The nation should embrace universal humanity<\/p>\n
By Frans Winarta<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): The May 12 fatal shooting of four Trisakti
\nUniversity students, allegedly carried out by the security
\nforces, marks a black day in the history of modern Indonesia. The
\ntragic deaths of students who were demanding democratic reform
\noccurred in conjunction with a wider process of democratization
\nbeginning in 1990 amid global trends favoring democratic
\ninstitutions and respect for human rights and the rule of law.<\/p>\n
It is ironic that such a peaceful student demonstration was
\nmet with force and live bullets. Whatever the justification
\noffered by the authorities for the loss of life, it is clear the
\nright to life has been sacrificed to serve political interests of
\nan authoritarian regime.<\/p>\n
The shootings were only the beginning of a tragedy as the
\nmasses burned and looted Chinese-Indonesian commercial
\nestablishments and homes the following days.<\/p>\n
More than 1,200 people died as a result of the May 14-May 16
\nriots. Throughout this period, there was no evidence that the
\nsecurity forces made any serious effort to stop it. Once again,
\nthe ethnic Chinese have been victimized by the masses who were
\nincited to riots in what smacked of racism to serve the interests
\nof some political elites.<\/p>\n
The New Order regime which accused China of abetting the
\nattempted communist coup in 1965 has persistently fanned the
\nflames of racial sentiment for political gain.<\/p>\n
Since then, Chinese schools have been closed, written Chinese
\ncharacters banned, spoken Chinese outlawed and Chinese cultural
\nexpressions prohibited so that the Indonesian people have
\ndeveloped the perception that everything relating to the Chinese
\nis bad and should be avoided.<\/p>\n
The New Order regime under Soeharto promoted anti-Chinese
\npolicies in which ethnic Chinese-Indonesians were not given
\nopportunities for political expression -- the absence of ethnic
\nChinese ministers in the six Soeharto cabinets -- was clear
\nevidence.<\/p>\n
The House of Representatives (DPR) almost never had ethnic
\nChinese members nor the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR).
\nAlso no ethnic Chinese leaders were permitted to participate in
\npolitical activities in the political parties or Golkar with the
\nexception of Kwik Kian Gie of the Indonesian Democratic Party. It
\nis clear the New Order regime practiced a policy of devide et
\nimpera originally implemented by the Netherlands East Indies
\ncolonial government.<\/p>\n
The appointment of Mohamad \"Bob\" Hasan, a longtime Soeharto
\nassociate who is Chinese-Indonesian, as minister of trade and
\nindustry in the Seventh Development Cabinet was not so much the
\nvoluntary option of the New Order regime as a panic response by a
\ngovernment facing a wave of reform.<\/p>\n
The government's policy of resisting the emergence of
\nopposition parties and forces was rejected decisively by
\nthousands of students throughout the country. Simultaneously and
\nspontaneously, there emerged opposition to the New Order regime
\nand a demand that Soeharto step down.<\/p>\n
These divisive politic tactics were so extensive that they
\nembraced numerous other conflicts such as Moslem versus non-
\nMoslem, indigenous people versus nonindigenous people,
\nconglomerates versus small and middle level entrepreneurs,
\nmilitary versus civilians and Old Order versus New Order.<\/p>\n
Additionally, lawyers' organizations were splintered into weak
\ncomponents, labor organizations constrained, journalists'
\norganizations prohibited and any organization which managed to
\ngather strength was compromised through co-option, intrigues,
\nintimidation and pressure.<\/p>\n
The most vivid example of this was the toppling of the
\nIndonesian Democratic Party's leader Megawati Soekarnoputri, who
\nwas undermined and virtually driven from the formal political
\narena. The opposition has been inappropriately treated like an
\nenemy.<\/p>\n
Lawyer Adnan Buyung Nasution's statement before a DPR session
\non May 14 contained much truth when he said that if the
\ngovernment could not protect its own people, this country might
\nas well be dissolved because it was not functioning in accordance
\nwith the principles set out by its founding fathers. The purpose
\nof the establishment of the Republic of Indonesia, the founding
\nfathers said, was to protect all citizens without exception.<\/p>\n
Ironically, shortly after this statement was made, Tanah
\nTinggi in Central Jakarta and other areas were torched by the
\nraging masses.<\/p>\n
That people are different from birth is a fact of life. Love
\nfor one's own kind, language, culture, customs and traditions,
\nsoil and nationality is a worthy right of every person. However,
\nin the end, we all must recognize a universal humanity. To
\naccentuate the differences or to promote one as better than the
\nother is inhumane and at odds with basic human rights.<\/p>\n
Much more pronounced than the differences are the similarities
\nshared by all people. Among these are the basic human rights that
\ncannot be diminished, reduced, obstructed or taken away by the
\nauthority, the most authoritative regime or the most dominant
\nmajority of the most repressive military regime.<\/p>\n
The writer is a lawyer based in Jakarta.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/the-nation-should-embrace-universal-humanity-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }