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JAKARTA (JP): Legal experts made a fresh call on the government yesterday to replace the outdated 1946 Criminal Code with a more sophisticated bill drafted three years ago.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)