Feudalism hinders law enforcement, says legal expert

JAKARTA (JP): Lingering feudalistic attitudes are hampering the socialization of laws in Indonesia, a legal expert said here yesterday.

Soetandyo Wignjosoebroto said Indonesia had yet to erase feudalism, a political culture with a clear-cut dichotomy between rulers and their subjects.

"Rule by (using) law, not rule of law, has been established to strengthen power. Therefore, laws serve only to give legitimation to political interests," he said.

Soetandyo, a professor in law and sociology from the Surabaya- based Airlangga University, said Indonesia had "adapted" the laws of other countries without adopting their spirit.

"We imported foreign constitutions but not the constitutional way of life," he said in a discussion at Foundation of the Indonesian Legal Aid Institute.

"This, however, happens in many new nation states formerly under colonial rule," said Soetandyo, a member of the National Commission on Human Rights.

The discussion was held by the foundation to gather ideas for a proposal to revise the 16-year-old Criminal Code Procedures.

Soetandyo said it was common for developing countries to adopt western countries' laws but fail to properly put them into practice because they have no tradition of rule of law.

He said this condition allowed governments in developing countries to become chauvinistic, and encouraged the violation of legal procedures and discouraged democratization.

Soetandyo said there had not been a revolution of law in Indonesia, although it gained independence through revolution.

A so-called revolution of law nearly occurred in 1960, he said, when the government proposed the total reform of laws inherited from the Dutch colonial system. Efforts to overhaul the legal system failed because they were challenged by both the Supreme Court and the Attorney General's office.

Soetandyo said the "rule by law" principle also affected those who drafted the Criminal Code Procedures more than 15 years ago.

The current Criminal Code Procedures, dubbed a masterpiece in the country's history of law, have yet to guarantee the fair running of judicial procedures, according to Soetandyo, because of loopholes.

A Foundation of the Indonesian Legal Aid Institute team concluded the Criminal Code Procedures did not have enough clauses to protect a suspect's basic rights.

"The Criminal Code Procedures leave questioning procedures lacking credibility and transparency," said Bambang Widjojanto, director of the foundation.

The foundation suggested new internationally recognized principles be integrated into the Criminal Code Procedures.

"The United Nations Convention against Torture must be introduced and the overseas travel ban ended," the team said.

They also called for the abolition of a clause giving both police and prosecutors the power to arrest and detain a suspect for questioning about general crimes, saying it violated the principles of investigation.

Under the Indonesian legal system, prosecutors may arrest and detain suspects only in subversion cases.

"Only investigators with certain seniority should have the right to arrest and detain someone. They also need to gather evidence through careful investigation prior to the detention," they said.

The foundation has listed 328 cases of people subjected to abusive questioning by security authorities, including the military, since 1994. Misconduct has included physical torture and other forms of humiliation.

Former national police chief Awaloedin Djamin, who was involved in the drawing up of the 1981 Criminal Code Procedures, rejected the plan to revise the code, saying the law contained enough clauses to protect a suspect's basic rights.

"Revision is welcome, but it must clearly explain what is wrong with the law," he said. "The obvious problem is how all law enforcers put the law consistently into practice," he added.

Instead of revision, Awaloedin suggested law enforcers improve their professionalism, the government improve facilities for suspects and prisoners, and heavier punitive measures be taken against officials who violate the law. (amd)