GRIB Jaya Explains Hercules' Presence During August 27 Riots
The United Indonesia People’s Movement (GRIB) Jaya has spoken out regarding the presence of its member, Hercules, amidst the riots on the night of 27 August during demonstrations near the DPR building and its surroundings.
Previously, several videos circulated on social media showing the presence of Hercules and his subordinates at the location filled with demonstrators. Wilson Colling, of the GRIB Jaya Legal Division, admitted that Hercules was indeed present at the site of the unrest.
Wilson stated that Hercules’ presence on the ground was part of a persuasive effort to monitor the situation and maintain environmental stability, rather than to exacerbate the situation, provoke, or engage in physical clashes. He stated that, organisationally, there were never any instructions to join the demonstrations or engage in any activities related to the protest.
Wilson noted that instructions from the General Chairman had been delivered clearly and firmly and had been published through the organisation’s internal media. “Therefore, the presence of certain individuals at a location cannot automatically be interpreted as a representation of the organisation’s actions, especially without evidence regarding orders, coordination, or involvement in any criminal act,” Wilson said in a written statement on Saturday (29/8).
Wilson also clarified the issue regarding the “go home, go home” call heard in circulating videos. He requested the public to understand the full context of the statement. According to him, the remark cannot be separated from the time, place, situation, the sequence of events before and after, and the intention of the person speaking.
He stated that the call to “go home” could be interpreted as an appeal for the masses to leave the location orderly when the situation was no longer conducive. “Furthermore, if the deadline for expressing aspirations has ended and the situation begins to potentially cause friction, an invitation to disperse peacefully is a preventive measure that can be rationally directed to prevent larger conflicts,” he said.
He expressed regret over several narratives appearing in digital spaces that use video snippets to create a frame suggesting that someone’s presence at a location is identical to involvement in a riot. In a legal perspective, he argued that the presence of a person in a place does not of itself prove involvement in a criminal act.
He stated that the assessment of alleged criminal acts must be based on valid facts and evidence, including who did what, when it was done, how it was done, with what intention, and whether there is a causal link between an individual’s actions and the alleged crime. “Thus, it is inappropriate for a video snippet to be used as a basis to conclude criminal involvement without first examining the entire recording, chronology, witnesses, other evidence, and the concrete actions of each person,” he said.
Furthermore, he stated there must be a separation between the right to express opinions and criminal acts. He noted that the right to express opinions in public is part of the constitutional rights of citizens, regulated under Law Number 9 of 1998 concerning Freedom of Expression in Public. However, he added that this freedom goes hand in hand with the obligation to respect public order, the rights of others, and legal provisions.
Therefore, there is a fundamental difference between the act of expressing aspirations peacefully, an appeal for the masses to disperse and maintain order, and acts of violence, vandalism, destruction, or other criminal acts. “These three things must not be conflated simply based on the similarity of location or the presence of a person within a single series of events,” he remarked.
Wilson has fully entrusted the Law Enforcement Agencies (APH) to investigate the incident. However, he requested that this be done based on facts, not the framing constructed in digital spaces. He noted that if there are allegations of criminal acts, law enforcement agencies certainly have the authority to conduct investigations and inquiries in accordance with legal provisions.
“However, at the same time, every person also has the right not to be immediately labelled as a perpetrator simply because they appear in a video or are at the scene of the incident,” he said.
Previously, the Metro Jaya Regional Police admitted they are still investigating the alleged involvement of mass organisations (Ormas) in the riots on Thursday (27/8) night. The Head of Public Relations for Metro Jaya Police, Kombes Budi Hermanto, was not yet able to comment on the issue currently viral on social media. “Regarding (involvement of) Ormas, we are still conducting further investigation because facts must be verified. We request time,” he said during a press conference on Friday (28/8).
Budi also declined to comment on the presence of GRIB Jaya General Chairman, Hercules, who was reported to be at the riot location. “We will investigate, because? Friends must understand that there are many uploads on social media containing disinformation, provocation, and hoaxes,” he said.
Meanwhile, the Coordinating Minister for Law, Human Rights, Immigration, and Correctional Affairs, Yusril Ihza Mahendra, requested that the public not be provoked by unverified information regarding the unrest following the demonstrations on 27 August 2024 in the Pejompongan area, Central Jakarta. Yusril stated that the Metro Jaya Police are still investigating several incidents that occurred after the demonstrations, including the death of a citizen named Bambang and the assault of a 12th-grade student named Faturrohmann. “Metro Jaya Police are currently conducting an investigation into the deaths of Bambang and the assault of Faturrohman. No conclusion can yet be drawn regarding who the perpetrators and the parties responsible for both incidents are,” Yusril said in his statement in Jakarta, Sunday.