Extradition talks and Singapore's lectures

Abdillah Toha, Jakarta

There is something rather irritating in the recent negotiations between Indonesia and Singapore concerning the extradition of Indonesian white-collar criminals now finding shelter in this island state. The two countries have negotiated this matter before, without success. The two rounds of negotiations held recently did not yield much, although President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has claimed that some progress had been made in the second round.

What is annoying is the fact that, in the opinion of many Indonesians, the attitude of the Singaporean government is both patronizing and hypocritical. Indonesians may well interpret their attitude as an attempt to protect these criminals.

What is particularly vexing is that rather than earnestly seeking ways to settle this extradition matter with the Indonesian government, Singaporean state leaders just seem to want to give lectures.

The question is, why does Singapore always lecture Indonesia? It may well be a manifestation of the character of Singaporean governmental leadership. In the past, Lee Kuan Yew on numerous occasions lectured the Indonesian government about terrorism and corruption. It seems that now under the leadership of his son, PM Han Sien Lee, this "tradition" is being continued. This time, Indonesians are being lectured about the benefits of extradition in the context of eradicating corruption. It is most unfortunate that this "lecture" is being conveyed even as the international community is in agreement in making concerted efforts to eradicate corruption.

On the matter of extradition, Singapore's prime minister and foreign minister recently said that an extradition treaty between Indonesia and Singapore would not break the chain of corruption practices in Indonesia. However, the Indonesian government has never claimed that it would! Signing an extradition pact with Indonesia is just one more weapon in the total armory in the fight against corruption in Indonesia.

The Singapore government's constant lectures on matters related to the extradition agreement has started to put a large question mark over their sincerity and motives. What is it that Singapore is really after? Is Singapore attempting to buy time for Indonesian white-collar criminals before the conclusion of an extradition pact?

For too many years, Singapore has enjoyed fat profits from the non-realization of the extradition pact regarding Indonesia's white-collar criminals. They benefit from the monetary deposits that these criminals have siphoned off along with their flight to Singapore. Everyone knows that these people walk freely and without fear in Singapore.

Even a suspect in the major BNI fraud case can freely give interviews from his hotel in Singapore to Indonesian newspapers. Various researchers estimate that billions of dollars stolen from Indonesia are now deposited in Singapore banks.

This practice of buying time is not new. The Indonesian government has since 1975 been asking Singapore to sign an extradition treaty. Every time negotiations are conducted, Singapore always puts forwards excuses to hamper the signing of a treaty. At first they argued that legal practices in Singapore were not the same as those in Indonesia. Singapore adheres to a legal system based on English common law, while Indonesian law refers to Dutch law.

This is clearly a groundless argument as Indonesia has already signed similar extradition treaties with Australia, Malaysia and Hong Kong, three countries whose legal systems are also based on English common law.

Astonishingly, Singapore then used another excuse when it issued a list of crimes considered "incompatible" with their own laws. Singapore argues that smuggling, for example, is not a crime in Singapore because Singapore is a free trade zone that allows the entry of all imported goods without the imposition of any customs and excise fees.

Regarding Singapore's stance, Commission I of Indonesian's House of Representatives has now taken a firm position. In two working meetings with the foreign minister, the House has asked the government to set the end of 2005 as the deadline for the conclusion of an extradition treaty with Singapore. If treaty is not signed by that time, then the House will demand that the government take firm measures against Singapore. If necessary, the government should recall the Indonesian ambassador in Singapore. This pressure from the House seems to have somewhat softened Singapore's stance, as it has now agreed to start negotiating again.

The Singaporean government is apparently very unhappy with this pressure from Indonesia. According to a number of reliable sources, a Singaporean diplomat in Indonesia has undertaken intensive lobbying to make their annoyance known. He has been stating that Singapore, as a small state, does not want to be pressurized by any country. If Singapore simply buckles under pressure, this will set a precedent for further pressure from other countries in the future.

This diplomat has also claimed that extradition is not easy and that negotiations on such matters must be conducted meticulously before a pact can finally be signed. However, this argument does not make any sense as negotiations on this matter have been going on the past three decades.

The problem of extradition of white-collar criminals is just one of many major problems confronting the Indonesia-Singapore relationship. Other major problems include the export of sand for Singapore's continued reclamation program of their island, and the dumping of hazardous waste into Indonesia. The conclusion of an extradition pact would mean that significant progress could be made in settling these other problems. It will also be a significant test of Singapore's sincerity.

Relationships between countries can be substantially improved if there is mutual benefit, mutual respect and mutual assistance. In too many cases, it seems that Singapore has been reluctant to adhere to these principles that are the foundations of sound bilateral relationships between states.

It is time for the rhetoric and lectures to stop, otherwise the relationship will suffer. What is needed now is for the two nations to immediately take concrete action to resolve all of these accumulated unsettled problems. An extradition treaty would be a very good start.

The writer is chairman of the National Mandate Party (PAN) faction in the House of Representatives (DPR) of the Republic of Indonesia.