Legal experts demand new subversion law
Legal experts demand new subversion law
JAKARTA (JP): Legal experts made a fresh call on the
government yesterday to replace the outdated 1946 Criminal Code
with a more sophisticated bill drafted three years ago.
Muladi, the rector of the Semarang-based Diponegoro
University, Loebby Loqman and Yusril Ihza Mahendra of the
Jakarta-based University of Indonesia, separately pointed out
that because the Criminal Code does not have provisions on
subversion, the government has had to use the 1963 Subversion Law
widely condemned as inhumane.
If the Criminal Code is replaced, they agreed, the government
will never again have to use the Subversion Law as the new
document would have adequate provisions.
"If the new bill is passed into law, the 1963 Subversion Law
would automatically be obsolete," said one of the observers.
"The draft was completed three years ago, I don't understand
why the government hasn't submitted it to the House of
Representatives," Yusril said. "All the fuss about the Subversion
Law would be over if the Criminal Code was amended."
"The best thing to do is scrap the Subversion Law and submit
the draft of the new criminal code to the House," said Loebby
Loeqman.
Muladi, who helped draw up the new document, agreed. However,
he recognized that there is only a slight possibility that the
House would be able to deliberate the document right away. After
the general elections in May, the House will see a change in
membership.
"But that's no excuse for the government to stall," he said.
The experts were commenting on a recent statement by
Secretary-General of the National Commission on Human Rights
Baharuddin Lopa, lamenting the government's failure to respond to
the commission's request last year that the 1963 law be revoked.
Law No.11/1963 prohibits activities that could be labeled as
"subversive" such as attempts to topple the government,
undermine the Pancasila ideology, express sympathy with the
country's foes, even damage a public facility.
Legal experts have criticized the law as inhumane, easy to
manipulate and for giving the government the sole authority to
define what constitutes a subversive act.
The government resorts to using the law because the 1946
Criminal Code has no provision for subversion.
Muladi tried to appease those who believe that without the law
the state would be vulnerable to subversion.
"The new document has provisions to restrict such activities.
Only, it's a lot more sophisticated than the old criminal code
because we tried to link every act defined as subversive to its
causes," he said.
In addition, the bill uses standard law terms, something the
old one lacks. The bill is not only based on existing national
laws and traditional laws but also on international conventions,
Muladi said.
After 12 years of toil, a panel of experts at the Agency for
the Development of National Laws completed the criminal code
draft in 1993.
The document contains more than 600 articles, including those
on subversion against the state. There has yet to be an official
explanation as to why the document has not been submitted to the
House of Representatives.
Loebby is pessimistic that the government would soon scrap the
1963 law. "It has become the government's lethal weapon," he
said.
The law was used in late 1960s against the now-banned
Indonesian Communist Party for its staging of a bloody coup
attempt. It was also used to deal with anti-New Order
administration demonstrations during the late 1970s.
The law is currently being used to nail the activists of the
Democratic People's Party (PRD) and labor leader Muchtar
Pakpahan. (35)