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?"