Human Rights Bill: Defending the Defenders of Human Rights

When human rights are violated, there are individuals who stand on the front lines to voice injustice. They accompany victims, advocate for policies, criticise abuses of power, and fight for a healthy environment. Yet, irony often occurs. Those who fight for human rights become the most vulnerable to intimidation, criminalisation, and even violence. Meanwhile, Indonesia’s constitution guarantees every person the right to self-advancement and to collectively fight for their rights to build society, the nation, and the state.

This underscores the importance of regulating the struggle for these rights, not merely stopping at the protection of victims of human rights violations, but also reaching those who work to ensure these rights are respected. Looking at Law Number 39 of 1999 on Human Rights, for more than two decades it has served as the primary foundation for human rights protection in Indonesia. It has also guaranteed personal and collective rights to build society, the nation and the state, and even to fight for one’s own interests. However, a significant void remains: the absence of regulations that specifically recognise and protect human rights defenders, despite the ongoing various forms of pressure against them.

In truth, the embryo of protection for human rights defenders has been recognised in Indonesia’s positive law, both in the Human Rights Law and Law Number 32 of 2009 on Environmental Protection and Management. The Environmental Protection and Management Law protects the struggle for every person’s right to a good and healthy environment so that they cannot be criminally prosecuted or civilly sued. This provision is known as a form of anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation), which is legal protection for anyone fighting for environmental rights to prevent them from being silenced through intimidatory legal processes.

However, this protection remains sectoral, as the Environmental Protection and Management Law does not use the term ‘human rights defender’, but only protects those fighting for the right to the environment. Consequently, similar protection is not yet comprehensively available for human rights defenders working in other fields. In international instruments, the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly through Resolution A/RES/53/144 on 9 December 1998, is recognised. This Declaration affirms protection for every person who peacefully seeks to promote, protect, or fight for human rights, while also regulating the state’s obligation to protect them. From this Declaration, the European Union Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders were born as an implementation instrument translating the Declaration’s principles into more concrete actions.

This is what the Human Rights Bill accommodates. Its presence is expected to close the void in Indonesia’s positive law and provide more comprehensive protection against the various risks faced by human rights defenders. One important development in this Bill is the inclusion of specific provisions regarding the recognition and protection of human rights defenders. Firstly, the Bill provides a fairly broad definition of a human rights defender. A human rights defender is understood as any individual or group that carries out activities peacefully and without violence to protect, promote, uphold, fulfil, and respect human rights, either individually or collectively. This formulation is important because it affirms that human rights defenders are not only civil society organisation activists, but also journalists, academics, lawyers, indigenous peoples, local communities, and ordinary citizens who peacefully fight for their rights can fall into the category of human rights defenders. This approach aligns with the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders. Secondly, the Human Rights Bill guarantees that human rights defenders who carry out their activities in good faith cannot be criminally prosecuted or civilly sued. This provision has the potential to become an important instrument to prevent the use of law as a tool to silence criticism and human rights advocacy.