Questioning impunity in human rights abuses

Imanuddin, Staff Writer, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The country's legal supremacy is at stake following the defiance by the Indonesian Military (TNI) and the National Police on behalf of the military and police officers allegedly implicated in the 1998 and 1999 Trisakti, Semanggi I and Semanggi II shooting incidents, to a summons from the human rights commission.

The latest no-shows were three police generals -- former National Police chief Gen. (ret) Dibyo Widodo, his successor Gen. (ret) Roesmanhadi and former Jakarta Police chief Comr. Gen. Nugroho Djajoesman -- who did not show up for the second summons issued by the Commission of Inquiry into Human Rights Violations (KPP HAM) on Thursday.

A previous rejection occurred on Jan. 31 when all four of the top officers scheduled to be questioned failed to appear. They were former armed forces chief Gen. (ret) Wiranto, and the three police generals.

The officers' rejection of the summons was criticized by the Secretary General of the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) Asmara Nababan, who accused the officers of a lack of understanding on whether or not the legislature (DPR) can issue a legal recommendation on the matter.

Asmara said the House's conclusion that they did not violate human rights, issued last year, was not a legal decision and therefore KPP HAM may legally embark on a fresh round of investigations.

Meanwhile, chairman of the inquiry commission Albert Hasibuan said the inquiry should go ahead for the sake of legal certainty.

Army Chief of Staff Gen. Endriartono Sutarto, however, has defended the military's stance in rejecting the very existence of the inquiry, saying that the TNI would not turn its personnel over for questioning as the House had made the decision not to categorize the three incidents as gross human rights violations.

Law No. 26/2000 on the human rights courts entitles the House to recommend which violations should be brought before the rights tribunal.

Endriartono also asked the commission to respect the decision of the House because "it is a decision arrived at between the House and the government".

Similarly, the TNI leadership said on Jan. 7 that a KPP HAM investigation was irrelevant and they saw no need to comply, since the House had already conducted their investigation concluding that there were no gross human rights violations in the shooting incidents.

Meanwhile, Wiranto had defended the military, saying that the TNI did not intend to violate human rights as "they were only trying to guard the country from more massive riots, as well as to secure the national agenda."

The former coordinating minister for political and security affairs also reminded all national leaders that their current positions were secured because of the military's action and sacrifice during the incidents.

The 11-member KPP HAM Semanggi-Trisakti inquiry was established by Komnas HAM on Aug. 27, 2001.

The inquiry team is in charge of investigating the May 12, 1998 shooting of demonstrators at Trisakti University, West Jakarta and similar incidents at the Semanggi flyover in South Jakarta which claimed 13 lives in November 1998 and one in September 1999.

Four students were killed in the Trisakti tragedy, which triggered major riots in Jakarta and other cities across the country, eventually developing into anti-Chinese rioting.

It led to the downfall of former president Soeharto on May 21 1998.

The first Semanggi incident took place in November 1998 when hundreds of students staged a massive demonstration to oppose the imposition of emergency laws giving the military greater powers to quell unrest.

The second Semanggi case involved security personal shooting at student demonstrators opposing then president B.J. Habibie's presidential nomination in September 1999.

The Komnas HAM-established inquiry had directly summoned 19 Army and police officers to appear for questioning after its letters to both the Army Headquarters and the National Police Headquarters asking for permission to question them went unheeded.

The investigation into the case could end in a stalemate as both KPP HAM and the TNI/Police have based their arguments on different laws. The KPP HAM based its rights to investigate the case on the Law. No. 39/1999 on human rights, while the TNI/Police on the Law. No. 26/2000.

In light of the deadlock in the legal aspects of the case, many have suggested that the country's highest authorities take the initiative to make the investigation proceed smoothly, within existing laws and regulations.

Human rights lawyer Bambang Widjojanto suggested that the Supreme Court should take the initiative to issue a legal opinion on the matter, similar to the one that Chief Justice Bagir Manan had issued a day before the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) decided on July 23, 2001 to remove Abdurrahman Wahid from the presidency.

At the time, Bagir issued a fatwa (legal opinion) that "mediated" the arguments between the then government of Abdurrahman and the MPR on the validity of holding the Special Session to seek the president's accountability of his government's performance. Bagir declared that the Special Session was lawful.

Such an initiative could also be taken by the President as the supreme commander of the Indonesian Military to instruct the continuation of the investigation into the cases.

President Megawati Soekarnoputri had taken a significant decision last year when her government renewed in August a presidential decree on the establishment of ad hoc tribunals to try those suspected of gross human rights abuses in the 1984 Tanjung Priok shooting incident in North Jakarta and the 1999 bloodshed in East Timor.

The new Presidential Decree No. 96/2001 clearly specifies each of the crimes against humanity to be brought to court, namely the human rights violations in the Tanjung Priok shooting in September 1984, and in East Timor in April and September 1999.

Similar expectations now are that the President should make a decision to issue a decree on the investigation into the 1998 and 1999 shooting incidents in the capital.

Only time will tell whether the Chief Justice and the President will take the initiatives to help settle the matter and uphold the law in the country. Or will impunity continue to rule?