Human Rights Bill Clauses Threaten Komnas HAM's Independence

Chair of the National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM), Anis Hidayah, stated that her institution was never consulted in the drafting of the revised Human Rights Law by the Ministry of Law. Anis added that Komnas HAM was not involved from the initial discussion stages and even struggled to obtain the initial draft of the Human Rights Bill.

Anis outlined several clauses in the recently published Human Rights Bill draft on the ministry’s official website that weaken Komnas HAM. First, the draft removes Articles 89(1) and (2) of the current Human Rights Law, which currently govern the commission’s research and education functions.

Anis said these functions are vital for preventing human rights violations, mapping root causes, and enhancing the capacity of law enforcement and public awareness.

‘This removal clearly undermines Komnas HAM’s ability to monitor the state and foster critical awareness among government officials,’ Anis stated in a written statement on Tuesday, 26 May 2026.

Second, Article 79(d) of the draft Human Rights Bill requires Komnas HAM’s findings to be submitted to the ministry to ensure human rights perspectives in policies. Anis believes this provision could transform Komnas HAM from an independent watchdog into a subordinate administrative body of the ministry.

Third, Article 84(1)(h) of the draft introduces interference with the Amicus Curiae authority, requiring Komnas HAM’s submissions to courts to include the ministry’s compliance assessment. This rule is seen as undermining Komnas HAM’s independence in promoting and protecting human rights.

Fourth, recommendation interference. Article 86(3) designates the minister as coordinator for implementing Komnas HAM’s recommendations on economic, social, and cultural rights. ‘This opens the door to significant political interference in human rights case follow-ups,’ Anis said.

Fifth, Anis highlighted legal uncertainties in investigative functions. Articles 78(c), 82, and 122 of the draft create ambiguity regarding investigative powers following the revised Human Rights Court Law.

‘This rule could hinder Komnas HAM’s pro justicia powers and create legal uncertainty,’ he said.

Sixth, Anis noted the draft contains substantive flaws by deviating from constitutional terminology through the insertion of ‘individual’ as a rights holder. He stated this lacks legal basis as Chapter XA of the 1945 Constitution consistently uses ‘every person’, ‘citizen’, and ‘resident’ as legal subjects.

‘This inconsistent terminology is not merely a linguistic issue but a flawed philosophical shift that could move human rights protection towards an individualistic paradigm alien to the nation’s philosophy,’ Anis said.

Anis added that using ‘individual’ reflects carelessness in legal drafting and could lead to future legal uncertainty and multiple interpretations.

The strategic weakening of Komnas HAM’s functions is suspected to be systematic, posing a real threat to the credibility of advancing, fulfilling, and protecting human rights. Anis said that if preventive functions are curtailed and oversight is interfered with, society and human rights victims will lose an objective, independent, and impartial human rights monitor.

‘It is not only the weakening of functions but also the severely limited budget support that hinders the commission’s ability to maximise public complaint handling,’ Anis said.

With these concerns, Anis urged the government to respect the separation of roles between Komnas HAM as an independent body and the Ministry of Law as the president’s executive assistant. ‘Clear boundaries between the two will foster healthy and constructive institutional relations,’ she said.

Komnas HAM also called for the Human Rights Law revision to not contradict the spirit of the 1998 Reformasi. Instead, the revision should strengthen Komnas HAM’s broad and strategic mandate, given its constitutional importance.

‘Komnas HAM invites all human rights victims, civil society elements, academics, and media to jointly monitor the Human Rights Bill revision to uphold transparency, meaningful participation, and democracy,’ Anis said.

Ministry of Law Secretary-General Novita Ilmaris claimed the Human Rights Bill revision involved various stakeholders, including Komnas HAM, civil society organisations, academics, and other government ministries and agencies.

Novita stated that the involvement of national human rights institutions was documented in various discussion forums and public hearings held by the ministry.

‘So if there are claims that the Human Rights Bill was drafted without involving national human rights institutions and civil society, we respond that the ministry has engaged all parties, including academics and experts, as this law will be ours,’ Novita told reporters on Friday, 22 May 2026.

Previously, Minister of Law Natalius Pigai said the revisions to Law No. 39 of 1999 on Human Rights and Law No. 26 of 2000 on Human Rights Courts would strengthen Komnas HAM. He stated the government plans to appoint human rights investigators from Komnas HAM.

In the draft law, Pigai said human rights investigators from Komnas HAM would have powers akin to those of Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) investigators. ‘Komnas HAM will function like the KPK,’ he said when met at his office in South Jakarta on Friday, 2.