{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1176907,
        "msgid": "indonesias-security-policy-1447893297",
        "date": "2005-07-25 00:00:00",
        "title": "Indonesia's security policy",
        "author": null,
        "source": "JP",
        "tags": null,
        "topic": null,
        "summary": "Indonesia's security policy Agung Yudhawiranata, Jakarta Indonesia is still considering ratifying the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which was agreed upon by 120 countries in July 1998, including Indonesia. The adoption of the Rome Statute was a historic event and is commemorated through the International Day of Justice.",
        "content": "<p>Indonesia&apos;s security policy<\/p>\n<p>Agung Yudhawiranata, Jakarta<\/p>\n<p>Indonesia is still considering ratifying the Rome Statute of<br>\nthe International Criminal Court, which was agreed upon by 120<br>\ncountries in July 1998, including Indonesia.<\/p>\n<p>The adoption of the Rome Statute was a historic event and is<br>\ncommemorated through the International Day of Justice. The treaty<br>\ncreates the first-ever permanent international criminal court,<br>\nindependent and impartial, and able to hold individuals<br>\npersonally accountable for the commission of the most serious<br>\ninternational crimes.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the International Court of Justice -- known as the<br>\nWorld Court -- the International Criminal Court (ICC) will not<br>\nhear cases between nation states, but rather will try individuals<br>\nwho are accused of the most serious crimes under international<br>\nlaw, namely genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.<\/p>\n<p>The ICC will provide redress to victims and survivors of these<br>\ncrimes and may, over time, prove to be a powerful deterrent to<br>\nthe commission of these crimes. The ICC will extend the rule of<br>\nlaw internationally, impelling national systems to investigate<br>\nand prosecute these crimes themselves -- thus strengthening those<br>\nsystems -- while ensuring that where they fail, an international<br>\ncourt is ready to act.<\/p>\n<p>The attainment of the Rome Statute, with the power to<br>\ninvestigate and prosecute those who commit genocide, crimes<br>\nagainst humanity and war crimes, indeed represents a significant<br>\nachievement for the world community. What is needed now is the<br>\npolitical will to move forward -- to ratify then implement the<br>\nprovision of the Rome Statute, an historical watershed in the<br>\nfight to end impunity long enjoyed by the perpetrators of heinous<br>\ncrimes.<\/p>\n<p>At the current stage of having 99 ratifications of the Rome<br>\nStatute, and having the ICC at the &quot;ready to exercise its<br>\njurisdiction&quot; level, the key measures to apply law and protect<br>\nhuman rights around the world are within reach. Accordingly, to<br>\nneglect ratification of the ICC would send a negative message to<br>\nthe international community, precisely when it is the moment to<br>\ncapitalize on the progress made in this direction so far.<\/p>\n<p>However, lack of information on the ICC and the Rome Statute<br>\nis often at the core of lack of support. At the same time, the<br>\ncomplexity of the Rome Statute of the ICC, and the constitutional<br>\nand other legal issues it raises, can create potential barriers<br>\nto ratification even when the concept of the ICC is understood<br>\nand supported.<\/p>\n<p>For example, some governments find the jurisdiction of the ICC<br>\naffects the conditions for exercise of national sovereignty,<br>\nparticularly those states in Asia, including Indonesia. Whether<br>\nIndonesia should be a party to the ICC remains a debatable issue<br>\nas it has not ratified the Rome Statute.<\/p>\n<p>This has resulted not only from the government&apos;s lack of<br>\npolitical will but also from the unique social, political and<br>\ncultural conditions that differ among countries in Asia, causing<br>\na problem in synchronizing the domestic legal system and<br>\nadministration with the ICC&apos;s. Another major obstacle lies in the<br>\nlack of knowledge related to the ICC among the state apparatus,<br>\nand also the lack of systematic efforts to campaign for the<br>\nratification of the ICC within one state, namely Indonesia.<\/p>\n<p>To date, the state has made no significant efforts to prepare<br>\nthe infrastructure in its bureaucracy and administration to<br>\nsupport the ratification of the Rome Statute. There is<br>\nPresidential Decree No. 40\/2004 on the National Action Plan on<br>\nHuman Rights, where the ratification of the Rome Statute is not<br>\nconsidered a priority program given the fact that it placed on a<br>\nlist of instruments to be ratified in 2008.<\/p>\n<p>As implicitly recognized in Law No. 26\/2000 on the Human<br>\nRights Court, Indonesia has adopted in its legal system some<br>\ncriminal conducts that have been regarded as international<br>\ncrimes. These crimes, which are generally called gross violations<br>\nof human rights, consist of genocide and crimes against humanity<br>\nwhere some of the provisions relate to four kinds of crimes that<br>\nhave been formulated in the Rome Statute of the ICC.<\/p>\n<p>However, because of the fact that Indonesia is still not yet a<br>\nstate party to the Rome Statute, there is no obligation to<br>\nprosecute those crimes internationally or submit the perpetrators<br>\nas international criminals.<\/p>\n<p>The Rome Statute has the most serious crimes within its<br>\njurisdiction, as mentioned earlier. Compared to it, the<br>\nIndonesian Human Rights Court has the crime of genocide and<br>\ncrimes against humanity within its jurisdiction, both are<br>\nactually adopted from Rome Statute provisions.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of some differences between the Indonesian Human<br>\nRights Court and the International Criminal Court based on the<br>\nRome Statute, in fact, both of them have been established in the<br>\nsame area of judicial authority to prosecute alleged perpetrators<br>\nof human rights violations. The first is in national and domestic<br>\njurisdiction; the other is in an international and universal one.<\/p>\n<p>Given the above facts, and taking into account the ICC&apos;s<br>\nprinciple of complementarity, which appears to give a more<br>\ncentral role to national courts -- i.e. according to the treaty,<br>\nthe presumptive fora for trials of international crimes are the<br>\nnational courts. National courts will always have jurisdiction.<br>\nUnder the principle of complementarity, the International<br>\nCriminal Court will act only when national courts are unable or<br>\nunwilling, concerns that the ratification of the ICC means our<br>\nnational sovereignty is in danger are most exaggerated.<\/p>\n<p>The writer is an international relations researcher at the<br>\nInstitute for Policy Research and Advocacy (ESAM), a Jakarta-<br>\nbased rights group. He can be reached by e-mail at<br>\nagung@elsam.or.id.<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/indonesias-security-policy-1447893297",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}