Legal experts divided over capital punishment
Legal experts divided over capital punishment
By Arif Suryubuwono
JAKARTA (JP): As four of the men on Indonesia's death row face imminent execution, legal experts debate whether execution should remain a part of the Indonesian system of justice.
All experts, however, agreed that the law must be upheld and that the executions should go forward.
President Soeharto recently rejected the appeals for clemency from the four, virtually shutting the door on possible reprieves.
One of them, the Malaysian Chan Tin Chong, alias Steven, has made an eleventh hour appeal for Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI) intervention, which in turn referred his case to the National Commission on Human Rights.
Baharuddin Lopa, the commission's secretary general said that any appeal for a stay of execution should be addressed to the proper legal institutions and that the commission would only deal with questions of human rights.
Steven, 39 years old, was sentenced to death by the West Jakarta District Court in 1986 for attempting to smuggle 429 grams of heroin. He has since been fighting his way through the higher courts, maintaining his innocence. Failing this, he has appealed for clemency from the President. This was rejected in May.
The other three awaiting execution are Fredik Soru, Dance Soru and Gerson Pandie, who were convicted of murdering the entire family of Teopilus on the Rote Island in East Nusa Tenggara in 1989. Their request for presidential clemency has also been rejected recently and they and their relatives have been notified accordingly.
Executions are generally carried out within weeks of the denial of the clemency appeal. Execution is carried by firing squad.
The strongest opposition to capital punishment comes mainly from human rights campaigners, including the YLBHI, who argue that deprivation of life is the ultimate violation of individual human rights.
"Personally speaking, I'm opposed to capital punishment," said Luhut Pangaribuan of the foundation.
"We must give the convicts a second chance to make amends. Hence, if the crime really deserves death, I think lifetime imprisonment is better than capital punishment," Luhut said.
Nothing wrong
Justice Bismar Siregar said he did not see anything wrong with capital punishment because it is recognized in Islam.
"I absolutely agree with capital punishment", he told The Jakarta Post by phone, admitting that he had upheld several death sentences reviewed by the Supreme Court.
"Capital punishment is consistent with the Holy Koran. It is also consistent with the Old Testament," Bismar said.
"I have faith in the Koran," he said. "Therefore, capital punishment should be applied when and wherever necessary."
Bismar also argued that his view is supported by the state ideology Pancasila, the first principle of which respects religions and consequently, it is also in line with what the religions say about such punishment. "So, capital punishment is not against our state ideology."
Bismar also defends the death penalty clause in the 1976 anti- narcotics law. "If let unchecked, dangerous drugs can destroy the whole nation, so I think we shouldn't show too much compassion to drug traffickers."
Rukmini Kusumo Astuti, a police general and a member of the National Commission on Human Rights, declined to say whether she supports or opposes capital punishment.
Rukmini suggested however that research be conducted to assess whether or not capital punishment is an effective deterrent.
In most nations where such studies have been carried out, no decrease in capital crimes has been uncovered after the introduction of the death penalty.
"Is it effective enough to discourage people from committing crimes punishable by death?" she asked. "And could it be justified by the sense of justice of our society?"
Legislator Suhardi, who heads the commission on legal affairs in the House of Representatives, also agreed that there should be a review to discuss the need to maintain capital punishment.
Suhardi said he could not yet decide his own position on the matter because on the one hand, he felt convicts deserve a second chance, but on the other, the law must be upheld and therefore the execution must be carried out in the name of justice.
"Ours is a country based on law. Everything must be based on law and as such, capital punishment, as a form of law, must be observed."
Suhardi said however that "speaking from the heart" he felt the convicts deserve another chance. "If they're dead, how can they correct their past?"