|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please download PDF Format here |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| General Information Country Name: Republic of Indonesia Capital: Jakarta
Transnational Issues:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Human Rights Institution &
Treaties National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) The
National Human Rights Commission was established in 1993
by Presidential Decree No. 50/1993. Its mandate is guided
by Pancasila[1], the Indonesian Constitution, and the
UN Human Rights Conventions. The Commission was widely
thought to be a response to the intense international
pressure mounted on the Indonesian Government’s
massacre in East Timor in 1991. The Commission
disseminates information, conducts studies and monitors
and investigates human rights cases. There are 25 members
of the Commission. The main bodies or "departments" within the Human Rights Commission include three Sub-commissions for: a.
Education and Public Awareness on Human Rights, which
disseminates the national and international concept of
human rights; b.
Monitoring Human Rights Instruments, which monitors
international treaties on human rights that the
Commission may propose to the government for their
ratification or accession; and, c.
Monitoring the Implementation of Human Rights, which
monitors and investigates the implementation of human
rights and provides advice and proposals to the related
government agencies. In
addition, the Commission cooperates with regional and
international agencies on human rights issues. This
activity is coordinated directly by the Vice Chairperson
of the Commission. Komnas
HAM was once regarded as one of the most credible
institutions and courageous human rights defenders in the
country during the late Soeharto years. Ironically,
its performance has been declining since the
democratically elected President Abdurrahman Wahid's time.
The investigation on many human rights violation cases
has been delayed, or the recommendations have not been
implemented. Komnas HAM also faces many obstacles
and pressures in its work. The
function and authorization of Komnas HAM mainly base on
two acts: Act No. 26 and Act No. 39. However, both
of them did not grant enough power to the Commission to
carry out its work effectively. In
September 1999, Act No. 39 was promulgated by the
Indonesian government in order to transform the Human
Rights Charter into legal norms. This Act renewed
the Komnas HAM to become an independent institution on
the same level as other state institutions. Act No.
39 only conceded the Commission’s function on study
and research, education and information, monitoring and
mediation. It conducts inquiry and examination of
events which may be assumed violations of human rights,
and brings the matter to the competent authorities to
take appropriate legal action against the alleged
perpetrators. However, the decisions of Komnas HAM
are not legally enforceable. In
November 2000, Act No. 26 was promulgated. It
defines gross violations of human rights as “crimes
of genocide and crimes against humanity” and gives
Komnas HAM, rather than the police, responsibility for
initial investigations into cases of serious human rights
violations. Same as Act No. 39, the work of Komnas
HAM does not go beyond inquiries and recommendations. Furthermore,
both Acts did not provide procedures for judicial
processes of cases of human rights violations and did not
clarify which court was responsible for such cases.
According to a panel discussion to the 61st
session of UN Commission on Human Rights on the human
rights situation in Website
of Komnas HAM (in Indonesian only) International
Obligations §
CAT - Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Status:
Ratification. 1998 §
CCPR - International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights Status:
Accession. 2006 §
CEDAW - Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women Status:
Ratification. 1984 §
CEDAW - OP-Optional Protocol to the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women Status:
Signature only. 2000 §
CERD - International Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Racial Discrimination Status:
Accession. 1999 §
CESCR - International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights Status:
Accession. 2006 §
CMW - International Convention on the Protection of the
Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their
Families Status:
Signature only. 2004 §
CRC - Convention on the Rights of the Child Status:
Ratification. 1990 §
CRC - OP-AC-Optional Protocol to the Convention on the
Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in
Armed Conflict Status:
Signature only. 2001 §
CRC - OP-SC-Optional Protocol to the Convention on the
Rights of the Child on the Status:
Signature only. 2001 International
Labour Standard §
ILO Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to
Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) Status:
Ratification. 1998 §
ILO Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) Status:
Ratification. 1958 §
ILO Discrimination (Employment and Occupation)
Convention, 1958 (No. 111) Status:
Ratification. 1999 For
more information, please go to: International
Labour Organization Office
of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
[1] Pancasila is the philosophical basis of the Indonesian state. Pancasila consists of two Sanskrit words, "panca" meaning five, and "sila" meaning principle. It comprises five principles held to be inseparable and interrelated. The five principles are as below: 1) Belief in the one and only God (Ketuhanan yang Maha Esa) 2) Just and civilized humanity (Kemanusiaan yang Adil dan Beradab) 3) The unity of 4) Democracy guided by the inner wisdom in the unanimity arising out of deliberations amongst representatives (Kerakyatan yang Dipimpin oleh Hikmat Kebijaksanaan dalam Permusyawaratan/Perwakilan) 5) Social justice for the
whole of the people of |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Justice & Peace Issues
[last updated: June 2007] Tension in Outer There
have been numerous conflicts in the outer islands of In
spite of ascribing the blame to long-seated religious
dispute, the conflicts are actually rooted in a lot of
historical, geographical, political and economic factors. The
geographically dispersed Indonesian archipelago between
Indian Ocean and the Furthermore,
the change in population balances, development policies
and militarization are three of the major political and
economic causes of the communal conflicts. Transmigration
Programme The
Transmigration programme was initiated by the Dutch
during the colonial era and implemented on a large-scale
under Suharto’s regime with financial support by the
Work Bank from 1976 to 1986. To
relieve the population pressure of the central islands,
the programme displaced millions of poor Indonesians from
Bali, Madura, Lombok and mainly Java, to outer islands,
including In
The
transmigration programme neither improved the livelihood
of people nor the country’s economy. According
to Éric Toussaint’s paper, “October 2004,
IMF and WB: The destruction of
(For
the full text, please click here) Development Policies The
development programmes have been taken place without
consensus and fair profit sharing with the local people.
These have led to resentment over the government coming
in and dispossessing the indigenous people of their land.
This in turn took on an ethnic component when the
dominant ethnic group represented by the government
happened to be in conflict with the local indigenous
population. The
Indonesian military (Tentara Nasional Indonesia, TNI) has
been criticized for “continue (sic.) to violate
international human rights and humanitarian law with
impunity” and has been committing “widespread
abuses against civilians, including extrajudicial
executions, torture, forced disappearances, beatings,
arbitrary arrests and detentions, and drastic limits on
freedom of movement.” (Human Rights Watch) Its
expansion in the outer islands, such as The
deployment of soldiers from the capital, In
the conflict areas, providing protection to the big
investors bring extra source of income to the TNI. The
protection guarantees the security for the investors,
more importantly, that there would be no resistance from
the local community. The collusion allows the big
business to act with disregard of the law and in against
the interest of the local people. There are reports
that the TNI has taken action to scare off the villagers
who protested against the expropriation of their land by
the conglomerates. Moreover,
the military and the police have been accused of
involvement in illegal activities, such as illegal
logging, prostitution and smuggling of weapons and
endangered animals and plants. Local
groups have been calling for a reform of the TNI,
especially to “stop the TNI from pursuing business
and dismantle its territorial structure.” In
2004, the The Fight for Papua
is located at the far eastern end of Papua
was not included in the Indonesian declaration of
independence in 1945. Despite the In
1999, a delegation of 100 Papuans met the Indonesian
President Habibie in The
2001 Special Autonomy Law was the central
government’s only significant attempt to reach out
to the Papuans, however, it has never brought true
autonomy to the people. According to the report of
South China Morning Post, the recent splitting of Papua
into two provinces “Papua” and “West Irian
Jaya” has violated the Special Autonomy Law and is
considered to be “a typical divide-and-rule
tactic”. It also criticized that “the
constant abuse by the TNI increased militarization of the
province, relentless arrival of migrants and the
discrimination perpetrated against them (Papuans) on
their own land”. Papuans,
a mix of 312 tribes of ethnic Melanesians and mostly
Christians, have little in common with the Muslim
Indonesians. However, the transmigration policy,
which led to the influx of Muslim Indonesians, has
diluted the Papuan population from 97 percent in 1960 to
about 50 percent in 2000. The
reason for TNI to stay in Papua is basically the profit
they earn from businesses such as prostitution, illegal
logging and providing protection to groups like As
access to Papua is prohibited, Human Right Watch has
produced a report “Protest and Punishment: Political
Prisoners in Papua” by interviewing defense lawyers
and members of local human rights organizations. It
documents how the Indonesian government continues to use
the criminal law to punish individuals who peacefully
advocate for independence in Papua. All the
prisoners have been convicted for treason or spreading
hatred against the government, for nonviolent activities
such as flag-raising, or attendance at peaceful meetings
on self-determination options for Papua. Full
report can be downloaded at here. Peace
process in Aceh Aceh
has substantial natural resources, including coal, gas
and oil. The exploitation of Aceh’s natural
resources, uneven distribution of profit between the
central government and the native people, as well as the
differences in economic approaches and cultural values,
have led to a call for independence during 1970s. During
1980s, the central government started to take suppressive
measures and to send troops to Aceh after several
security incidents. The support to the Free Aceh
Movement (GAM) grew as a result of human rights abuse in
the province. The large support was shown during
the 2000 plebiscite attended by half million people (of 4
million population of the province). The central
government responded in 2001 by broadening Aceh’s
autonomy, but accompanied by repressive measures. In
2003, Military Emergency Condition was proclaimed in the
province. The war continued until Aceh was hit by
the massive tsunami. Aceh
was seriously hit by tsunami in 2004 which led to 130,000
to 238,000 persons dead or missing, more than 500,000
remain homeless. In order to enable the rebuilding
of Aceh after the natural disaster, a peace agreement
between the Government of Indonesia and the GAM was
reached. Under the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)
signed on 15 August 2005, both parties “committed
themselves to creating conditions within which the
government of the Acehnese people can be manifested
through a fair and democratic process within the unitary
state and constitution of the Republic of
Indonesia.” GAM
agreed to disarm and the Government pledged to withdraw
all non-local military and police by the end of 2005.
The MoU is also expected to lead to peace and democratic
transformation of the province. On
11 December 2006, Irwandi Yusuf and Muhammad Nazar won
the elections for the governorship of Aceh. The
elections were a huge victory of the GAM which marked the
end of 30 years of conflict that claimed over 15,000
lives. Irwandi Yusuf, former leader of the GAM, pledged on welfare, economic growth, the abolition of corruption and building a strong Aceh with equality among native and ethnic populations during his campaign. Disregarding 38% of the voting population in support to Irwandi Yusuf, not all the parties welcomed the election of a former leader of rebels. He still needs to find a way to co-operate with different parties, including a potentially hostile local parliament, which was elected under the old system and is filled with representatives from national parties. Death
Penalty in The
death penalty in Indonesia is applicable for murder with
deliberate intention and premeditation; attempting to
assassinate the President or Vice-president or render him
unfit to govern; treason; premeditated murder of the head
of state of a friendly state; piracy resulting in death;
theft resulting in death; producing, processing,
extracting, converting or making available narcotics;
crimes against humanity; and terrorism. Death
penalty is applicable to corruption only when the country
is in emergency situation. Following
the execution of two men, who were convicted of multiple
murders, in May 2001, there was a de facto moratorium on
the death penalty in On
5 August 2004, Two
Indonesians, Ms. Astini and Mr. Turmudi bin Kasturi, were
executed on 20 March and 13 May 2005 respectively. Both
of them were convicted for murder. Despite
the call from local groups, activists, religious leaders
and international communities for clemency to the three
men and several postponements on the execution dates due
to the pressure, Messrs. Fabianus Tibo, Dominggus da
Silva and Marinus Riwa, who were accused of masterminding
the massacre of 200 Muslims in Poso during the
inter-religious clashes in 2000, were executed on 22
September 2006. Firmly against any prosecution of
death penalty, Hotline issued SUA060811(4)
and SUA060920(6)
in August and September 2006 to urge the authorities to
stop the execution and grant clemency to the three men. On
28 April 2007, Mr. Ayub Bulubili, aged 40, was executed
by firing squad. He was sentenced to death for the
premeditated murder of a family of six people in 1999.
His two appeals for Presidential clemency were both
rejected, firstly by former President Megawati
Sukarnoputri on 9 July 2004, and a second appeal was
rejected by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, in March
2007. It is the first execution in 2007. According
to Amnesty International, at least 90 people were under
death sentence, given that the judicial system of In
2006, the Indonesian Parliament ratified the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(ICCPR) which promotes the right to life. Article
6(2) of the ICCPR states that, "in countries which
have not abolished the death penalty, sentence of death
may be imposed only for the most serious crimes".
The UN Human Rights Committee established to oversee the
implementation of the ICCPR, provides the most
authoritative interpretation of the ICCPR. In the General
Comment adopted by the Human Rights Committee (General
Comment 6 [Article 6], UN Doc. HRI/GEN/Rev.3) on 15
August 1997, it has stated that "the expression
‘most serious crime’ must be read restrictively
to mean that the death penalty should be a quite
exceptional measure". However,
There
are 25 countries in Asia-Pacific region that have put an
end to capital punishment in law or practice. BBC News Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre International Labour Organization Local Sources Office of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights South China Morning Post |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
INDONESIA