Human rights commission: Last avenue of people's hopes

Human rights commission: Last avenue of people's hopes

By Sri Wahyuni

JAKARTA (JP): A woman in her 50s, holding a bundle of files,
looked worried sitting on a chair in a waiting room of the
National Commission on Human Rights building on Jl. Latuharhary
4b, Jakarta. She frequently wiped her cheeks and forehead with
tissues, as if cold sweat was endlessly dropping.

"This is what happens when an ordinary person like me is about
to meet an important person to seek justice. Nervous and
sweating," she said, looking sad and helpless.

The woman, Mrs. Nugroho, was about to meet a member of the
commission.

"I'm a victim of fraud. I've reported it to the authoritative
institutions, but after almost five years, I gotten almost
nothing," she murmured. She said she realized that her complaint
was beyond the commission's task, but admitted she didn't know
what else to do.

Mrs. Nugroho is not alone. On the same day she went there,
there were several other people. Some came from outside Jakarta,
submitting letters of complaint or requests for investigation.

"We have been receiving around three to four requests in
person for investigations a day lately. That excludes about 15-20
letters making the same request," Clementino Dos Reis Amaral,
secretary of the subcommission of the implementation of human
rights monitoring, said.

It's not surprising, therefore, if there are hundreds of
letters and complaints awaiting the commission's response.

"We are still working on July's letters at the moment," Amaral
told The Jakarta Post recently.

In its three years of existence -- Dec. 7, 1996 is its third
anniversary -- the National Commission on Human Rights seems to
have become more and more popular among the Indonesian people.
Some even believe that its popularity has eclipsed that of the
House of Representatives, as well as those of other NGOs,
including the Foundation of the Indonesian Legal Aid Institute.

According to Amaral, there are two possible causes for the
increase in the number of complaints the commission receives.
First, there has been an increase in the number of violations.
Second, people have just realized that they have so-called "human
rights" and that there is a special institution whose main task
is monitoring the implementation of them.

"I think the second factor is more likely to be the cause than
the first one," Amaral said. He said the people's awareness came
about as a result of the informal education and public lecturing
the commission provides to almost every level of the community.

The commission's Vice Chairman, Marzuki Darusman, said that a
misperception about human rights violations and the main task of
the commission has also been another factor.

This is due to the fact that about 30-40 percent of the
complaints they receive are not human rights violations, but
legal or societal ones. Most of them are problems related to land
ownership disputes, divorce or labor disputes, in which case
institutions like a police precinct or a court are more suitable.

Such a thing can be avoided, provided that the existing
government and mass institutions function as they should. If they
still perform ineffectively, the commission will always be
flooded by non-human rights problems.

"The commission can work at its best only if it is supported
by a good environment," Marzuki said.

Absurd or even silly requests also pose problems. A person who
claimed to be the next prophet after Prophet Muhammad, for
example, came to the commission and asked them to oust the
President, because he was planning to take over the position.

In another case, an old man who claimed to be a retired member
of the Armed Forces told the commission that all members of the
Indonesian Democratic Party and those of the Navy were
communists. Then he asked the commission to do something about
it.

According to Marzuki, people keep forgetting that as an
advisory body, their main task is providing recommendations for
solutions to the problems concerning human rights violations that
they investigate. They have no power to follow-up on the
investigations, he said.

That's why with every single complaint it handles, the
commission always tries to insert an educational element. As it's
linked to a real problem, the result is even much more effective
than that of a public hearing, he said.

The public hearings are mostly carried out by the secretary-
general. During the year, he has given about 100 lectures at
schools, universities, governmental institutions and at other
public organizations. But basically, every member of the
commission has the responsibility to do so.

"We have about five to six members going out of town every
week. They always use the time to lecture while they are
investigating a given case," Marzuki explained.

Given such a fact, Marzuki disagrees with those saying that
only a few of them do their work actively as members of the
commission, while others are too busy with their own personal or
professional activities.

"Each of us is doing their job, but not everyone receives
public exposure," he said.

Amaral shares the same thinking. Although there are only three
of them who are always on standby at the office, it doesn't mean
the rest are not doing their jobs.

"It's not a problem. We still consult certain related cases
with them. Their contributions are so far significant," Amaral
said. "There's no need to worry about replacing those thought to
be inactive," he added.

What is more urgent, according to Amaral, is the need for more
supporting staff members. With its 25 members, the commission
employs only 15 supporting staff. They consist of 11
administration staff and four legal experts.

Ideally, each member of the commission is supported by at
least five staff. Therefore, there should be at least 125 staff
with them. Compare this to what the Philippines has. With only
five members of a similar body, they have about 600 supporting
staff.

"It's not the members of the commission which should be
increased, but the number of the staff," said Amaral. "For the
time being, 35 more will do," he added.

The fact that more and more people turn to the commission to
seek justice nowadays shows that it has certainly won the hearts
of the public.

"We have to admit that the national commission which was
previously predicted to be a showcase only, in fact has gone
beyond our prediction. It is capable of solving various major
problems involving human rights violations, which I do
appreciate," noted sociologist Loekman Soetrisno said, in
commenting on the commission's existence.

What has become a problem, according to Loekman, is the fact
that most of the community, including government officials, do
not understand what "human rights" is. They cannot yet see human
rights as a factor that can make us into a modern society and
increase international appraisal as well. This can be easily
recognized from, for example, the way people beat a thief after
catching him.

Some senior government officials often make unnecessary
statements which only show their misunderstanding about human
rights, he said. For example, they keep saying that the issue of
human rights, like that of democracy or the environment, is part
of a conspiracy formed by developed countries to attack
developing countries like Indonesia.

It's also a mistake defining our own definition of human
rights, he said.

"Human rights is something universal. We cannot have our own
definition," said Loekman. He said a great effort is needed to
socialize the understanding of human rights.

"Socialization has to be done at all levels of the community,
including that of senior government officials," he insisted.

A rather skeptical statement about the existence of the
commission came from Y.B. Mangunwijaya, a noted social worker.
Mangunwijaya said the existence of the National Commission on
Human Rights is indeed alright, "but at the same time, it shows
that the nation's human rights is in an appalling condition," he
told The Post.

According to Mangunwijaya, such a national commission is
actually unnecessary, providing that human rights are not
violated. "The task can be done by an NGO, not a national
commission like that," he added.

For those who are seeking justice, on the other hand, the
commission serves as their last hope regarding the condition of
the existing legal system, which sometimes lacks fairness.

"We've done everything to solve our problem. Yet, what we have
so far is a very big nil," said Rahardjo Prajitno, 70, a justice
seeker who recently submitted a request for investigation to the
commission.

Rahardjo and thousands of other prospective dwellers of the
soon to be completed Kemayoran Satellite City, are struggling for
what they call a bigger compensation and better treatment in
relation to the Kemayoran project. Some of them claimed to have
suffered from illegal house demolitions since they refused to
receive the government-proposed compensation.

They have reported their case to related government and non-
government institutions, but there has been no significant
progress. Feeling desperate, they finally went to the National
Commission on Human Rights a few weeks ago, in the hope that it
would be able to help them.

"I hope the commission will be able to reveal the unfairness
and wrongdoings we have been experiencing from some irresponsible
party," the spokesman of the dwellers delegation said.

People do place a lot of hope in the commission. It's now up
to the commission to maintain the people's trust they've gained.
Marzuki feels that maintaining independence is not an easy task,
although so far, they have succeeded.

"Things are made easier for us by the fact that the government
allocates a sufficient fund without interfering in its use. It
comes as an independent fund that makes it possible for us to
produce independent investigations and judgments," he said.

Window A:

The fact that more and more people turn to the commission to
seek justice nowadays shows that it has certainly won the hearts
of the public.