Truth, reconciliation pose a challenge for the government<\/p>\n
On Monday representatives of truth and reconciliation
\ncommissions from several countries will convene to share their
\nexperiences with Indonesia, that has only recently passed a law,
\nlong awaited, setting up such a commission. The following is an
\nexcerpt from an interview with Ifdhal Kasim, Director of the
\nInstitute for Policy Research and Advocacy (ELSAM), who talked to
\nThe Jakarta Post's Muninggar Sri Saraswati.<\/p>\n
Question: What is the purpose of the meeting of the Managers
\nof Truth Commission Affinity Group (MTC), which will be held next
\nweek in Jakarta?<\/p>\n
Answer: This meeting will be attended by members of truth
\ncommissions from several countries, such as Jorge Rolon Luna from
\nParaguay, Yasmin Sooka from South Africa, Javier Ciurlizza from
\nPeru, Marcie Mersky from Guatemala, Father Matthew Kukah from
\nNigeria, Aniceto Gutteres Lopes from East Timor, Howard Varney
\nfrom Sierra Leone as well as Indonesian officials, scholars and
\nnon-governmental organizations.<\/p>\n
We hope it can provide a clear description on the work of
\ntruth commissions in other countries as well as to seek
\ncomprehensive solutions for gross violations of human rights
\ncases around the world. We will also discuss the East Timor-
\nIndonesia Truth and Friendship Commission and several important
\naspects involving truth commissions.<\/p>\n
Could you explain the background of the establishment of the
\nCommission for Truth and Reconciliation here?<\/p>\n
Law No. 27\/2004 on the Commission for Truth and
\nReconciliation is Indonesia's experimental response to a
\ntransitional political situation. Such a commission is usually a
\nproduct of countries in a transitional period, from an
\nauthoritarian regime to a more democratic regime -- during which
\ngovernments usually face public demands to explain past gross
\nviolations of human rights.<\/p>\n
What is the importance of establishing such a commission?<\/p>\n
Gross human rights violations that occurred during the period
\nof an authoritarian regime must be settled by the next regime,
\nwhich applies a democratic system. (If not) the cases will haunt
\nthe next regimes in developing democracy and national unity.<\/p>\n
The commission will play an important role in revealing the
\ntruth, and offer substantive instead of political reconciliation,
\nof rights violations in the past. Both victims or their families,
\nalleged perpetrators and members of society in general, will find
\nanswers in their quest for truth.<\/p>\n
Some 40 percent of the country's citizens are victims of
\nvarious gross human rights violations, who have been seeking
\nanswers for years.<\/p>\n
But why does the public seem indifferent to the issue of the
\nestablishment of the commission?<\/p>\n
First, the issue less popular than that of corruption,
\ncollusion and nepotism (KKN) in the wake of reformasi. It was
\nthe issue of KKN that led to the fall of the New Order.<\/p>\n
Our political elite, who rose in the transitional period, also
\nmainly responded to this issue. Our president won the election
\nby promising to eradicate KKN.<\/p>\n
Second, the government and the legislature were very sluggish
\nin drafting the law on the (truth) commission. Actually, the
\nissue was earlier a public debate involving scholars, activists,
\nvictims and alleged perpetrators. But the authorities failed to
\nrespond to it quickly.<\/p>\n
Third, the poor record of Indonesia's human rights tribunals
\nhad raised skepticism for a just settlement for cases of gross
\nhuman rights violations.<\/p>\n
Do you think the sluggishness in establishing the commission
\nand the corresponding law was intentional?<\/p>\n
It seems the political elite was reluctant to establish the
\ncommission quickly because one of its main tasks would be
\nrevealing the truth of gross rights violation cases that occurred
\nunder the New Order. It involved powerful people from the
\nmilitary, government and political parties; those who now hold
\npower in the government, the House of Representatives and the
\nRegional Representatives Council (DPD).<\/p>\n
So do you think this government can meet the challenge of
\nsettling past gross violations of human rights?<\/p>\n
Yes, provided it is determined to uphold the state's dignity.
\nThey must speed up the establishment of the commission by
\ndeveloping a conducive political atmosphere. They could start by
\nestablishing a credible committee to select commission members in
\na bid to set up a credible commission.<\/p>\n
Each stage of the process must be transparent to gain public
\nsupport. But then again, the government must understand that the
\ncommission's main duty is to make substantive reconciliation
\nrather than political reconciliation.<\/p>\n
We had high hopes when President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
\ncalled for reconciliation soon after he was elected president.
\nUnfortunately, he was referring to reconciliation with his
\npolitical competitors.<\/p>\n
Are you sure the credibility of members of the commission will
\ndetermine the credibility of the commission?<\/p>\n
Obviously. If the commission consists of figures such as
\n(Muhammadiyah chairman) Syafi'i Ma'arif, (Nahdlatul Ulama cleric)
\nSahal Mahfudz, (philosopher) Franz Magnis Suseno or (rights
\nactivist) Father Sandyawan or other credible figures, I am sure
\nthe commission will get public support. The opposite will happen
\nif it consists of former officials of the New Order.<\/p>\n
What kind of cases would the commission handle first?<\/p>\n
The commission will not handle cases (on an individual basis)
\nbecause its duties and authority are not the as that of the
\nNational Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM). Its main task
\nis to determine the general pattern of gross rights violations
\nand deciding whether it is a result of the system or not.
\nMembers will decide to examine and probe several gross rights
\nviolations that occurred for a certain period before seeking to
\nreveal the truth and set up a reconciliation process.<\/p>\n
But the law says that if victims or their families refuse to
\npardon the alleged perpetrators in a certain case, the commission
\nwill not grant amnesty to the latter and hand over the case to
\nthe human rights tribunal.<\/p>\n
That is a flaw along a number of others in the law. The
\ngovernment should start making some revisions to the law because
\nthe commission cannot work like Komnas HAM; otherwise there would
\nbe overlapping of duties. Actually, the commission could use
\ninvestigation results by Komnas HAM in its examinations.<\/p>\n
Do you think the commission can run well in Indonesia?<\/p>\n
With regard to the law, I have two stances. First, I see an
\nopportunity for credible members to sit in the commission, that
\nhopefully will bring a good influence in terms of its performance
\nand credibility.<\/p>\n
Yet I also see that it may be extremely difficult for the
\ncommission to accomplish its mission in revealing the truth and
\nsetting up substantive reconciliation here because of several
\nindications by the government's moves in establishing the
\ncommission.<\/p>\n
One indication is that the government is responsible to inform
\nthe public about the law, but it has failed to do this. Second,
\nthe government has not been transparent in establishing the
\ncommission.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/truth-reconciliation-pose-a-challenge-for-the-government-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}