Observers back Gus Dur's assessment of police

JAKARTA (JP): Military and police observers cautiously supported President Abdurrahman Wahid's statement on the National Police's role and duties.

Army Lt. Gen. (ret) Hasnan Habib, former National Police chief Gen. (ret) Awaloedin Djamin and military observer Johannes Kristiadi told The Jakarta Post separately on Wednesday and Thursday that the President's statement should be understood as adjusting the police's intelligence role, but not eliminating it.

"If what the president meant is military-style intelligence, than it should be eradicated.

"But, the police still need accurate data and information on the situation in the city and nationwide, which can only be provided by its intelligence unit," Hasnan Habib said on Wednesday.

Hasnan, a former Indonesian ambassador to the United States, said an intelligence unit was an important instrument of the state, including of the military, the police, the immigration agency and the Attorney General's Office.

"They need the intelligence units as their eyes and ears. Without such units, they cannot perform their tasks properly as they are both blind and deaf," he said.

President Abdurrahman told new National Police chief Lt. Gen. Rusdihardjo on Tuesday to concentrate his force on maintaining security and public order and to abandon its military-style intelligence operations.

"Police must handle cases based on the results of investigations, not on intelligence activities," the President said before the induction of the new police chief by Vice President Megawati Soekarnoputri at the State Palace.

Abdurrahman, who is better known as Gus Dur, also said that a separation of investigation and intelligence roles was necessary to differentiate the role of the police from that of the Indonesian Military (TNI).

Awaloedin Djamin, who was National Police chief from 1978 to 1982, said Abdurrahman's statement only reaffirmed the government's policy regarding what the National Police should be.

"I believe Gus Dur only reaffirmed that the police is not a combat force and should not be like one," Awaloedin said on Thursday, while adding that he agreed the police should prioritize criminal investigations as part of their duties.

He said police intelligence was completely different to military intelligence.

"Although the police and the military frequently had joint military exercises in the past, both have different intelligence functions," he said.

Awaloedin, who is also head of the National Police chief's supervisory body, said the so-called police intelligence or criminal intelligence was needed to obtain a clear picture of social, economic and political conditions in the community, but "not to arrest people only based on police assumptions.

"That's not how the police work," he said.

"Police learn and analyze every aspect of the community. They use the results of analysis to take necessary action to prevent any disruption to security and order in society."

Meanwhile, J. Kristiadi of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) shared the President's view that the police should only focus on creating a secure situation in the community by handling criminal cases, and not by adopting the role of the military as the country's guardian.

"Gus Dur only emphasized the police's role so that it won't be mixed up with military intelligence activities," he said on Wednesday, while citing the importance of having a clear job description for the two forces.

He said intelligence operations were indisputably adherent to military functions, as they were aimed at discouraging people to engage in chaotic situations as well as anticipating chaos and disclosing incidents.

"Intelligence can also be viewed as an early warning system, so the military will not be surprised when a chaotic situation emerges. It also has to seek out the cause and the masterminds of the incidents," he said.

Kristiadi said the police's intelligence role was controlled by the police detective unit, whose functions were to restore normalcy and to anticipate any security disruptions in the community.

"The range of the police's intelligence role is narrower than the military's," he said.

"The military's intelligence role is to anticipate potential ethnic or religious clashes throughout the country. Military- style intelligence is needed only to monitor macro issues," he said. (01)