1963 Subversion Law still needed: Singgih

1963 Subversion Law still needed: Singgih

JAKARTA (JP): Attorney General Singgih said yesterday the
controversial 1963 Subversion Law would be needed until Indonesia
introduced a substitute law to deal with political crimes.

But he agreed the subversion law should be enforced carefully
so that it was used only against political crimes that threatened
the state.

Singgih said he was opposed to any proposals to revoke the law
because crimes related to state security could be handled through
the Criminal Code.

"The criminal code is appropriate to deal with common crimes
but not for political crimes that could undermine the state," he
said.

Critics say the law, which carries a maximum penalty of death,
is inhumane because it is easy to manipulate and gives the
government sole authority to define what constitutes a subversive
act.

The law was first used in the late 1960s against leaders of
the now-banned Indonesian Communist Party for attempting a coup.
It was also used to deal with activists involved in
antigovernment demonstrations in the late 1970s.

It is currently being used to prosecute labor leader Muchtar
Pakpahan and Democratic People's Party activists on trial for
sowing hatred against the government.

The National Commission on Human Rights has also called for
the abolition of the law but the government has failed to respond
to its demand.

The latest debate on the controversial law was triggered last
week when Armed Forces Commander Gen. Feisal Tanjung reportedly
told the commission he would agree to its abolition and replace
it with an internal security act.

Military officials said that Indonesia needs an internal
security act in anticipation of escalating threats to national
stability.

The Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation said Monday that if the
security act was aimed at replacing the subversion law it would
merely duplicate the existing law.

"The duplication will reduce people's trust in the laws," the
foundation said in a statement.

"The commander touched on the existence of internal acts in
Singapore and Malaysia which give the government wide authority
to control their people. The act is criticized by democracy
campaigners in the two countries," it continued.

The Indonesian Legal Aid and Human Rights Association said the
subversion law was intended to ward off opposition, "Basically it
violates human rights," it said. (05)