Military impunity undermines democracy

Military impunity undermines democracy

Paul Barber, London

Indonesia is fast learning the lesson that while elections are
an important part of the transition from dictatorship to
democracy, the more difficult parts include establishing the rule
of law, eradicating corruption and ensuring military
accountability to civilian institutions.

According to these criteria the democratization process in
Indonesia still has a long way to go.

Although military operations in Aceh and West Papua prevented
free and fair elections in those areas, many observers declared
the legislative and first round of the presidential elections a
relative success. The two remaining presidential candidates seem
unlikely to provide significant impetus to the cause of military
reform however. President Megawati Soekarnoputri has shown that
she is a virtual puppet of the military while Susilo Bambang
Yudhoyono is a former general unlikely to change his military
spots.

But it is the continuing impunity of armed forces personnel
that in particular augurs ill for the transition to democracy.

The outcome of recent proceedings in Indonesia's ad hoc human
rights court and its associated appeal court have been a massive
blow to those who, over-optimistically, believed that Indonesia's
legal institutions were sufficiently independent and mature to
handle the prosecution of some of the gravest crimes known to
humanity.

This is not only a criticism of the Indonesian system, but
also an acknowledgement of the immense difficulties of
transitional justice in a country which has emerged from decades
of authoritarianism.

The appeal court's decision to quash the convictions of four
Indonesian security officials found guilty of crimes against
humanity in East Timor has confirmed the widespread view that the
proceedings were a travesty of justice. Twelve other Indonesian
security officials had already been found not guilty by the ad
hoc human rights court.

The only convictions still standing are those of two ethnic
Timorese -- militia leader, Eurico Guterres and former East Timor
Governor, Abilio Soares. The appeal court also halved Guterres'
10-year sentence thereby reducing it below the legal minimum.

The impression that military impunity remains firmly
entrenched was reinforced by the decision of the same ad hoc
human rights court to acquit the head of Indonesia's special
forces, Kopassus, Maj. Gen. Sriyanto Muntarsan, of gross human
rights violations for his role in the 1984 shooting of Muslim
protesters at Tanjung Priok in Jakarta. Families of the victims
have no intention of letting the matter rest and say they will
take the case further if the Supreme Court refuses to overturn
the acquittal.

Concern has also been expressed about a military bill before
Parliament, which it likely to have the effect of strengthening
the military's power and influence through the re-establishment
of its 'dual function' role and its territorial presence
throughout the country.

Some have concluded that the recent developments concerning
the military are reminiscent of the Soeharto era and that in
reality little has changed since then.

In the case of serious crimes committed in East Timor, it is
now clear that alternative international judicial mechanisms will
be required to provide justice for the victims.

Although an International Commission of Inquiry on East Timor
recommended in January 2000 that an international tribunal for
East Timor should be set up, the UN controversially opted instead
to give Indonesia the chance to bring the alleged perpetrators to
justice under its own legal system. Unfortunately, the
Indonesian authorities have shown that they are unwilling and
unable to establish the truth of what happened in East Timor --
especially as regards the role of the security forces -- and to
hold the perpetrators to account for their crimes.

While this is essentially a failure of political will, much of
the blame must also be attached to the Attorney General's office
for its failure to present credible cases against the accused and
its reluctance to indict senior officers, such as former armed
forces commander-in-chief, General (ret.) Wiranto. Wiranto was
identified by Indonesia's own Commission for Human Rights
Violations in East Timor (KPP-HAM) as the person with overall
responsibility for the violence in East Timor.

The UN Secretary General is now coming under increasing
pressure to establish a commission of experts to evaluate
existing justice processes in Indonesia and East Timor and to
recommend future action, including the possible establishment of
an international tribunal. Support for such an initiative has
recently been expressed in letters to the Secretary General from
106 representatives of East Timorese civil society, 78 members of
the U.S. Congress and leading international human rights
organizations including Amnesty International and Human Rights
Watch.

The Indonesian Foreign Ministry's objection to outside
interference in the judicial proceedings of a sovereign country
is groundless. The proceedings arose as a result of an agreement
with the UN and the international community has a special
responsibility to intervene in the case of alleged crimes against
humanity if the sovereign country is unwilling and unable to
carry out a genuine investigation and prosecution.

In deciding upon the next step, the UN must avoid relying too
heavily on the views of the Indonesian and East Timorese
governments since their views are determined primarily by
political as opposed to legal considerations.

The crimes committed in East Timor are of the utmost gravity.
The UN must take special account of the views of ordinary East
Timorese people, the victims and their families, which are not
necessarily reflected by their government. It must also ensure
that it fulfills its overriding responsibility to uphold the
supremacy of international human rights and humanitarian law.

The writer is a researcher for the London-based TAPOL, the
Indonesia Human Rights Campaign. He can be reached at
plovers@gn.apc.org