AHRC (INDONESIA): Delayed Criminal Code reform prolongs institutional use of torture

FROM ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AHRC-STM-083-2011
June 24, 2011

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission on the Occasion of the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, June 26, 2011

INDONESIA: Delayed Criminal Code reform prolongs institutional use of torture

Has the video showing military torture in Indonesia in October last year created any serious concern for torture in that country? In the video, members of the Indonesian military tortured two indigenous Papuans to obtain information about alleged separatist activities. While some of the perpetrators got a few months of imprisonment for disobeying the orders of their superior, nobody was punished for the torture committed, nor did the victims receive any compensation or medical treatment. The extreme practices shown in the video shocked the public even though numerous cases of torture had been documented by NGOs and the National Human Rights Commission for years.

Torture is frequently used by the Police and the Military to force confessions, intimidate or to obtain information. The infliction of severe pain by public officials for the above and certain other purposes is prohibited in the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (full text in English, Bahasa Indonesia). This definition of torture and its prohibition also applies to Indonesia. Experts in and outside the country have repeatedly pointed out the neglect for institutional reform that the government has shown so far to effectively end this medieval practice.

Indonesia decided to ratify the Convention in 1998 and make it thus fully applicable into its legal and institutional system. While this may have appeared as a dedicated choice towards human rights, this promise from 1998 has never been kept. After 13 years, the government and parliament have failed to take even the basic key steps to end torture. As a result, torture continues to be applied.

What are the next steps to end torture? To make torture a crime! Amending the Criminal Code to make an act as defined in the international Convention punishable by law is a minimum requirement. Instead of fulfilling this requirement the government makes reference to maltreatment articles that actually only cover some parts of the problem as well as conduct guidelines for the police, which are neither promoted nor effectively enforced within the service.

Torture can be a convenient methodology for unprofessional members of the police force or the national military to “get things done”. Obtaining confessions, intimidating protesters, threatening minorities, producing quick case reports or to increase the income through bribes. Many dedicated staff in the national police, the national police commission and other related bodies have made considerable efforts to end this practice in their institutions but to support their efforts, more needs to be done.

Moreover, many see the use of torture as a legitimate and necessary mean to deal effectively with any wrongs ranging from petty crimes like theft up to organised terrorism. “Tough crimes need tough responses”, some may respond while forgetting that punishment is not part of the role of the police and military. Punishment for crimes is to be applied after a judicial process has established the guilt of the perpetrator and may then include imprisonment or other forms of non-violent punishments. But leaving an entire justice process in the hands of a police officer cannot be further away from fair trial and a just society.

Sunday June 26, 2011 is the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture. Indonesia has thousands of victims, probably more. Many of them have not committed any crime and the majority of them is poor or from marginalised groups. Persons undergoing serious torture often suffer from the post traumatic stress disorder syndrome, cannot sleep well, relate personally to society and are violated and broken in their heart and soul. Decades of medical research have shown how tremendous and long lasting the impact of torture for the body and mind are for the victims and often also for the perpetrator.

Justice does not need torture as the eradication of the practice proofs in other countries. In fact as long as torture continues in a society, violence prevails. This practice can end if the use of torture is effectively punished and fully prohibited. To fulfil the promise Indonesia made in 1998 to the Indonesian people the Criminal Code needs to be reformed immediately. The victims of torture need our support.

# # #

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation that monitors human rights in Asia, documents violations and advocates for justice and institutional reform to ensure the protection and promotion of these rights. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.

Warning: Distressing Images of the killing of Derek Adii, May 14, 2011

According to information from the Justice and Peace Secretariat of the Kingmi Church, Papua, a man called Derek Adii who had just completed his application for appointment as a civil servant in the sub-district of Deiyai, was maltreated by six members of the armed forces in the Nabire port area on Saturday 14 May.

He was beaten and stabbed and died as a result.

WARNING: THE FOLLOWING IMAGES OF DEREK ADII ARE HIGHLY DISTRESSING, BUT MUST BE PUBLICISED

The Indonesian State is responsible for the shooting of three civilians in Dogiyai

Press Release

The Indonesian State is responsible for the shooting of three civilians in Dogiyai

 

(JAKARTA, Friday, May 13th 2011) – The Anti-Militaristic Papuan Students’ Coalition urges the Head of the National Police to immediately dismiss the Heads of Papua provincial police, Nabire regency police and Moanemani district police after the shooting of three civilians that occurred in Moanemani district, Dogiyai regency, Papua.

This was stated by Frans Tomoki from the Anti-Militaristic Papuan Students’ Coalition during a press conference at the KontraS office, Jln. Borobudur No. 14, on Friday, May 13th.

According to Frans, shooting incidents have been occurring for nearly one month but haven’t been clarified yet. He also criticized the brutal behavior of  the police officers who shot at civilians without warning.

“There must be a warning before shooting, but the police directly opened fire without thinking of the possible consequences.  This  can be categorized as a serious human rights violation.”

According to Agus Okama Kosay, human rights violation have been going on in Papua since the territory was forcefully merged into Indonesia. “From 1961 on there have been human rights violation and tensions keep rising.”

In the Reformasi era, all the more since the implementation of the Special Autonomy Law, human rights violations should have decreased. But this eventually didn’t materialize. As compared to the Ancient and New Order eras, the Special Autonomy era is even worse.

“Why do Papuan people think that the Special Autonomy is a total failure?  Because human rights violations keep occurring  and the central government never tried to solve this problem,” Agus explained.

The Anti-Militaristic Papuan Students’ Coalition also urges the international community to lobby the Indonesian government to take responsibility  for the frequent serious human rights violations in Papua, including the shooting incident in Dogiyai regency.

Images of shooting sites, Dogiyai (IMages courtesy of witnesses on ground)

“The international community must lobby the Indonesian government to  thoroughly investigate several human rights violations in Papua,” Agus added.

The shooting of three civilians by police officers took place on April 13th, 2011, around 1.30 pm. It began as police officers raided a togel [illegal lottery] kiosk in Moanemani market housing complex. They seized the money belonging to the togel vendor who was just known as an agent working in fact for police members.

A group of people refused this and followed the police car to the district police station. The upset police officers shot at three civilians and wounded two others, directly in front of the district police station. Dominikus Auwe (24), Otniel Yobe (26) and Agus Pigay (24) died, while two of their friends were critically wounded.

As a consequence, local people were angered and torched the Moanemani district police station as well as several kiosks belonging to migrants from other islands, including the illegal lottery kiosk operated under the names  of First Brigadiers I Made Sudarsa and Eka. Papua provincial police sent two Brimob [Mobile Brigade] platoons to secure the area in Dogiyai and investigate the involvement of police officers but to date,  no further clarification was provided. (**)

Statement on Indonesia Intelligence Bill Drafting

Advocacy Coalition on Indonesia Intelligence Bill Joint Statement
http://idsps.org/english-news/pers-release/advocacy-coalition-on-indonesia-intelligence-bill-joint-statement-201104035746/
 

Indonesian parliament with the government plans to ratify the State Intelligence Bill draft to become the Law of Intelligence in 2011. Through a series of discussions that have been done by the parliament and government, Intelligence draft has undergone several changes.

From the beginning we give full support to the parliament and the government’s plan which will regulate intelligence institution through the establishment of the Intelligence Bill. However, discussion and ratification of the Intelligence Bill should become integral part of intelligence reform. In that context, the basic principles of democratic state should have been an inherent part of the Intelligence Bill.

We assessed that the draft of State Intelligence Bill that is being discussed parliament is not fully accommodate the principles of democratic countries and it raises serious issues against the values of democratic life of the country itself, including:

1. Intelligence definition
Article 1 point (2) states intelligence as a state government agency. Basically, the intelligence agencies are not government agencies but the instrument of the state. The definition has put intelligence position as tool of the ruler that works for the interests of rulers and not the instrument of the state which work for the benefit of its people. It’s very concerning since it is very likely intelligence can be used to spy on people in the interest of the ruler alone and not to the real enemy as Indonesia had experienced in the New Order era.

2. Intercept
The existence of refusal of court authorization requirement before conducting interception as mentioned in the explanation of Article 31 is not only potentially threaten citizens’ rights but also vulnerable to abuse (abuse of power) for the sake of economic and political power. Intelligence do need the authority to conduct tapping/interception, however, it must be done through a standardized and rigid mechanism and must have a clear prerequisite, such as the importance of getting court approval for conducting interception.

Referring to the decisions of the Constitutional Court No. 006/PPU-1/2003; No. 012-016-019/PUU-IV/2006; No. 5/PUU-VIII/2010, the Court believes it is necessary to establish specific regulation about interception on the level of State Law/Bill to prevent the possibility of abuse of authority for wiretapping and recording. Thus it is only appropriate that the discussion of the Intelligence bill conducted in parallel with the discussion of the bill on Interception in the interest of coordinating arrangements for intelligence ability to intercepts.

3. Secret Intelligence Information
Setting intelligence secret referred in Article 24 jo Article 39 of the Intelligence Bill draft still raises multiple interpretations and are vague. The multiple interpretations are threatening the freedom of information, freedom of the press and democracy itself.

4. Arrest (List of Revision given by Government)
Granting authority for the intelligence to arrest threatens human rights and damage criminal justice system mechanism. To grant the authority is tantamount to legalizing kidnapping using Intelligence Bill considering intelligence work is closed/covert and secret. It is important to remember that the state intelligence agency is part of the non-judicial agencies that are not included as part of law enforcement officers, such as police and prosecutors, therefore granting authority to arrest is wrong and can not be justified. In a country that respect rule of law, authority to arrest and detain is only obtained by law enforcement officials.

5. State Intelligence Coordinating Institution (Lembaga Koordinasi Intelijen Negara – LKIN)
State Intelligence Coordinating Institution (LKIN) as the new institution provided by this bill will be the agency that replaces the position of the State Intelligence Agency (Badan Intelijen Negara – BIN) that has very broad authorityy. In that case, LKIN should not have the operational authority and functions, such as making communication interception, checking flow of funds, and such. Implementation of operational functions should be handed over to existing intelligence agencies which have operational authority.

6. Oversight
Oversight mechanism in the National Intelligence Bill draft is only made in the form of parliamentary oversight by the House of Representatives held by the completeness of the House of Representatives in charge of intelligence oversight. There are no regulations governing internal controls, executive oversight, and legal supervision. At this point, the oversight conducted by the parliament should be performed by a separate intelligence committees within the parliament, namely by forming a new special commission overseeing the intelligence.

7. Organization and Role
From an organizational standpoint, the Bill draft did not adopt the State Intelligence structural differentiation and specialization of functions. State Intelligence Bill draft does not strictly divide the working area of foreign intelligence, domestic intelligence, military intelligence, and law enforcement intelligence.

8. Structure and Position
State Intelligence Bill draft also has not been able to separate accountability between the structures that is responsible for policy making with the structure responsible for operational in implementation of the policy. Ideally all security actors who serve as executors of the policy are under or become part of ministries/ministerial-level the structure, intelligence agencies are no exception.

9. Personnel and Recruitment
Associated with members of the intelligence, the State Intelligence Bill regulates vaguely of intelligence personnel. It is not regulated whether recruitment mechanism is either open or closed.

10. Code of Conduct and Prohibition
In addition, the State Intelligence Bill draft does not contain regulation or codes of ethic for intelligence that includes obligations, rights and restrictions for all activities and aspects of intelligence.

11. Making Intelligence a Civil Institution
This Bill draft has not incorporated the agenda of making intelligence as civil institution. Ideally in the era of democracy, all intelligence agencies are civilian and not active military, except for military intelligence. Until now, the State Intelligence Agency (BIN) is still filled by active military personnel despite the head of intelligence is civilian.

12. Rights of victims
State Intelligence Bill draft has not included the rights of victims, particularly those related to complaints of victims if there are intelligence actions that are deviate and caused serious problems for the implementation of the rights of people.

We urge the parliament and the Indonesian government not to rush in passing the State Intelligence Bill and provide space for the community to provide input and views on the efforts to improve the State Intelligence Bill draft, as provided in Law No. 10 Year 2004 on Procedures for Making Laws and Regulations.

We fully appreciate members of Parliament who rejected the plan on granting intelligence the authority to arrest in the Intelligence Bill. Ideally the formulation of the Intelligence Bill is to maintain a balance between the need for countries to guarantee and protect the freedom of civil society and human rights on one hand; and to guard and protect national security on the other.

Jakarta, March 28, 2011
Advocacy Coalition on Indonesia Intelligence Bill

Institutions:
Imparsial, Kontras, IDSPS, Elsam, the Ridep Institute, Lesperssi, Setara Institute, LBH Masyarakat, ICW, YLBHI, LBH Jakarta, HRWG, Praxis, Infid, Yayasan SET, KRHN, Leip, Ikohi, Foker Papua, PSHK, MAPI, dan Media Link

Individual:
Bambang Widodo Umar

http://idsps.org/english-news/pers-release/advocacy-coalition-on-indonesia-intelligence-bill-joint-statement-201104035746/

We hope international network can help monitor and push Indonesian government to create Intelligence Bill that is accountable and respect the value of democracy.

We welcome every feedback and support from your organization around the world.

Have a nice day,


Regards,

Mufti Makaarim al-Ahlaq
Executive Director
Institute for Defense Security and Peace Studies

Broadcasting Papua’s Songs of Freedom: Why the international community must support West Papua’s citizen media development

FREE THE PEOPLE? FREE THE MEDIA!

by Nick Chesterfield

A Paper presented at the University of Sydney Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies “Comprehending Papua Conference”, February 22-23, 2011.    This paper will form a chapter of the forthcoming book “Comprehending Papua”, to be published in early 2011 by the University of Sydney Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies.

———

It is almost a cliché today that peoples wishing to free themselves from tyranny are turning in huge numbers to citizen journalism both to tell their stories to the outside world, and to put a formidable brake on the out of sight, out of mind mentality that allows state organs to conduct constant abuse with impunity. The rise of citizen media is giving mainstream journalism the kick it needs to remember its core business of giving voice to the voiceless.  In West Papua, the Voiceless are slowly discovering they can roar.

Just a few weeks ago an event occurred in Tunisia that was to be the spark for the pan-Arab awakening which has just seen yet another dictator ousted, now in Egypt.  After a local trader immolated himself in protest against the Tunisian regime, citizen media succeeded in viralizing the news of this event.  “We could protest for two years here, but without videos no one would take any notice of us,” said a relative of the martyred 25-year-old.

For media activists and journalists reporting Papua, this truth is self-evident, and its acceptance hopefully could ignite the spark of uprising in Papua.  The opportunities presented by the Pan-Arab (and other) awakenings are not being lost on the young generation in Papua.  Social media in Papua is buzzing, unafraid, with vibrant discussions of implications for Papua of the pan-Arabic revolutionary success.  The reality is that a spontaneous awakening and mass politicisation of ordinary Papuans is completely inevitable, and it is being ably assisted by switched-on local people developing their capacity to tell the story to the world.

In researching for several stories over the last few months, my sources have told me in no uncertain terms that they are all ready for a trigger to explode the situation.  The only thing holding back sustained mass action – revolution even – across occupied Papua is the constant bickering between exile groups, the actions of the collaborator elites, desperate to cling to the illusion that Jakarta is not there just to steal their land and send them to the moon, and for those who will put their own interests ahead of those surviving under occupation.

What is a mystery is how this mass consciousness will survive the elite and exile power games that are evident in most transitional polities throughout recent history (and is certainly present in West Papua today); whether those exiles will hijack the efforts of the young generation or listen to the actual wishes of their people; and if Jakarta can be trusted not to unleash the truly evil and deeply entrenched habitual brutality that is its only constant in becoming the new colonialists; or that they will claim their place amongst the civilised by not slaughtering those who want peace. History is a wise teacher, and its lesson is never trust the evil or greedy to reform of its own accord.

To keep these ugly realities in check, West Papua (and the international community) needs a determined, effective, vibrant and fearless citizen and professional media to deliver real-time accountability both internally and internationally.

Real time advocacy is vital for the international community to act to end Papua’s suffering.  Human Rights advocates conduct scientific research into abuses, but because this information does not get out easily, the problems in Papua are only now getting known to the world.

I need to ask you all today an honest question:  without the hard work of journalists in Papua and those outside assisting them to get their voice to international media, would Papua even be in people’s consciousness today?   So why is the international arena concerned with West Papua falling prey to the disease of factionalism and Big Man syndrome, and not in assisting WestPapuan people to get their stories into the living rooms of the world?

Many loud mouthed exiles claim significant legitimacy, but baulk and splutter when asked to prove it.   This has developed a culture of opacity across the exile movement.  A strong and diverse citizen based media across Papua can easily counter exile’s game playing and false claims by ensuring credibility and honesty in social movements. It benefits and strengthens social movements too by giving the skills and practice for sharpening their message, and creating a powerful argument for international support for their aims.  Strong domestic media also removes international government’s excuses for inaction, by seriously raising the credibility and verification bar.

If the international community is serious about improving the lives of Papuan people, it will help develop the capacity of the West Papuan media to tell the story of what is going on, and press Jakarta hard to allow immediate international media access.  After all, with full accountability, what is there to be afraid of?

Largely in response to years of wilful ignorance and self-censorship of the Indonesian created horrors in West Papua by international media, many sectors of Papuan society spontaneously and independently began a dramatic take-up of social media technology, exponentially increasing since 2008. Blogs, social networking and online media outlets are being utilized all over the country, by a young generation of Papuans impatient for real change.  Today’s mass Papuan movement is mainly urban, educated, innovative, nonviolence based, and embracing significantly the power of citizen and social media as a key plank of civil resistance strategy.

Very occasionally West Papua does get in the news, but only through the co-ordination between committed journalists and human rights workers working together and ear-bashing news editors.

Due to the ongoing ban by Indonesia on international media and humanitarian organisations having access to Papua, allegations of abuse are notoriously difficult to verify.  While this ban remains in place, only the most dedicated journalists make the effort to go in undercover.   West Papua Media has been proud to facilitate undercover trips into occupied territory to meet with many West Papuan people prepare to tell their own story. This is getting more difficult by the day so local people are working for a solution.

Live images, videos and online activism by Papuan people have already created tremendous momentum in action and awareness of Papua.  By creating their own media, and their own narrative, Papuan people are reclaiming self-determination denied for so long.

Reporting in West Papua is a highly risky business.   Journalists, Papuan and outsiders alike, are under constant threats for reporting West Papua, with four journalists dying in suspicious circumstance in 2010 alone.  Anywhere journalists report fearlessly they are targets, but most journalists in West Papua simply put up with it, they have no other option.  What can we do to lessen their risk?

Partly in response to this danger and partly to give local journalists a voice globally, West Papua Media (WPMA) (WestPapuaMedia.Info) was started. It aims to provide a professional service to international media covering West Papua, ensuring high quality, verifiable reporting gets into the international media, directly from the ground, and not from those who seek to distort the truth of daily experience in Papua.  By reporting Papuan campaigns to end human rights abuses and bringing these unreported Papuan issues to the front page, we hope to hold the abusers to account. With an ever growing stable of committed and disparate voices from citizen media to professional journalists, West Papua Media is proud and excited to be part of this movement.

Some of our real time work has assisted directly in the prevention of mass acts of violence by the Indonesian security forces, such as our coverage and media advocacy fixing of the July 8-9 Otsus Gagal demos and occupation of the Jayapura DPRP.

Less than ten minutes before the deadline for dispersal of the 2 day rally of over 45,000 people, Indonesian security forces were forced to back down after a BBC report aired, organised by WPMA, which brought international attention the explosively dangerous situation.  Extensive international diplomacy occurred in that 15 minutes and, together with the extreme discipline of the mass protest, enabled the protestors to peaceably leave the scene of the protest without violence.

WPMA has worked very hard raising the media profile of West Papua, with significant joint investigations with major media outlets breaking several key stories in 2010.  None of this would be possible without deep trust from the people of Papua in reporting their stories.  West Papuan citizen media, in conjunction with several colleagues here today, played a key role in alerting the world to deeply heinous cases of abuse.

One was the sourcing, verification and release of the deeply shocking leaked Kostrad torture videos of civilians in Puncak Jaya. The Kiwo incident neatly captures why the Indonesian military cannot be trusted to reform themselves from the inside, and why the role of a robust media is so critical in Papua.

The other was footage of Indonesian BRIMOB police taunting a former political prisoner Yawan Wayeni, having disembowelled him moments before for arguing with them. Both these videos showed the power of citizen media in activating international human rights networks to effectively raise the issue of Papua. Of course, there are many more videos in preparation for release.

A swarm movement cannot have a single media strategy, but media need to understand that it will get media out in its own way too.  The media that had wilfully ignored West Papua’s voice for so long really has no right to dictate how information disseminates, and if it wants to get the stories before others, then it just has to move faster.  Because it is new media techniques that have already, and will propel Papua onto the front page, to make people choke on their cornflakes.

Likewise, evidence dissemination also needs multiple, failsafe distribution routes: Single dissemination routes can easily be shut down or silenced.  West Papuans have tailored their mechanisms to this very effectively; yet this is significantly frustrating outside journalists.  According to many in mainstream media, West Papuans can be their own worst enemy when it comes to disseminating information.  People on the ground do need to get smarter about media distribution strategies, but the media also must adapt to a social and cultural reality.  West Papuan human rights and citizen media are not chaotic: they are maximising the potential audience  for their information.

It is important to understand that no one faction or sector in West Papua can claim dominance or leadership of this mass movement. This is not Congress in India and there is no single Gandhi figure. Rather, this is a movement with thousands of Gandhis.  The civil movement refuses to be based around a single leadership group, and instead features multitudes of groups and tribes all acting autonomously and independently (where everyone knows their role and works their hardest) but which is nevertheless unified under its collective goals.

Such a swarm structure can occasionally present difficulties for those who cannot think outside traditional top-down strategies for national change, which includes traditional media. Rather than being shut out of dialogue by the game playing of unaccountable elites, this type of structure encourages a longer lasting peace by enabling all actors to have their voices heard. It is also a natural strategy to employ in a nation where it is,  for the most part, illegal to congregate in groups.

Other barriers for West Papuan media are much more easily solved with a bit of training, and understanding the enemy (this time the enemy being the unreasonable expectations of media executives far removed from reality).

One issue is the lack of speed with which many West Papuan media activists work, and whilst improving, an event on a day has to be filmed, edited, packaged and disseminated as fast as possible. There are issues of journalistic discipline and professional journalistic practice in new media; safe information gathering, abuse documentation and investigative journalism methodology; information quality assurance; protection of sources, and more.

Effective citizen and professional media training is required to develop awareness of major current and future challenges to safe information dissemination – these are all programs that the West Papua Media network is currently engaged in and it needs help to increase its capacity.

All of this costs money, and requires the international community to understand that the development of indigenous journalism in West Papua is crucial to the protection of human security and peace across the entire Asia-Pacific region.  It requires international institutions in media and academia to get out of their cloisters and get muddy, to actually pool resources and help identify new sources of sustainable funding to start training journalists in innovative new media reportage techniques, and to support their work for the global human interest.  As I said before, West Papua Media already has training programs ready to go, we just need the funds to make them happen.

In West Papua, as across the world, accountability is always the simplest solution to combatting impunity. An aggressive culture of investigative journalism must be encouraged, and the skills to enable it must be developed, to deliver that accountability, be it in human rights, against military business mafias and corruption, human security, environmental protections, etcetera, and to cover (and protect) the desires of a population to determine their own future, in both the current occupation and in any situation for the future.  Both academia and international media must take a strong role in its development, to embed international protections to enable West Papua’s journalists and citizen media to report without fear, hindrance or threat, the stories that are important to West Papuan people and their freedom.

Our hope is that we have a really robust citizen media that can deliver accountability.  We want to stop people from being afraid of speaking out, and we want West Papua’s voice to be its weapon, to broadcast its songs for Freedom.

Nick Chesterfield, editor at westpapuamedia.info, is a human security journalist and activist with extensive experience of the Papua issue through refugee protection, human rights, environmental protection, and citizen media work and safety training. He has conducted many field investigations in the West Papuan region since 1999. Together with citizen media and human rights workers from inside Papua, Chesterfield helped set up West Papua Media in 2008, to counter the wilful lack of coverage of West Papua by the international press.

 

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑