Red Cross emblems violated during political upheavals

Red Cross emblems violated during political upheavals

By Fadillah Agus

JAKARTA (JP): The chaotic events leading up to the downfall of
former president Soeharto saw several instances in which the
emblem of the Red Cross was not respected or was misused.

Several media reports cited cases in which security personnel
treated health care volunteers wearing Red Cross badges violently
during various student demonstrations across the country.

A doctor in Surabaya was quoted by the Jawa Pos as saying that
cases in which security officers beat people wearing Red Cross
emblems constituted a violation of the 1949 Geneva Convention.

On the other hand, when demonstrating university students
occupied the House of Representatives/People's Consultative
Assembly (DPR/MPR) complex in May, many vehicles and people not
belonging to the Indonesian Red Cross displayed Red Cross
emblems. Some were private cars or office vehicles transporting
logistical and medical supplies.

A number of university vehicles assigned to medical jobs also
displayed the emblem. Some of these vehicles even had "Reform"
written below the red cross. Community members and students
assigned to medical and logistical jobs put red crosses on their
arms, bodies or heads.

These examples could be interpreted as indicating the high
degree of appreciation the community has for the Red Cross'
emblem. It also proves that they knew the protective function it
carries.

Some unnecessary mistakes in the use of the red cross symbol
did occur, though. During the student occupation of the DPR/MPR,
for example, a group of doctors were seen wearing vests bearing a
white cross on a red field -- instead of a red cross on a white
field. It was obviously not the doctors' intention to indicate
that they were delegates from Switzerland (the Swiss national
flag is a white cross on a red field). It might have been that
such vests were made because of some aesthetic consideration.

Adding words to the Red Cross emblem, such as "I'm for
peaceful reform", is a misuse of the symbol. It is also
technically wrong to wear a Red Cross emblem on a headband. The
correct place to wear it is on the left arm or on the body.

Other incorrect uses also occurred. This is understandable
since most community members do not know who is entitled to use
the Red Cross emblem or the proper way to wear it.

The examples above indicate that most community members share
the common opinion, though erroneous, that the Red Cross emblem
may be used by any volunteers undertaking humanitarian
assignments, such as providing medical and logistical aid.

Most also believe that security forces must not commit violent
acts against those using the badge. But it should be understood,
however, that there are special regulations on the use of the Red
Cross symbol.

According to these regulations, the Red Cross emblem may be
used as an indicator or as a protection symbol for certain people
or objects.

In the case of its use as an indication sign, a small Red
Cross emblem may be displayed on a person or an object. In the
case of its use as a protection sign, a large-sized emblem may be
displayed on people, vehicles, buildings or equipment.

The use of the emblem and its protection is regulated in
international legislation, including the 1949 Geneva Convention
and Regulation on the Use of the Emblem of the Red Cross or the
Red Crescent by National Societies. According to prevailing
provisions, the Red Cross emblem can be used only by Red Cross
societies, medical services of an armed forces and clerical
officials.

Presidential Decree No. 25/1950 and Presidential Decree No.
246/1963 recognizes the Indonesian Red Cross (PMI) as the only
Red Cross society in Indonesia. Internationally, each country is
only allowed one national Red Cross society associated with the
International Red Cross and Red Crescent.

Therefore, the Indonesian Red Cross, medical services of the
Armed Forces and clerical officials are the only people entitled
to use the Red Cross emblem in Indonesia. They are also entitled
to use it on their equipment, building or transportation
facilities and ambulances. The International Committee of the Red
Cross (ICRC) and the International Red Cross and Red Crescent
Federation are also allowed to use the badge in any country at
any time.

Each country may adopt only one of the two emblems, either the
red cross or the red crescent. The PMI has opted for the red
cross.

The question is why can't just anybody use the emblem?

During the recent student demonstrations, particularly those
at Trisakti University and DPR/MPR compound, the PMI performed
its humanitarian tasks as a politically neutral institution. It
provided first aid services, evacuated victims and utilized its
ambulances. Many other volunteers who were not PMI members also
performed similar humanitarian tasks.

The amount of humanitarian activities carried out by the
public was indeed encouraging. But many community members did not
feel safe when offering their humanitarian services. They were
afraid that what they were doing would put them in conflict with
the government and security authorities.

Apparently, the community felt more secure in providing social
and humanitarian services when using the Red Cross emblem. They
may have thought that the emblem was internationally known and
would, as such, provide them with the necessary protection --
particularly against violent acts which might be perpetrated by
security personnel.

They did not realize that institutions other than the Red
Cross may not use the emblem while performing humanitarian tasks.
Even hospital ambulances may not use the emblem unless it belongs
to the Red Cross society.

If the community feels the need to use the Red Cross emblem,
it must cooperate with the PMI.

The regulation on the use of the Red Cross symbol is, on the
one hand, meant to guarantee respect for those using the emblem
so they will not be constrained in performing their tasks. On the
other hand, such volunteers are required to perform their duties
on the basis of internationally recognized principles.

However, on a national level, perhaps legislation is needed
for people to obtain a proper and adequate guarantee of respect
and protection. Such legislation would serve as a strong legal
foundation for the realization of the protection and respect for
the use of the Red Cross emblem in Indonesia.

Since Indonesia ratified the 1949 Geneva Convention in 1958,
such legislation could help assure that the country follows the
agreement.

In this regard, a working group at Trisakti University's
Center for Studies of Humanitarian Laws has prepared a draft
regulation on the use and protection of the Red Cross emblem. The
draft is scheduled to be discussed in a seminar organized by the
Indonesian Red Cross on Aug. 12.

Such legislation would help the community, including the
government and the military, to better understand matters linked
with the use of the Red Cross symbol.

The writer is a lecturer at Tisakti University's School of
Law.