Legal experts decry Atambua sentences
JAKARTA (JP): Legal experts lamented the "lenient" sentences handed down to six men for the killing of three United Nations humanitarian workers, saying that the prosecutors should have prepared a stronger case and should immediately appeal to a higher court for severer punishment.
National Commission on Human Rights secretary-general Asmara Nababan and noted lawyer Abdul Hakim Garuda Nusantara said that the international outcry that followed the sentencing was understandable.
But Asmara remarked that the sentences were not totally unexpected since the investigation was weak from the onset. Prosecutors, he said, failed to bring a clear case against the six who were convicted.
"The judges had no other decisions to take since they were based on the prosecutors' indictment. So we understand if the international community is disappointed and angry with the weak punishment, which is similar to that given to a bicycle thief," Asmara told The Jakarta Post by telephone.
The North Jakarta District Court sentenced on Friday three men -- Julius Naisama, 35, Jose Francisco, 30, and Joao Alvez da Cruz, 26, -- to between 16 months and 20 months imprisonment for their involvement in the September attack in Atambua, East Nusa Tenggara.
Presiding judge Anak Agung Gde Dalem said the manslaughter charges had been dropped against the three due to the fact that the attack was carried out by a mob, which made it difficult to determine the suspects of the killings.
The judge also said that the victims' charred bodies made it difficult to identify who committed the killings.
Two others -- Xisto Pereira and Joao Martins -- were sentenced to 10 months each while Serafin Ximenes got 15 months for conspiring to incite violence that resulted in the damage of property belonging to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
The sentences immediately received strong criticism from UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who said that there should be no impunity for those who use violence against the UN or international humanitarian staff.
Similar condemnation over a "very disappointing verdict" was also voiced by the United States government, which questioned Indonesia's commitment to the principle of accountability.
In response, Attorney General Marzuki Darusman has promised that his office will file an appeal to the high court against the sentences and seek more severe punishments for the six men from East Timor.
Separately, Abdul Hakim from the Institute for Policy Research and Advocacy (ELSAM) decried the sentences, which he said indicated impunity rather than punishment.
"The verdicts have negated the effect of the punishment, in which someone is to be punished in order to make them wary and not repeat such a crime again. This case is a heavy test to our national court's credibility," Abdul Hakim told The Post.
Abdul Hakim further argued that the Criminal Code clearly stipulates that premeditated murder is punishable with a life sentence or the death penalty.
Both Asmara and Abdul urged that an appeal should be lodged, with prosecutors preparing a stronger case.
"The victims were in Atambua at this country's invitation to help us take care of the refugees. The government failed to protect them," Abdul Hakim said.
"The prosecutors have to take their chances with an appeal in the hope that the high court will also consider the international community's sense of justice, and not only the country's nationalism," Asmara said.
Asmara pointed out that the Sept. 6 incident could be considered a violation of human rights, which carries stricter and heavier punishment. However, the time the crime was committed falls beyond the new law on human rights' existing mandate.
He said that according to Human Rights Tribunal Law No. 26/2000, someone convicted of rights abuse could face a minimum 10-year jail sentence and a maximum 20 years or the death sentence.
The law was passed on Nov. 23, 2000. (02/bby)