Caning vs human rights

Caning is to be introduced as punishment and that caning is to be carried out in open places for public viewing in Aceh for those who do not carry out their religious obligations.

Abubakar -- head of Aceh's sharia office -- has stated that "sharia will not disturb people's privacy or human rights".

Obviously he doesn't subscribe to the modern internationally accepted definition, but prefers the Middle Ages' concept; Theocratism and its inquisition was just and tolerant. Of course this ruling on caning grossly violates human rights!

Mankind has the right of free will. Belief in any religion is a private and personal choice. So be it if we wish to be liberal or conservative in our beliefs, and no individual or group has the right to physically force or threaten with violence another to adhere to a particular belief.

Where are Amien Rais' statements of outrage now against Malaysia's use of caning? Are we compounding this crime against humanity with hypocrisy also?

Explain to me where this caning is compatible with constitutional law or Pancisila! Is stoning next? Would it be better to give Aceh total autonomy and let Indonesia continue in its advances toward democracy and freedom to pursue true independence? Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Indonesia is also a signatory of the UN Human Rights Accord.

BRIEN DOYLE, Jakarta