Lawyers question internal security bill
JAKARTA (JP): A group of human rights lawyers and activists urged the House of Representatives yesterday to take the lead from the military in drafting the proposed internal security bill.
The activists, led by lawyer Adnan Buyung Nasution, met with two members of the Armed Forces (ABRI) faction, to present a statement which also called on the House to review the 1963 Subversion Law.
But the discussion focused on the military's plan to introduce the internal security bill, with the activists questioning the objective of such legislation.
Buyung said such an act was not needed in a democratic state.
He questioned whether the purported objective of the legislation was really to empower the government to deal with major crises that could endanger national unity.
A crisis for the government was not necessarily a crisis for the nation, he said.
The government also has the potential of becoming a threat to the people, he said, citing authoritarian government and dictatorships as examples.
ABRI Sociopolitical Affairs Chief Lt. Gen. Syarwan Hamid disclosed in September that the military was preparing a draft an internal security bill. He said the military had been drafting the legislation for 10 years.
It is not clear whether the proposed law is intended to replace the subversion law, currently the subject of mounting opposition, including from the National Commission on Human Rights.
The 1963 law has proved effective in stifling government opponents and critics.
Syarwan did not disclose the content of the proposed internal security bill, but many experts believe it will be similar to the ones used in Singapore and Malaysia, where the government is empowered to detain a person for up to two years without trial in the name of national security.
Syarwan argued that the proposed legislation was deemed necessary in anticipation of escalating security disturbances.
Buyung and his colleagues said that if Indonesia was to have an internal security act, then its drafting should be transparent and not infringe on human rights.
They said the House should take the initiative rather than leaving it to the government to draft the bill.
ABRI faction representative Brig. Gen. Moeljono A.R. declined to comment on the proposed bill, saying that he had not received the draft.
Lawyer Dadang Trisasongko was appalled at the lack of transparency in the way the bill is being drafted, by even excluding members of the House of Representatives.
"Where is the people's participation?" he asked. (05)