Let's just start to build trust: GAM

Let's just start to build trust: GAM

Tiarma Siboro
The Jakarta Post/Jakarta

Two weeks after the Indonesian government and the Free Aceh
Movement (GAM) signed a peace deal in Helsinki, many continue to
question its legitimacy, particularly House of Representatives
lawmakers, which may pose a stumbling block to its
implementation.

Politicians opposed to the memorandum of understanding (MOU)
on the peaceful settlement of the Aceh conflict have claimed that
many points in the agreement are vague, which leaves room for
multi-interpretations, especially those on the governing of Aceh
and the powers of the local legislature.

Vice President Jusuf Kalla, who was involved in the peace
process since the onset, had called for a halt to the debate over
the peace accord.

Member of the GAM negotiating team Mohammed Nur Djuli,
however, said delegations of both parties had sought every avenue
to bridge differences of view while formulating the MOU. He was
convinced the MOU, which wrapped up six months of talks, was the
best arrangement the negotiators could reach to end almost three
decades of armed struggle in the province.

The negotiation was facilitated by the Helsinki-based Crisis
Management Initiative (CMI).

"We both agreed upon a self-government system and picked the
term 'Aceh Administration' for it in the MOU because GAM can't
accept special autonomy, while the Indonesian government could
neither accept a referendum nor independence for Aceh.

"It is quite fair that we (Acehnese) talk about governing our
own territory, albeit still within the Republic of Indonesia. The
debate stopped then and there," Nur Djuli told The Jakarta Post
on Friday.

According to the MOU, the new government arrangement in Aceh
will require the House to seek the Aceh legislature's consent for
all international agreements, administrative measures and
policies concerning Aceh. House members consider the condition
undermines their power.

Concerns have also been raised over human rights issues as the
House legislators have said the government and GAM had given
conflicting interpretations of the retroactivity principle of the
planned human rights tribunal, which will be established in
accordance with the MOU.

Nur Djuli suggested that both sides leave the matter to
international principles of law, which give the sole authority to
the UN to establish the rights tribunal to hear cases of crimes
against humanity during the conflict in Aceh.

"The UN holds the full authority to establish the rights
tribunal in Aceh to try either Indonesian soldiers or GAM
fighters who are accused of perpetrating atrocities. The
establishment of the human rights tribunal in Aceh was not based
on what we (GAM) or Indonesia asked for," he said.

Nur Djuli admitted that many parties were not altogether happy
with the peace process.

Disputes in many ways could disrupt the implementation of the
MOU, he added. "That's what the foreign monitoring team is for,"
he said, referring to the around 200-strong Aceh Monitoring
Mission (AMM).

When the AMM cannot resolve a dispute through a dialog
involving representatives of both the Indonesian government and
GAM, the top political leadership of the two sides and the CMI
will be invited to step in, with the knowledge of the EU
Political and Security Committee.

The CMI will issue a ruling, which will be binding for both
sides.

Nur Djuli said the dispute settlement arrangement would
prevent the peace accord from faltering.

"The previous Cessation of Hostilities Agreement (COHA) in
2002 failed because the monitoring team lacked the power to
enforce its policy. We should not repeat the same mistake, and
complying with AMM decisions has nothing to do with sovereignty.
It is merely about the involvement of international arbitration,"
he said.

He suggested that debate over the MOU would be
counterproductive and could backfire on the peace process.

"Let's just begin to build the trust," he said.