Indonesia still struggles to uphold supremacy of law

Abdul Khalik, Jakarta

Lack of public trust in law enforcers, inadequate legislation, and insufficient understanding of new laws retard the drive to uphold the supremacy of the law in Indonesia, an expert says.

Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) deputy chairperson Dewi Fortuna Anwar said in a seminar on upholding the supremacy of law on Monday that the public's trust in law enforcers, such as police, prosecutors and judges was still low even after six years of reform.

"We conducted a survey in 1997 that found that people placed police, prosecutors and judges on the bottom when asked about the state officials they trusted most. This image remains until now, as reflected by our current survey," said Dewi.

This highlighted the fact that the performance of law enforcers was far below expectations, she said. Dewi added that the reason was that bribery, corruption and other violations were still common among law officers.

She argued that this poor performance had led the public to resolve their cases without involving law enforcers because people were reluctant to report their cases to officials they did not trust.

Dewi added that supremacy of the law could not be upheld without public involvement in the legal process. She admitted that police had tried to reform the force but no results were seen after six years of efforts.

Another factor that obstructs law enforcement is that Indonesia is still using the outdated Dutch colonial legal system, which is inadequate to resolve conflicts amid ever- changing conditions, resulting from globalization.

"Many current laws are simply out of date due to the globalization. Non-conventional crimes, such as intellectual property rights violations, cyber crimes, financial and banking crimes, cannot be resolved under the current laws," said Dewi.

In the absence of such laws, she said, people would find their own ways to resolve their disputes.

Dewi also claimed that political reform was much faster than legal reform, causing difficulties in upholding the law when facing political conflicts. This explained why so many cases involving high profile persons have simply disappeared without a legal solutions.

"Unlike Thailand, we do not have a strong legal system that is compatible with the political system. Every time a big political change occurred in that country, the legal system remains solid to accommodate that change," she said.

Dewi said that the 1998 reform movement and its aftermath exemplified the weak law enforcement in the country when the legal system could not do anything to accommodate the political changes.

In addition, the law enforcers, especially the police, have limited knowledge of the numerous new laws, making them incapable of handling many nonconventional cases.

"The police officers, who have limited knowledge and education, can't cope with the fast changing conditions, new laws and new crimes. The situation has led to difficulties in upholding the law," said Dewi.

She proposed that the police officers should keep on upgrading their knowledge of the latest developments in criminology, law and technology, while at the same time boosting their commitment not to break their own code of conduct and regulations in order to gain public trust.

"Public participation is also very critical in this area. For example, people should learn not to try to bribe the police in resolving their cases. The police will not take bribes if they are not offered them," said Dewi.