On human rights law<\/p>\n
In referring to Compromises vital to settle debate on human
\nrights bill (The Jakarta Post, Feb. 5, 2000), I also refer to
\nprevious remarks by the minister of law and legislation in
\nNovember 1999, about which I commented in my letter of Nov. 24,
\n1999.<\/p>\n
What I said then still applies, and I disagree with the
\nabsolute need for any bill containing a \"retroactive\" clause.
\nHuman rights violations are not some sort of otherworldly event,
\nthey are sometimes very commonplace. For example, if I were to
\nstep inside your front gate without permission, I have
\ntechnically violated your right to enjoy your property without
\ninterference from anyone, and if I were not to leave when asked
\nthen you could have me charged with trespassing.<\/p>\n
Normally there is a time limit past which you cannot bring
\nsuch a charge, but for the violations we are talking about in
\nrelation to East Timor, Aceh and Maluku, there are no time
\nlimits. Murder, unlawful killing, manslaughter, rape, assault and
\narson are all criminal acts for which there are already laws in
\nIndonesia. Within these laws are sections dealing with persons
\nwho conspire, assist, condone and are accessories to the acts
\nthemselves. I may need correction, because I do not know the
\ncriminal code of Indonesia, but most countries have such laws
\nand such sections within those laws.<\/p>\n
This being the case, there is no real necessity to introduce
\nnew laws hurriedly, which might easily be avoided by clever
\nlawyers because they are badly drafted. Far better to use the old
\nlaws, some of which I presume were inherited from the Dutch,
\nwhich have stood the test of time. From these it is simple to
\ncharge A with murder in that he, on a certain date, did willfully
\nand with malice kill B. Then C can be charged with standing and
\nwatching this being done without trying to stop A. Before
\ncharging A and C, they will have been questioned and from what
\nthey say, and other evidence collected, D can be charged with
\nbeing an accessory to the crime in that he ordered A and C to
\ncommit the murder.<\/p>\n
Within the Army it is implicit that each and every man has a
\nsuperior officer until you reach the most senior general, and he
\nderives his authority from whoever or whatever is designated as
\nbeing in command in the constitution, either the king, the
\npresident or the highest legislative body. In the example above,
\nhe would be E, the man to whom D would ultimately report.<\/p>\n
I do agree that if there are now some internationally
\nrecognized crimes, laws for which have not yet been drafted in
\nIndonesia, then we need to incorporate these laws if we intend to
\ncharge anyone with crimes under them. Incidentally, Article 1 of
\nthe criminal code must be amended immediately. I would assume
\nthat it was introduced into the code at a time when there were
\nmany horrendous crimes being committed in the course of gaining
\nindependence from the Dutch, but that was war and I hope that no
\none is suggesting that the fighting in East Timor, Aceh and
\nMaluku was or has been at any time war, even though the Army has
\nconducted itself as if it was at war. Dissidence, even active, is
\nnot war and the normal criminal and civil codes of law still
\napply.<\/p>\n
As this question of retroactive law keeps coming up, it has to
\nbe assumed that the old regime is mobilizing as much of the money
\nthat they have in an attempt to avoid paying for their crimes
\nwith their lives. Whatever charges are formulated and under
\nwhatever laws, please, all you elected representatives, ensure
\nthat no clever lawyers are able to obtain their clients' freedom
\non technicalities.<\/p>\n
W. WALLER<\/p>\n
Cianjur, West Java<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/on-human-rights-law-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }