Prisoners of conscience

It is barely a year since President Abdurrahman Wahid ordered the release of all remaining political prisoners from Indonesian jails under a general amnesty program. The President then lived up to his image and reputation as a humanist, a man whom many people at home and abroad hoped would lead Indonesia through the transition from an authoritarian to a democratic regime. In the envisaged civil society, or what we fondly call the New Indonesia, no person would ever be condemned to jail for his or her political beliefs. The nation has certainly had enough of that.

For more than four decades, under the successive regimes of presidents Sukarno and Soeharto, many people were sent to jail for political dissent. Some for speaking out against the regime, others, like many East Timorese, Irianese (West Papuans) and Acehnese, for demanding an independent state. Some of these people were jailed without trial, and others were tried in courts under circumstances that could hardly be described as fair. Many others were less fortunate: they were summarily executed.

Such intolerance for political dissent blemished the otherwise impressive contributions of Indonesia's first two presidents to the nation-building process: Sukarno for leading the nation to independence, and Soeharto for lifting the nation out of abject poverty. But during the course of their reigns, both men resorted to repressive means and persecuted their political opponents. Now, President Abdurrahman seems to be making the same mistake. He has started arresting political dissidents, and may soon put them in jail.

Last week, the police arrested five leaders of the Papuan Presidium Council -- Theys Hiyo Eluay, Thaha Moh. Alamid, Don Flassy, John Mambor and Herman Awom -- ahead of a rally to mark the anniversary of the 1961 West Papua declaration of independence. In November, police arrested Muhammad Nazar, chairman of the Information Center for Aceh Referendum (SIRA), also before his group organized a massive political rally to call for a self-determination referendum in the province.

Their arrests bore all the hallmarks of the Soeharto regime. They were charged with crimes supposedly committed sometime ago. Police invoked either the subversion law -- Soeharto's favorite tool to suppress dissidents -- or an article in the Criminal Code pertaining to the spread of hatred against the government, a tool dating back to the Dutch colonial regime.

The six men arrested had one thing in common: they were preaching peaceful methods in their struggle for independence or, in the case of SIRA, a referendum of self-determination. There are many in Irian Jaya and Aceh who have taken up arms in this struggle, but they have not been arrested, even as the military claims to know the precise location of the jungle hideout of the Free Aceh Movement.

It appears the government considers these six men potentially far more dangerous than the armed separatist guerrillas precisely because they use peaceful democratic means, not bullets, in their struggle for freedom. This is a far more effective weapon in influencing public opinion and gaining widespread support, both at home and around the world. Indonesia's own history, from the independence struggle of the early years of Sukarno and M. Hatta, testifies to the importance of winning the public opinion campaign.

Ironically, by arresting the Papuan Presidium Council leaders and the SIRA chairman, the government has only strengthened their standing in national and international public opinion.

If these men are tried, convicted and sent to jail, they will become the first political prisoners, or prisoners of conscience, under the Gus Dur regime. If and when this happen, the government will no longer be able to take for granted international support for Indonesia's territorial integrity.

We can be sure the international community will reassess its position with regard to Indonesia's claims over Aceh and Irian Jaya if Jakarta reverts to the old ways of abusing people's basic democratic rights.