted by supreme court, promoting protection towards 403 members of PPI that hold the status of suspect and are in the list of wanted person by the serious crime unit in Timor Leste.

7. Indonesia’s Human Rights Foreign Policy is better
Projection of a positive Human Rights situation from SBY government is shown in the foreign policy. This is because Indonesian positive image in international eyes due to its strategic role: as a quite successful democratic transition state with the biggest moslem citizen; with stabil economic and relatively unaffected by the global economic crisis; and de facto regarded as a role in South East Asia region in which will became its leader de jure next year, Positive signs of Indonesia’s human rights foreign policy can be seen in this past years. Indonesia’s government through the ministry of foreign affairs seriously trying to increase the capacity of ASEAN Inter-governmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) with a mandate alike with international standard of human rights mechanism. Unfortunately those proposal gain resistance from other countries. There are still possibilities for human rights issue in ASEAN level, Indonesia will push an agenda to promote and protect human rights more progressive. So far international support is quite positive to Indonesian contribution in human rights matters, but it is an urgent need to be able to response the most chronic human rights problem in this region, that is to respond the Burma question faster and firmer.

8. Security institution Reform still incomprehensive
In 2010 the momentum of security sector reform marked by succession of the chief of army and police, that were presume can progressively carrying out an unfinished agenda. KontraS welcome the new Military commander statement, General Agus Suhartono, during his fit and proper test in the legislative house (DPR) that admitted there is still some deficit in the military reform agenda. We agree that there are three deficit agenda that is reform of the territorial command system, completion of the takeover of the military business, and revision of the military court. Of course this statement must be followed up by the military, concretely, bearing in mind that those three were constitutional mandate, although it is understandable that the military commander’s statement can develop resistance even from inside the military itself.

KontraS see security sector reform agenda deficit is in the minimal accountability scheme to respond a human righrs violation conducted by security sector actors (police, military and intelligent). Military sector accountability for example is still hindered by resistance from the military to revised the present military court system. Although this system has contribute to the practice of impunity and does not have any deterent effect with injust verdict for the victims and lack of transparency in the process. Likewise in the police sector, the absence of an independent external accountability mechanism made the handling abuse of power case (especially alleged case of corruption and human rights violation) less credible. Proposal to reform the police accountability system through revision of President Regulation Num 17/2005 on National Police Commission is seen as insufficient to fulfil the needs. Furthermore, in the intelligent sector, accountability agenda still awaits the new draft act on Inteligent. Beside institutional accountability, security sector reform agenda still missed the personel accountability, that is a vetting mechanism for those with poor human rights trackrecords from the past. Minimal accountability for security sector actors will indirectly facilitate new human rights violation in the future due to the absence of deterent factor. Thus it is predictable that security sector actors behavior will not likely to change in the coming year.

Other important security sector reform agenda is the coordination and synergy among security sector actors. So far the relation between the police, military and intelligent is still crosscutting in handling national security. This can be seen in the handling of terrorism issue by the formation of National Body on Terrorisme Eradication (BNPT) whereas the military has breached an area not in their institution competence, that is law enforcement. Also in a controversial topic in the Draft act on Inteligent that will discuss the mandate of an intelligent agent that includes arresting and detaining someone without being based on a normal legal procedure. Those items can potentially yield systematic human rights violation. Actually the opportunity to reorder the role and specific function of each actor can be done by formulating a draft act on National Security, which unfortunately is not a priority for both the government and the legislative.

After 12 years of political transition, four constitution amandement and three general election, Indonesia still covered by the problem of violence and failure to prosecute the perpetrators. Regeneration of leaders in law institution did not bring good news in the effort of legal protection for the victims and vulnerable groups in Indonesia. As mention above, unsecure feeling and lack of security guarantee caused by institution and authorities. The police became the most dominant institution that showed their violent and discriminative behavior throughout 2010. Likewise with the police, the military still enjoys the weak corrective mechanism upon past abuse done by its personel. Human rights law progress is at stale, mere writing. Principle and regulation accommodated in several regulation (including International Human Rights regulation ratified by Indonesian government) went unrespected. State apparatus failed to grasp the democratic principle of anti violence in their daily practices.

President SBY and his government seem satisfied and proud with a situation of merely having human rights regulation and having a good image in the regional community. In national context throughout 2010 SBY and his government prefer to maintain his coalition political stability than promoting human rights. SBY let use the new order security approach (and criminalization) in handling the anti government political activity in Mollucas and Papua.  Forgetting that democracy must make room for dialogue and non violence measure. Also in the agenda of terrorism eradication. This is inverse with the hollow protection to the minority. During 2010 human rights were violated due to policy oriented in state interest instead of policy oriented in human interest. State actively take action upon situation that became a global agenda and pose threat to its physical integrity. State ignorant in protecting minor and vulnerable group and individual existence. Including by omission ignoring the absence of corrective measure of past violence case. In the other side, each day the suffering and disappointment spreads out even more, from Aceh to Papua, even to neighbouring contry Timor Leste. Not surprising if SBY and his government popularity sink significantly.

Projection for 2011
In the future we worry that the state will merely choose a normative strategy in promoting human rights. This strategy is also important, but insufficient to fulfil the need and demand for full restoration of human rights in Indonesia..This means there are promotion activity as a minimal border to measure state’s human rights commitment. Those agenda is to push the role and more effective function of the ASEAN Commission of Human Rights (AICHR) to prove Indonesias leadership in the ASEAN region; launch a new human rights national action plan; and ratifiying important human rights instrument such as conventionon migrant workers, Rome Statute, Convention against enforced disappearance, etc. These act is necessary but insufficient. Therefore we recommend that president SBY and his government to immediately make a breakthrough to respond to shis situation by formulationg a blue print of human rights enforcement. This blueprint must contains human rights enforcement vision in accordance with Indonesias humanist and anti discrimination ideals; includes human rights issues in Indonesia; and contains strategic formulation to coordinate and strenghtening the law enforcer to act in order to preserve the secure and justice feeling for the victims and the people, based on existing rule of law.

In the future, several measurement of human rights success that can be a measurement tools, includes the existence of following up and completion of Munirs case, reduced level of violence against journalist and other activist; not criminalize political activist of Papua and Maluku with a peace dialogue especially for Papua;  Protection guarantee of identity, religion and belief upon several groups; exist commitment to reform control institutions and accountability; last legislation process should not hijack out human rights regulation from their fundamental standard and border.

Jakarta, 28th  December 2010

KontraS Team