Definition of terrorism opens to abuse: Experts

Definition of terrorism opens to abuse: Experts

Yogita Tahilramani, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The definition of terrorism currently being promoted by the
government in its antiterrorism bill opens the door to abuse
through the potential labeling of any political activity
considered a threat by the state as terrorism.

Noted rights activist and lawyer Abdul Hakim Garuda Nusantara
said on Monday that the bill, which defines terrorism as the "use
of violence or threats of violence for political purposes or with
a political background," opens the door to a range of damaging
interpretations.

Apart from destruction of property and threats to life,
Article 1 of the bill also describes terrorist acts as those
which create fear among the general public.

There are worries that such a loose definition could easily be
exploited to incriminate opposing political movements that are
deemed "threatening".

In his written presentation at a seminar on the draft bill,
Hakim said Indonesia's definition of terrorism was as ambiguous
as the Arab convention on terrorism eradication, which, he said,
also had the dangerous potential of "repressing innocent people
whose only sin would be, for instance, to have an affiliation
with an opposition party, which incidentally uses violence."

The Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States have
served as a rallying cry for many governments around the world to
act against terrorist movements and introduce measures which
would give the state additional powers to swiftly deal with
suspected terrorist elements.

The Indonesian government in recent months has often cited its
lack of such a powerful law as grounds for not acting against
alleged terrorist elements in the country.

Under the current bill, a task force -- comprised of the
police, the military, the Attorney General's Office and the
National Intelligence Agency-- would be formed to fight
terrorism.

Those suspected of terrorist activities could be detained for
up to 360 days.

During investigation, a suspect could also be denied the
rights common in regular legal proceedings such as the right to a
lawyer and outside contact, including with family members.

Hakim urged further clarification in the bill on the roles of
the primary perpetrators, the accomplices, supporters and
funders.

The definition must not lead to multiple interpretations that
could confuse law enforcers, he said.

Coordinating Minister for Political and Security Affairs
Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who opened Monday's seminar, conceded
that there was debate over "security interests versus civil
liberties".

However, this did not change the fact that Indonesia was a
nation state and was obligated in every aspect to maintain its
national security, he said.

"We must be careful not to place human rights in the context
of drafting this bill, as an absolute ... and therefore allow the
nation to be reduced to chaos or instability," Susilo argued.

Criminologist Mulyana W. Kusumah, who also spoke at the
seminar, suggested that Indonesia compare similar antiterrorist
laws in other democratic nations, citing India, which had just
passed one last week, as a possible example.

The Indian Prevention of Terrorism Act allows the police to
detain suspects for questioning for three months without charge
and an additional three months with approval from a special
court.

The act also allows anyone suspected of giving money, shelter,
transportation or other support to terrorists to be tried on
terrorism charges.