Legal experts decry Atambua sentences
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)