Protecting secrecy without jeopardizing democracy<\/p>\n
By Mochtar Buchori<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Who shot the four Trisakti students to death on
\nMay 12? Will we ever know the truth? Or will it remain a \"buried
\nsecret\" like the Marsinah and Udin cases?<\/p>\n
I do not think that anyone among the lay public can answer
\nthese questions. And I do not think that those who have the facts
\nwill volunteer to answer these questions. I think that the facts
\nwill emerge to the surface only if there is tremendous public
\npressure on the military establishment.<\/p>\n
I do not think I am alone in my skepticism. People like me
\nfeel that the military is not being quite honest to the public. I
\nfeel personally that the military has been trying to cover up
\nsomething big in this case.<\/p>\n
Against the background of the firm promises made by the
\ngenerals in the Armed Forces (ABRI), including Gen. Wiranto, that
\nthis case will be investigated in a thorough and objective
\nmanner, the performance of the military tribunal is very, very
\ndisappointing. Based on ABRI's promises, the public expects that
\nthe military tribunal will open the case by examining those
\nsuspected of doing the shootings. But what the public has
\nwitnessed instead is the prosecution of police officers accused
\nof not obeying an order given to them.<\/p>\n
My immediate reaction to this was disbelief. \"What is this? Is
\nthis a joke? What does 'disobeying an order' have to do with the
\ndeath of the four students? Is this the most important element
\nthat caused their deaths?\"<\/p>\n
Until today, I am still disappointed and frustrated. I know I
\nam illiterate in matters related to legal proceedings, but my
\ncommon sense has prompted me to conclude that the military has
\ndecided to conceal many secrets in this case, and resist any
\nattempt to uncover them.<\/p>\n
Every good citizen realizes that there are things which cannot
\nbe revealed to the public. We know there are secrets that must be
\ntightly guarded for the sake of maintaining public security and
\npreventing chaos.<\/p>\n
Experiences show, however, that too much secrecy can lead to
\ntoo little accountability, and that this in turn can lead to
\nexcessive practices among intelligence \"professionals\".<\/p>\n
The torture of people kidnapped by intelligence officers is
\none testimony of such excesses. The mysterious death of Marsinah
\nis another testimony. And the prosecution of Dwi Sumaji, an
\nentirely innocent man, in the case of the mysterious death of
\nUdin is still another testimony.<\/p>\n
Something must be inherently wrong when the intelligence
\napparatus has so much freedom to do so much harm, and all to no
\nadvantage to the country.<\/p>\n
I think there are too many unnecessary secrets, too many
\nunexplained events in Indonesia. In addition to the Marsinah and
\nUdin cases mentioned above, there are many other events that
\nuntil today remain unexplained. They have become buried with
\ntime.<\/p>\n
The recent kidnappings, riots that seemed to be quite well
\norganized and the physical assault on Indonesian Democratic Party
\n(PDI) Megawati supporters at the PDI headquarters on July 27,
\n1996 are all secrets that the military seems unwilling to
\nuncover.<\/p>\n
These are not trivial events, but events of great significance
\nfor the rehabilitation and cultivation of democracy in Indonesia.<\/p>\n
These are practices that flatly deny and reject respect for
\nthe people, the highest political authority in any well-
\nfunctioning democracy.<\/p>\n
The very important question ABRI has to answer in this respect
\nis: \"How should intelligence work be carried out effectively
\nwithout betraying the principles of democracy?\"<\/p>\n
It should not be forgotten that ABRI is a part of Indonesian
\nsociety. And if the promises to carry out total reform are
\ngenuine, then it should reexamine its definition of \"secret\" and
\nrethink the present classification of its secrets.<\/p>\n
According to Adm. Stansfield Turner, director of the CIA
\nduring the Carter administration from 1977 to 1982, there are two
\nkinds of secrets that are truly important in intelligence work:
\nsecrets concerning the identity of the people who risk their
\nlives spying on \"hostile\" territories, and secrets concerning
\ntechnical means used to conduct spying.<\/p>\n
This definition can be employed to raise a number of
\nquestions, the answers of which can then be used to reclassify
\nIndonesia's existing secrets into two groups: secrets that are
\nreally vital for protecting the country and the nation, and
\nsecrets that stand in the way of the nation's efforts to generate
\na clean and just society.<\/p>\n
We can ask in this regard, for instance, what or which should
\nbe considered as \"hostile\" territory. Are university campuses
\n\"hostile\" territory?<\/p>\n
If the answer is yes, it was a very grave mistake on the part
\nof ABRI to leak signals concerning their operations within
\ncampuses. It was truly unprofessional conduct.<\/p>\n
If, on the other hand, university campuses are not considered
\n\"hostile\", then it was also a grave mistake to spy on them. It
\nwas again totally unprofessional conduct.<\/p>\n
It must be admitted, I think, that public esteem toward
\ncertain elements of ABRI has sunk to a very low point. The word
\n\"intel\" -- short for \"intelligence\" -- has a very bad connotation
\nin the public's mind.<\/p>\n
To restore the reputation and trust of the military,
\nespecially that of the intelligence apparatus, Adm. Stansfield
\nTurner prescribed the following two principles: objectivity and
\nlegality.<\/p>\n
The principle of objectivity requires that all \"reporting and
\nanalyses coming from intelligence community must be scrupulously
\nfree of bias, either conscious or unconscious\". And the principle
\nof legality demands that \"intelligence agencies, like all arms of
\ngovernment, must reflect the mores of the nation and abide by its
\nlaws\".<\/p>\n
To restate our main question, the essential issue in this case
\nis whether or not the military will allow the public know the
\nentire truth.<\/p>\n
Will the military let the public know who did the shootings
\nand for what reason? Or will ABRI treat the answer to this
\nessential question as a \"secret\" that must be guarded at all
\ncosts, even at the risk of killing once again the seeds of
\ndemocracy in our society?<\/p>\n
The writer is an observer of social and cultural affairs.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/protecting-secrecy-without-jeopardizing-democracy-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }