House urged to clarify Komnas selection results

Fabiola Desy Unidjaja, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

Several veteran human rights activists who were inexplicably considered "unsuitable" for the National Commission of Human Rights by legislators called on the House of Representatives to explain to the public the controversial results of the recent selection.

The selection, conducted by the House's Commission II on legal and home affairs, has sparked criticism from the public as many candidates, who are greatly respected for their commitment to upholding human rights in the country, were considered "unsuitable" for Indonesia's top human rights authority.

Todung Mulya Lubis, Hendardi and Wardah Hafidz whose track records have shown a long and undying dedication to human rights issues, were disappointed but philosophical about the results, as they seemed to anticipate that the legislators would consider their experience a liability to certain people in the country.

The three were part of 43 candidates proposed by an independent team led by Harkristuti Harkrisnowo, a law expert from the University of Indonesia. The House accepted only 23 candidates, most of whom are considered human rights rookies.

Hendardi, coordinator of the Indonesian Legal Aid and Advocacy Association (PBHI), said he was not surprised by the results, but the House should transparently explain to the public how it came to such conclusions to avoid any confusion among the people.

"The House needs to do that, not to appease my own disappointment with the decision, but because criticisms are useful so similar mistakes are not repeated in the future. It also needs to avoid any confusion among the people," Hendardi he told the Jakarta Post by telephone on Thursday.

He said further that such debatable selections should not happen again in the future and the House should set standard criteria for acceptance into the rights body.

"We have seen that the criticism against the House's selections has been mounting after such dedicated candidates were declared unsuitable for this government's national rights commission," he said.

Many suspected that the House only took candidates who were expected to maintain the impunity of human rights violators, mostly from the military.

Wardah Hafidz, coordinator of the Urban Poor Consortium (UPC) concurred and said the House owed a plausible explanation to the public since it obviously ignored the national interests in conducting the selection.

"The House is supposed to represent the people, so they need to be accountable to all the people in all their decisions," she said.

She acknowledged that before undergoing the fit and proper test she felt that the legislators would not give her a passing grade precisely because of her strong commitment to ending human rights abuses in this country.

Todung Mulya Lubis, a noted rights activist and corporate lawyer said that he fully accepted the decision and should there be any question about the decision it should be addressed to the House.

"I do not have the obligation to explain to the public why I was not elected, it is the House's responsibility to do so," Todung said in the press statement.

He emphasized that the public would decide whether the selections were made based on human rights experience as the standard criteria or something else.