Experts differ on how to manage threats

Bambang Nurbianto, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

JAKARTA (JP): Most experts agree on the need to put an end to the threats currently being made to search out and expel Americans, but differ as to the legal grounds on which the police should go after those making the threats.

Such threats have already caused hundreds of expatriates to flee the country.

Lawyer and women's activist Nursyahbani Katjasungkana said on Friday that the police would be entitled to take action against those making the threats by using article 335 of the Criminal Code.

The article stipulates that someone is liable to prosecution if he or she intimidates another person or causes them to feel discomfort as the result of threats.

"If the police find it difficult to use the article because it involves religious groups, at least the police could show the public that uttering verbal threats is against the law," Nursyahbani told The Jakarta Post.

She also said that those who encouraged the public to undertake certain actions could also become the target of police investigation based on article 160 of the Criminal Code.

Adrianus Meliala, a criminologist from the University of Indonesia (UI), agreed that article 335 could serve as a legal basis for the police to take action against those making threats against other people, but warned that the article is very vague and could be subject to differing interpretations.

He argued that under the present legal system, threats are considered as crimes only if they are carried out.

Article 335 was often used by the repressive regime of former president Soeharto to suppress opposition.

"If the police use the same article to go after those making threats of sweeping and killing, the police would become unpopular," Adrianus said.

Adrianus said that in many Western countries like the U.S., which adhered to the Anglo-Saxon system of law, anyone who threatened another person could become the target of a police investigation.

Based on this system, many English-speaking countries had adopted special laws, such as antiterrorism laws, whose implementation was frequently marked by excess and the violation of human rights.

Indonesia, however, followed the civil law system (derived from Dutch law).

Mulyana W. Kusumah, another UI criminologist, said the making of a threat could become the target of a police investigation if and only if the threat was addressed against a particular individual.

"A telephone threat, for example, could become the subject of an investigation based on articles 338, 339 and 340 of the Criminal Code. But if a threat is made during a speech without any clear target, it cannot be investigated," Mulyana added.

Articles 338, 339 and 340 of the Criminal Code deals with premeditated murders.

Mulyana also called on the police to use a persuasive approach in dealing with Muslim groups which are upset with the U.S. plan to attack Afghanistan over its policy toward Osama bin Laden, who has been named as the chief suspect in the attacks on Washington and New York.

"I think the police made a good move by approaching the leaders of these Muslim groups. Legal action against them would only cause further problems," Mulyana told the Post.

Adrianus said the issue of sweeping had been exaggerated by the media by quoting persons who claimed that they would kill Americans if the United States attacked Afghanistan.

"The police have already guaranteed that they will protect foreigners in the country. The foreigners have a choice -- either they can believe in the police or in the media," said Adrianus.

Article 335: Whosoever makes a threat of violence, a threat of another sort or a threat which gives rise to a sense of discomfort or unease shall be subject to a maximum sentence of one years imprisonment or a maximum fine of Rp 4,500.

Article 160: Whosoever encourages other persons in a public place to commit a criminal act either verbally or in writing ... shall be subject to a maximum sentence of six years imprisonment or a maximum fine of Rp 4,500.