JP\/6\/SISWO<\/p>\n
Is ASEAN ready for an anti-terrorist convention?<\/p>\n
Siswo Pramono
\nDeputy Director
\nfor Global Organization
\nMinistry of Foreign Affairs
\nJakarta<\/p>\n
Various regions -- America, Western Europe, East Europe,
\nAfrica, and South Asia -- have regional treaties to combat
\nterrorism. Southeast Asia has no such treaty. With this
\noversight in mind, legal officers and diplomats from Southeast
\nAsia met in Bali last August and agreed, in principle, that such
\na treaty (or convention) is a necessity for the Association of
\nSoutheast Asian Nations.<\/p>\n
ASEAN leaders have also taken up such concerns in the recent
\nSummit. Bali Concord II states that ASEAN shall fully utilize the
\nexisting institutions and mechanisms within the association with
\na view to strengthening regional and national capacities to
\ncombat and counter terrorism.<\/p>\n
At the national level, ASEAN member countries have been
\nengaged in capacity building to suppress terrorism, leading to
\ncontroversy, particularly when they are seen as encroaching the
\nhuman rights of suspects.<\/p>\n
Brunei Darussalam is equipped with 11 national legislations to
\nsuppress terrorist acts. Indonesia has enacted Law No. 15\/2003
\nconcerning the eradication of acts of terrorism. Malaysia has
\ndeveloped a compendium of 55 laws, including the Penal Code and,
\nas is also the case with Singapore, the Internal Security Act, to
\ncounter terrorism.<\/p>\n
Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam have taken legal measures to
\nassert control of terrorist activities. The Philippines is in the
\nprocess of enhancing its national legislation to combat
\nterrorists. At present, only Lao and Myanmar do not have specific
\n(or comprehensive) laws on terrorism.<\/p>\n
The problem with the aforementioned national legislations is
\nthat they may not be compatible with one another. And, worse, due
\nto their respective colonial histories, ASEAN countries have
\nadopted different legal systems.<\/p>\n
With such difficulties in mind, and while considering some
\nassertions on the lack of political will, rather than the flaw,
\nor incompatibility of the existing national institutions and
\nmechanisms, an "ASEAN convention on combating terrorism" is worth
\nconsidering. Such a convention could help bridge the gaps among
\nvarious national legislations and contending legal systems in
\nSouth East Asia.<\/p>\n
ASEAN has in fact developed a regional political
\ninfrastructure -- seven declarations, a plan of action and its
\nwork programs, an agreement and its protocols, joint communique
\nand statements etc. -- to deal with terrorism.<\/p>\n
With the existing political infrastructure and, hopefully, a
\nmore determined political will, a regional convention to suppress
\nterrorist activities is now a possibility. But what should such a
\nconvention focus on? ASEAN can learn from the various anti-
\nterrorist treaties arrived at by other regional organizations.<\/p>\n
The definition of terrorism, for one, is often a frustrating
\nstarting point. But ASEAN could learn, for instance, from the
\ndetailed definition of terrorism as elaborated in the 1999
\nConvention of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) on
\nCombating International Terrorism.<\/p>\n
Article 1 of the convention defines "terrorism" and "terrorist
\ncrime". It also provides a comprehensive list of the criminal
\nacts accepted by the international community as terrorism.<\/p>\n
Extradition, as a tool to combat transnational crime,
\nparticularly terrorism, is always a controversial issue. The
\ncapture of Hambali and the debate over his possible extradition
\nis the case brought to mind. Some states, including Singapore,
\nare cautious when they discuss extradition. But, for various
\nregional anti-terrorist treaties, extradition is a necessity.<\/p>\n
The 1977 European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism
\ndevoted 8 out of its 16 articles to dealing with extradition. And
\n6 out of 11 articles in the 1987 South Asian Association for
\nRegional Cooperation on Suppression of Terrorism are devoted to
\nextradition. As such, provisions on extradition must likewise be
\nincluded in the ASEAN anti-terrorist convention.<\/p>\n
In case an agreement on extradition is hard to reach, then,
\nalternatively, the ASEAN anti-terrorist convention could adopt
\narticles on extra-territorial investigations and mutual legal
\nassistance. The Organization of African Unity (OAU) Convention on
\nthe Prevention and Combating of Terrorism governs such an
\narrangement. Thus, for instance, without necessarily calling for
\nan extradition, Indonesian police would be given access to
\ninvestigate an Indonesian citizen held in another country over
\nterrorist charges.<\/p>\n
An ASEAN anti-terrorist convention could also serve as a
\nblueprint for technical cooperation. Here, the experience of
\ncountries in East Europe is relevant. The 1999 Treaty of
\nCommonwealth of Independent States in Combating Terrorism governs
\nvarious technical matters, ranging from exchange of intelligences
\nto sending special anti-terrorist units to fight terrorists
\noperating in other member countries. (But ASEAN should not
\nnecessarily step toward this extreme direction).<\/p>\n
More importantly, and taking the promotion of the ASEAN
\nsecurity community into consideration, the anti-terrorist
\nconvention could function as a tool of social engineering.<\/p>\n
A "dialog forum" involving academicians, experts, and
\ndiplomats held last August in Semarang revealed the need for
\nASEAN to promote a common understanding among the South East
\nAsian community about the teaching of jihad in the context of
\npluralism and tolerance.<\/p>\n
The ASEAN anti-terrorist convention could help attain such a
\ngoal by, for instance, standardizing the curricula of religious
\nboarding schools (of various religions) in ASEAN countries.<\/p>\n
Last but not least, the ASEAN anti-terrorist convention could
\nhelp strike the balance between the urgent need to protect the
\nASEAN community from the dangers of terrorism, and, equally, the
\npressing need to protect the suspects from the possible human
\nrights abuses, which are a form of state terrorism.<\/p>\n
The opinions stated above are solely those of the author.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/jp6siswo-1447899208", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }