Reflecting on rights body's success<\/p>\n
Hak Asasi Manusia Dalam Persepektif Budaya Indonesia (Human<\/p>\n
Rights in the Perspective of Indonesian Culture)<\/p>\n
PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama in cooperation with the National<\/p>\n
Commission on Human Rights and The Asia Foundation, 1997<\/p>\n
xx and 313 pages<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Many people greeted with cynicism the birth of
\nthe National Commission on Human Rights (Komnasham) in late 1993.
\nThey doubted its independence because its establishment was based
\non a presidential decree.<\/p>\n
The presumption has proven wrong. The commission showed in its
\nfirst two years of existence that it could be critical not only
\nof the executive which had given birth to it, but also of the
\nsecurity authorities. It exposed several controversial incidents
\nand brought cases to the military tribunal of those \"acting
\nbeyond the military operational procedures\".<\/p>\n
Liquisa in East Timor and Amungme in Irian Jaya, to name just
\ntwo cases, have shown that the commission is one of the places
\nwhere people can register complaints about human rights
\nviolations. The commission has in a relatively short time taken
\nover the advocacy function usually identified with non-
\ngovernmental organizations.<\/p>\n
This book is a compilation of reports from a seminar held by
\nthe commission in late 1995. As far as the papers published in
\nthe book are concerned, discourses on human rights have not shown
\nany new development. They place human rights as part of the
\nhistory of thoughts of Indonesia's nationalist movement, viewed
\nfrom cultural and religious perspectives.<\/p>\n
The elements of human rights are studied as far as they are
\nrecorded in Indonesian law. Human rights are also viewed from the
\neconomic viewpoint. A discussion like this has repeatedly taken
\nplace here through scientific and popular writings in several
\nmass media.<\/p>\n
The last section of the book holds its own attraction. It
\ndeals with the presentation by the commission's secretary-
\ngeneral, Baharuddin Lopa, on the organization's performance in
\nits first two years. A senior non-governmental organization
\nfigure, Abdul Hakim Garuda Nusantara, comments on this
\npresentation.<\/p>\n
Lopa said the commission received 2,360 letters of complaints
\nin 1994 and 2,918 in 1995. The commission handled 343 cases in
\n1994 and 421 in the next year.<\/p>\n
Commission members acted as speakers or resource advisers in
\n241 forums in Indonesia.<\/p>\n
The figures say a lot. The presence of the commission has been
\na godsend to many people, and its members are considered helpers
\nwho assist people out of their trouble.<\/p>\n
The table above shows that the commission's implementation of
\nits advocacy function has risen by more than 10 percent on
\naverage. The commission's administrative response to the
\ncomplaints through case handling had risen by only 3.31 percent.<\/p>\n
Should this be taken as an indication the commission's
\npotential is untapped in handling of this administrative matter?
\nWhile complaints lodged went far above 10 percent, the commission
\ncould only handle 3 percent of the total.<\/p>\n
The commission has recently encountered several difficulties
\nin settling cases of human rights violations. It is not clear,
\nhowever, what criteria is used to say the handling of a case is
\ncompleted. Take for example the Marsinah case, which is still
\nunder police investigation, or the violent takeover of the
\nheadquarters of the Indonesian Democratic Party (PDI). The
\nauthorities have apparently turned a deaf ear on the
\nrecommendations.<\/p>\n
This is a dilemma for an institution like Komnasham. It has no
\nauthority to execute a decision on a particular case, or at least
\nbring a case of human rights violation to court. At best, it can
\ncome up with recommendations, which the executive or security
\nbranches are free to heed or ignore.<\/p>\n
This suggests that it is still difficult for the Commission to
\nfind solutions to problems of human rights violations as they
\nrelate to the existing political structure.<\/p>\n
Nevertheless, the commission has turned to be a new control
\ninstitution. It is still a moot point whether it can serve as the
\nmost effective institution for the settlement of human rights
\nproblems. It has put itself in the ranks of other institutions
\nassigned to exercise control over such a huge executive power:
\nthe press, the legislature, non-governmental organizations,
\npolitical parties and others.<\/p>\n
Despite its limitations, Komnasham will likely contribute
\ntowards the creation of a more transparent political structure,
\nand perhaps even democratization, although this may be too high
\nan ideal. Whether the public will continue to place its trust in
\nthe commission in future will largely depend on its own
\nperformance.<\/p>\n
-- Ignatius Haryono<\/p>\n
The reviewer is chairman of the Institute of the Study of the
\nPress and Development, Jakarta.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/reflecting-on-rights-bodys-success-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}