An exemplary move

An exemplary move

Five members of the National Police's elite Mobile Brigade
(Brimob) were pilloried by their commander, Brig. Gen. Firman
Gani, who stripped the officers of their berets and corps
insignias during a televised ceremony in Jakarta on Monday. The
public shame the five sergeants experienced at being so
dishonorably discharged, however, can hardly be compared to the
shame they brought to Brimob.

The five, whose job it is to protect and serve the public,
have been implicated in a recent robbery and murder in Jakarta.
Their alleged participation in this crime may have caused
irreparable damage to the police's reputation at a time when
public trust and respect for the police are already at their
lowest.

There is another reason why the Mobile Brigade should be
particularly angry with these five officers. The alleged crime
occurred as some of their colleagues were putting their lives on
the line fighting separatist rebels in Aceh. Hours after the five
were discharged, their colleagues held a smaller ceremony to pay
their respects to the latest Brimob officer killed in Aceh. The
five sergeants have not only betrayed the public's trust, they
have also betrayed their colleagues.

These officers' public dismissal was a laudable move that
sends a message to the public that the Mobile Brigade and the
National Police will not tolerate criminal behavior from its
officers. The five sergeants have been handed over to the
civilian police to stand trial for their alleged crime.

This is just the kind of damage control exercise the
Indonesian Military would do well to emulate to earn the public
trust and respect which it has also lost. One reason the
reputation of our security forces, both the police and the
military, has been so badly tarnished is the public impression
that our law enforcement officers are above the law.

There may have been cases where officers were discharged and
later convicted for crimes they committed, but their commanders,
probably for fear of tarnishing the reputation of the corps,
prefer to keep these cases out of the public glare. The problem
with this approach is that the public is never informed about
which cases have been settled, and whether the guilty parties
have been duly punished for their crimes.

Being less than transparent also gives rise to suspicion that
some criminal cases involving security personnel have been closed
simply because the perpetrators have family connections with
people higher up in command. Certainly, nothing has been heard
about the drug case involving Second Lt. Agus Isrok of the Army's
Special Force. The son of former Army chief of staff Gen.
Soebagyo was arrested by the Jakarta Police during a drug bust in
a Jakarta hotel in August. But nothing has been heard since the
Army took over the case from the police.

The argument for greater transparency could equally apply to
cases of human rights violations involving members of the
military and police, particularly those cases involving top
officers. The police and the military cannot pretend these human
rights abuses never occurred, especially when the evidence is out
in the open for every one to see, such as in Aceh and East Timor.
No matter how damaging an admission of guilt would be, it is
still far less damaging than pretending, or worse still, denying
that these abuses ever occurred. The police and the military
cannot stretch the principle of esprit de corps so far as to
undermine their own reputation and credibility.