"Don't stay silent, resolve the cases of human rights violations."
Indonesia: Thirteen Years after Soeharto Impunity Prevails
JAKARTA/NEW YORK, April 7, 2011—A joint report released today by the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) and KontraS (the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence) examines the variety of state-sponsored initiatives to address mass violations of human rights in Indonesia since the fall of Soeharto’s New Order regime.
The research concludes that senior government officials consistently and repeatedly failed to achieve truth, accountability, institutional reform and reparations for the most serious crimes.
“Since Soeharto took power, hundreds of thousands of Indonesians have suffered from an array of serious human rights violations, at the hands of state actors,” said Haris Azhar, the national coordinator of KontraS. “After 1998 and the start of reformasi, there have been commendable government initiatives to address human rights abuses, including changes to the constitution, legal and security sector reform, and the establishment of new institutions to uncover the truth about past abuses and hold perpetrators accountable. However, a systemic review of these initiatives and their overwhelming failure to provide justice for victims highlights the continued triumph of state-sponsored impunity for these crimes in Indonesia, and the derailment of the reformasi movement,” he said.
Jakarta, Kompas - Pembahasan Rancangan Undang-Undang Intelijen Negara hendaknya tidak dilepaskan dari konteks sejarah peranan intelijen dalam kasus-kasus pelanggaran hak asasi manusia pada masa lalu.
Hal ini menjadi rekomendasi yang diajukan Komisi untuk Orang Hilang dan Korban Tindak Kekerasan (Kontras), Selasa (5/4). RUU itu seharusnya tidak hanya diuji di DPR, tetapi dibawa ke lokasi-lokasi operasi intelijen.
Koordinator Kontras Haris Azhar menyebutkan, saratnya keterlibatan intelijen tidak hanya memberikan kekuasaan tak terbatas kepada Orde Baru. Kekuatan intelijen itu masih terasa sampai saat ini, terbukti dengan sulitnya lembaga negara independen seperti Komnas HAM mengakses dokumen intelijen yang mengakibatkan pelanggaran HAM.
Kasus-kasus seperti Tanjung Priok 1984, Talangsari 1989, penembakan misterius (petrus), serta daerah operasi militer (DOM) di Aceh sarat bukti adanya operasi intelijen, seperti intimidasi hingga penculikan dan pembunuhan. Deretan kasus itu dan berbagai fakta menunjukkan, badan-badan intelijen didesain tertutup dan minim akuntabilitas. Badan-badan ini banyak digunakan untuk melanggengkan kekuasaan pemerintah. Hal ini bisa berulang dalam draf RUU Intelijen setelah mendapat masukan dari pemerintah.
Don't forget the human rights violations
The deliberations on the Draft State Intelligence Law cannot be separated from the historical context of the role of intelligence agencies in past cases of human rights violations.
This was one of the recommendations made by the Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras) on Tuesday April 5. The draft law should not only be reviewed by the House of Representatives (DPR), but taken to the locations of intelligence operations.
Kontras Coordinator Haris Azhar said intelligence agencies were deeply involved in providing unlimited power to the New Order regime of former President Suharto. The power of these intelligence agencies can still be felt to this day, as evidenced by the difficulty experienced by independent state institutions such as the National Human Rights Commission in gaining access to intelligence documents on cases that resulted in human rights violations.
Cases such as the Tanjung Priok shooting of Muslim protesters in 1984, the Talangsari massacre in 1989, the mysterious shooting (petrus) of alleged criminals in 1983 and 1985 and the Military Operational Zone (DOM) in Aceh provide ample evidence of intelligence operations, from intimidation to abductions and assassinations.
These cases along with other facts indicate that intelligence agencies are designed to be closed and with minimal accountability. These agencies are mostly used to preserve the power of the governments, and this could be repeated in the draft intelligence law after it obtains input from the government.
Kompas 6 April 2011 (Translation by James Balowski) Read the whole story here.
Desak Penyelesaian RUU KUHAP
Penulis: Icha Rastika | Editor: Tri Wahono
Minggu, 3 April 2011 | 18:10 WIB
JAKARTA, KOMPAS.com - Sejumlah Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat mendesak agar pembahasan Rancangan Undang-undang Tentang Hukum Acara Pidana (RUU KUHAP) yang digagas sejak 2009 segera diselesaikan. Presiden diminta mengeluarkan Surat Presiden (Surpres) agar proses legislasi terhadap RUU tersebut dapat dimulai.
"RUU yang merupakan usulan pemerintah ini tidak pernah sampai ke parlemen, padahal RUU KUHAP menjadi agenda prolegnas (program legislasi nasional) sejak 2009 juga dalam 2011," ujar Kepala Litbang Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Jakarta, Restaria Hutabarat dalam jumpa pers di kantor Yayasan Lembaha Bantuan Hukum Indonesia, Cikini, Jakarta, Minggu (3/4/2011).
Menurut Restaria, pembahasan RUU KUHAP tersebut mandek karena mendapat perlawanan dari penegak hukum, khususnya kepolisian. "Disinyalir penolakan dari Polri ini akibat adanya pengaturan tentang Hakim Komisaris dalam draft Undang-undangnya," katanya.
Menurutnya, Polri selalu mengemukakan penolakan atas konsep hakim komisaris. "Penolakan atas konsep adanya otoritas pengawasan terhadap upaya paksa adalah upaya serius untuk mempertahankan praktek penyiksaan, penyuapan, pemerasan, dan praktik mafia hukum di Polri," ujarnya.
Pressure to finalize the Draft Law on Criminal Procedure
A number of non-governmental organisations urges the government to finalize the debate on the Draft Law on Criminal Procedure, which has been under consideration since 2009. They ask the President to issue a Presidential Letter so that the legislative process can start.
"The Draft Law is a proposal by the government, but has not yet been sent to the Parliament, whereas it is an item on the National legislative Agenda (Prolegnas) since 2009, also for 2011", says the Head of the Division of Research and Development of the LBH Jakarta, Restaria Hutabarat in a meeting with the press on Sunday 3 April 2011, in the office of the Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Indonesia, Cikini, Jakarta.
According to Restaria, the analysis of the Draft Law got stuck because of opposition from the side of the law enforcement, especially the police. "It has been noted that the reluctance from the police is caused by the regulation about a examining magistrate (rechter-commissaris) in the Draft Law", she said. She added that the Indonesian Police has always refused the concept of an esamining magistrate. "This refusal directed against the concept of an authority that controls means of coercion, is a seriopus effort to maintain the practices of torture, corruption, extortion and the practice of the legal mafia within the police", she said.
On 23 March 2011, the Netherlands has ratified the Convention for the Protection against Enfoirced Disappearances. It is the 24th country that has ratified the CPED. After the 20th ratification (by Iraq) in December 2010 the Convention became operational. See: treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx . The Convention makes possible that individual copmplaints are submiited to a special Committee. For the text of the Convention, see www2.ohchr.org/english/law/disappearance-convention.htm .