Sat, 22 Jul 1995

Police as part of ABRI need role clarified: Experts

JAKARTA (JP): A national seminar on law enforcement recommended yesterday that police be given greater autonomy to enable them to carry out their jobs more effectively.

"The position of the police force as a part of ABRI (the Indonesian Armed Forces) must be redefined, in both operational and administrative terms," said the recommendation, read at the end of the seminar.

The recommendation was prepared by a working group that was made up of senior experts, including Muladi, Loebby Loqman and Mardjono Reksodiputro.

Legal expert Satjipto Rahardjo, well-known as a columnist on police matters, said that in the long run the police should be separated from the ABRI so that the force could be more independent in carrying out its duties.

"But giving the police greater autonomy is the most immediate need in improving the police's performance," Satjipto said.

"Our middle class' increasingly demands for security can only be fulfilled by truly professional police. And this can be achieved only if the police is independent from the military," he said.

He argued that only the police were trained in policing civilians, while the military was trained mostly in warfare.

The issue of the separation of the police from the military has often been raised in public forums but military leaders have persistently rejected the idea on the grounds that the policy could, dangerously, divide ABRI.

Among those opposed to the proposal is Gen. (ret) L.B. Moerdani, a former ABRI chief and defense minister.

Lack of professionalism within the police force has often been blamed on the lack of funds provided for their day-to-day operations.

During the seminar, suggestions that the police be given at least financial autonomy received no response.

"I think our society is not aware of the price of security," Satjipto said.

Earlier in the discussion, National Police Chief Gen. Banurusman said that, to make matters worse, there was no clear policy regarding who has the authority to investigate a case.

He said that under the existing rules, civilian officials are also involved in investigations of certain cases, although it is only the police who are trained to do so.

"The criminal code procedures also state that only the police are authorized to investigate, but in reality the practice is different," he said.

Banurusman argued that, without clear rules, any official can claim they have the authority to arrest people. "This will lead to violations of human rights," he said.

Banurusman's concerns received a sympathetic response from legislators participating in the seminar.

"In one case a local police chief in Singaraja, Bali, stopped an investigation of a man over his role in a land dispute. But, surprisingly, an officer from the local military office arrested the suspect for a further investigation," said legislator A.A. Oka Mahendra of the Golkar faction.

Oka said that such military intervention in cases happened simply because military men felt they were superior to the police.

A similar view was expressed by legislator V.B. da Costa of the Indonesian Democratic Party (PDI). He said that the official procedure in investigations did not apply when the case implicated an ABRI member.

He said it often happened that lower-ranking military officers tortured a suspect before handing him over to the police. (anr)