Calls mount for revision of antiterrorism bill

Muninggar Sri Saraswati and Tiarma Siboro, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The controversy surrounding the arrest and status of suspected terrorist Omar al-Faruq has prompted calls for an antiterrorist law that would provide a legal basis for the fight against terrorism, while also preventing arbitrary detention.

Noted lawyer and the chairman of the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM), Abdul Hakim Garuda Nusantara, urged the government last week to revise immediately the antiterrorism bill to provide a legal umbrella for the fight against terrorism, and to avoid violations of existing Criminal Code procedures.

According to Abdul Hakim, several controversial articles in the bill should be revised, including one that stipulates that intelligence reports are a sufficient basis on which to submit people to the due process of the law.

"Based on our Criminal Code procedure, no arrest can be made without strong evidence and proper procedures being adhered to," Hakim said over the weekend, implying that intelligence reports could not be used as prima facie evidence by legal enforcers to prosecute people.

"We need an antiterrorism law, of course, in order to avoid further legal loopholes, as in the case of the arrest and deportation of foreigners accused of suspected terrorist acts.

"But this country's need (for legislation) should not be an excuse for the government and lawmakers to ignore people's rights," Abdul Hakim said.

Omar al-Faruq, believed to be a Kuwaiti citizen, was arrested and deported from Indonesia as part of an intelligence operation involving Indonesia's intelligence service and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the United States.

Indonesian authorities have given conflicting statements about al-Faruq's case. Minister of Justice and Human Rights Yusril Ihza Mahendra defended al-Faruq last week, saying, "He cannot be declared a terrorist because Indonesia does not yet have an antiterrorism law."

Yusril's statement conflicted with earlier statements by Indonesian authorities, who insisted that al-Faruq was an Indonesian citizen wanted by the U.S. government for terrorist acts in the U.S. even prior to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Topo Susanto, a senior lecturer at the University of Indonesia, said the antiterrorism bill should be revised prior to its passage because "it approves the arbitrary arrest of people".

"The Indonesian legal system does not recognize extraordinary efforts -- including the involvement of intelligence officers -- for prosecuting people," he said.

Yusril, meanwhile, said the government had prepared an antiterrorism bill but had delayed submitting it to the House of Representatives due to objections from various parties.

Following the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, in the U.S., Indonesia, the country with the world's largest Muslim population, has been seen as a haven for people linked to the international terrorist group al-Qaeda.

The U.S., as well as several neighboring countries, has repeatedly accused Indonesia of being reluctant to prosecute its citizens believed to have links with al-Qaeda.

Under international pressure, Indonesia prepared the antiterrorism bill, which many consider to be based on the Internal Security Acts of Malaysia and Singapore. The bill was prepared earlier this year and was originally scheduled to be submitted to the House in July. However, deliberation of the bill was delayed following objections from rights activists, who argued that several articles opened the door to rights abuses.

"We must avoid the imposition of a law that is similar to the Internal Security Act of Singapore or Malaysia, because we have different conditions here," said Topo.

"Those neighboring countries place state security as the priority, but Indonesia, which is in the process of becoming a democracy, has to support individual rights," he told the Post.

Abdul Hakim further warned the government not to use the antiterrorism bill to eliminate political opponents.

"Because the definition of terrorism in the draft is unclear, it could be used as a weapon to get rid of the government's political opponents, as happened during the New Order regime," Abdul Hakim said.