Reviving spy network a dangerous decision

Reviving spy network a dangerous decision

Ardimas Sasdi, Jakarta

One of the bizarre aspects of the government's plan to revive
the notorious regional intelligence network has been that it has
ignored the anxiety of the people. Even more bizarrely, is its
decision to secretly set up the agency despite the hue and cry
about it.

Sudarsono Hardjosoekarto, the Director General of Nation Unity
and Politics at the Ministry of Home Affairs, said on Wednesday
-- a week after idea was launched by the President -- that almost
all regional administrations had established the intelligence
community (Kominda).

What a swift action; a contrast to the inefficiency and
irresponsiveness that normally characterizes the bureaucracy. But
this showed the government would do anything and at any cost to
achieve its goals, even though this would mean ignoring the voice
of the people, who are still traumatized by bad experiences
dealing with intelligence agents in the past.

The haste and secretive way by which the government worked
probably explains why there was a mix-up in names used by
officials for the agency.

In a bid to track down terrorists, President Susilo Bambang
Yudhoyono ordered the country's governors last Thursday to revive
Bakorinda, a Regional Intelligence Coordinating Agency which was
made known to the people only after the announcement.

J. Kristiadi, a researcher at the Centre for Strategic and
International Studies (CSIS), told a national newspaper, "The
people are questioning about an agency the government wants to
revive? In the past there were Bakin (State Intelligence
Coordinating Board), Pusintelstrat (Strategic Intelligence
Center), Sintel Kopkamtib (Intelligence Center for Operational
Command for the Restoration of Security and Order), Bais (ABRI's
Strategic Intelligence Agency) and intelligence agencies under
the police force and prosecutor's office."

The four intelligence agencies, except Bakin, were under the
military, but all were chaired by generals close to Soeharto.
Like intelligence bodies in authoritarian countries, the agencies
were the arm of Soeharto to stifle opposition with powers to
conduct surveillance, infiltrate targets and arrest suspects
deemed as state enemies. These agencies were also responsible for
screening people, who would be promoted to key positions in the
executive branch.

With accountability lacking, agents often used foul methods
like physical and mental torture to extract information from
detainees. The results were predictable: detainees suffered and
refuted testimonies in court, saying that they were framed or
forced to admit crimes they never did during questioning.

Intelligence agents also spied on clerics, priests, activists
of non-governmental organizations and academicians under the
pretext of preventing extremism, leaving disastrous impacts.
Academicians, for example, avoided discussion on sensitive
issues, although this is still within a corridor of academic
freedom after seeing outspoken scholars lose their positions or
have their professorship delayed by rectors, who were military
figures or academics loyal to Soeharto.

The list of abuses of intelligence agencies in the past, which
deepened public resentment toward the network, is long. One of
the most extreme examples was the use of intelligence agents by
state-owned and private companies to coerce people to accept
prices unilaterally set by them to acquire land for mega
projects.

The negative image and trauma are still fresh in the minds of
the people. So it comes as no surprise that the public strongly
opposes plans to revive the regional intelligence network in
provinces or expand intelligence powers.

"It sounds scary," Agung Yudhawiranata of the rights group
Elsam told The Associated Press. "We worry that the Soeharto era
has returned and that the agency will use the pretext of fighting
terrorism to violate individuals' rights ..."

Activists like Agung are fully aware of the threat of
terrorism, which has continued to haunt Indonesia since the Bali
bombings in 2002. The subsequent attacks on the JW Marriott
Jakarta hotel, the Australian Embassy and more recently, the
public market in Tentena in 2005, have opened the eyes of the
public to the fatal threat of terrorism.

But public anxiety, including that of journalists who know
well how difficult it was to carry out their journalistic duty
during the New Order era, over the possibility of abuse of
intelligence agencies by the power holders, still dominated by
remnants of the New Order regime, outweigh their fears of
terrorism. This notion was properly illustrated by a hard-hitting
editorial of The Jakarta Post.

"In the fight against terrorism, law enforcers can complain
all they want about their lack of power .... But until there are
much better checks and balances, we would like to see their
improved record in this war before giving them a blank check and
a potential return to the days when intelligence authorities
professed ignorance about civil liberties and thought their job
was to serve whoever had the power to define a 'state enemy'."

The promise of the government that the revival of the
intelligence network would not impinge on the young, hard-gained
democracy is simply not enough. The people want to see a change
in the culture of intelligence agents and improved cooperation
among intelligence agencies, which is lacking due to vested
interests.

Part of the demand is the creation of an effective checks and
balances system through a promulgation of laws on intelligence
and information acts, and the reopening or trial of past cases,
whose masterminds have not been punished. The trials could start
with prominent cases like the poisoning of rights activist Munir
and the kidnapping of activists in the late 1990s.

Until these conditions have been met, the public should think
twice before endorsing the government's plans to revive the
intelligence agency as the plan carries so many dangers. It may
destroy a fair measure of the freedom we have achieved, and if
this happens it will turn the clock back to the dark era of
Soeharto.

The author is a staff writer at The Jakarta Post.