Observers back Gus Dur's assessment of police

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)