Experts call again for abolition of subversion law

SEMARANG (JP): Experts are making a fresh call for the abolition of the anti-subversion law which they say is outdated, defective and trampling on people's rights.

Legal expert Satjipto Rahardjo, constitutional law expert Soehardjo, and sociologists Darmanto Jatman and Is Susanto discussed the relevance of the law in relation to democratization in a seminar at the August 17 University yesterday. The speakers agreed that the law should be revoked because it is no longer relevant with current situation.

Satjipto, who is a member of the National Commission on Human Rights, said the commission has determined that Law No. 11, 1963 on subversion has many substantial flaws.

"Seen from many points of view, including that of the Pancasila state ideology, international documents on human rights and Indonesia's Criminal Code, this law is defective," said the lecturer from Diponegoro University.

Satjipto pointed out that the legal mechanisms currently in effect, including the Criminal Code, have been developing rapidly so that they covers topics contained in the law. Furthermore, he said, the law is no longer relevant as it was issued during the Old Order administration of the late president Sukarno in his capacity as the "Great Leader of Revolution".

Darmanto said the law is "an artifact of the Dutch colonial administration's system aimed at controlling its colony".

"The law was never meant to increase public participation in development. Instead, it's a means to oppress people," Darmanto said. "The law should be revoked because it really violates people's basic rights."

The human rights commission late last year called for a review of laws which were considered no longer relevant, and those which it alleged trample on people's basic rights. The subversion law is among the laws being evaluated.

The campaign caused a split in society. Prominent human rights activists and legal observers, such as Abdul Hakim Garuda Nusantara and J.E. Sahetapy, are staunch proponents of the revocation of the subversion law.

Most of the proponents criticize the expansive definition of the term "subversive" because it sometimes includes those who merely have points of view differing from the state ideology, Pancasila.

In the opposite camp are the Armed Forces and government officials. Chief of the Supreme Advisory Board Sudomo, for instance, steadfastly defends the law, pointing out that although the criminal code already has sanctions against subversive activities, it does not prevent them from occurring.

The former chief of the Internal Security Agency (Kopkamtib) also believes that if the law is abolished, as some people have recently demanded, Indonesia would have no other means to cope with the danger of subversion.

In the seminar yesterday, Soehardjo said that the law was designed in such a way as to encompass all human behaviors as potentially subversive. "If one studied the law really carefully, one would be amazed," he said.

"All it needs is the government's suspicion that a person's activity is undermining its power or authority, and the person can be branded as subversive just like that," he said. (har/swe)