Govt and people must work together on rights

A survey has found that police officers top the list of human rights abusers in Indonesia. Noted rights activist Todung Mulya Lubis, who supervised the survey, discussed the issue with The Jakarta Post.

Question How accurate was the data you made public last week?

Answer: The data was based on printed media reports throughout the country tabulated by the Center for Human Rights Studies. It refers only to political and civil rights violations committed during January 1995 to March 1996. There were 194 violations, including violations of freedom of speech, freedom of thinking, and freedom of gathering and forming an organization.

The victims, therefore, varied from political figures to public figures, both individuals and groups. Their activities were curtailed, including art exhibitions and performances, press and other professional activities, oratories, demonstrations and going abroad.

The violators also came from different government institutions including police officers, university chancellors, officials of the attorney offices, political and social offices and of regional government level and below.

Actually, it's not the only data the center has. Reported violations on labor and land disputes were no less alarming. During 1995, the center recorded 1,129 cases of this type.

Q: What can you see from this?

A: There are at least three things. First of all, the understanding of human rights among government officials, especially those in charge of law enforcement, is inequitable. Therefore, something has to be done to improve it. I'm quite sure that it will reduce the number of human rights violations.

Second, strict and consistent enforcement of the law is necessary to prevent more human rights violations, either by government officials or common members of society. Such an enforcement will force people to think carefully before doing anything that may violate human rights.

Third, human rights awareness has to be made as a parameter for government officials' promotion. In deciding whether to promote a police officer, for example, the officer's level of respect toward human rights must be considered.

Q: It seems that the government plays an important role in this business of protecting human rights ...

A: The state, along with its officials, is the biggest organized power. It has a very wide range of coverage. That's why it's also the state -- through its officials -- that has the greatest potential to commit human rights violations.

On the other hand, it's also the state which has the most potential power to prevent human rights abuses. It's the state which has the judiciary institutions. It's the state which has the police officers. It's also the state which runs the attorney offices.

The government, therefore, is supposed to function as the prime guardian of human rights for its citizens.

Q: Is there anything the society can do about it?

A: Of course. The society has to be more active in socializing human rights among them and help government officials to reduce the number of human rights violations.

Here, the role of public figures, including religious ones, is quite instrumental, because feudalism and paternalism are still part of our lives.

Q: Where is the position of the National Commission on Human Rights then?

A: The commission has a mandatory task to socialize human rights among the society and government officials, to assume a role as a fact-finding and investigative body, and to forge cooperation with other local and international human rights groups or institutions.

The commission plays a unique role here, because it was founded through a presidential decree, while it has to work in a society where human rights have been taken for granted in the life of the nation and the government.

Q: The government likes to say that human rights issues are often used as weapons to attack developing countries, including Indonesia ...

A: Such an issue can indeed be exploited politically. If someone says that human rights are another form of economic protection for a developed country, it's true to some extent. We nevertheless cannot deny that human rights movements are springing up everywhere.

When a free market economic system emerged as a result of the demise of communism, human rights became an unseparated part of that system. It's quite reasonable, because the soul of the free market is equality of opportunity and the existence of fair play.

Q: So, what do you think is the best way to face such a problem?

A: We have to be careful in handling critical remarks regarding human rights violations. Yet, we have to remember that handling the remarks doesn't eradicate our constitutional responsibility to protect human rights. Fighting back in rhetoric without doing anything about what is being criticized won't do any good.

The fact that the remarks are made by a country in which human rights violations also exist doesn't mean that we can do the same thing, can we? (saw)

Dr. Todung Mulya Lubis is chairman of the Center for Human Rights Studies and a corporate lawyer based in Jakarta.