Rights activists oppose internal security act
JAKARTA (JP): Two leading human right campaigners say they strongly object to the military's call to introduce an internal security act to deal with domestic disturbances.
Todung Mulya Lubis and Hendardi, both active promoters of human rights, told The Jakarta Post separately that the criminal code should be adequate to deal with any disturbances that arise.
Mulya feared that an internal security act would be abused by the authorities to quell political dissent.
Hendardi said that such legislation goes against the spirit of democracy that Indonesia has been pursuing.
The two men were responding to the Armed Forces' (ABRI) disclosure that for the last 10 years it has been drafting a bill on internal security and that it will soon be ready for submission to the House of Representatives.
ABRI Chief of Sociopolitical Affairs Lt. Gen. Syarwan Hamid did not say whether the bill is intended to replace the 1963 Subversion Law.
The pre-New Order legislation has been widely used by the authorities against dissidents and its critics, prompting human rights campaigners to call for its repeal. The National Commission on Human Rights has also said the law should be abolished.
Syarwan said the military has been handicapped by the absence of legal tools to deal with domestic disturbances.
He recalled that in the 1970s and 1980s it had the Command for the Restoration of Security and Order.
The military unit, known by its acronym Kopkamtib, was widely feared because of its overriding powers. It was abolished in the late 1980s and replaced by Bakorstanas, the Coordinating Agency for National Stability, with far less power.
Syarwan did not give details of the proposed bill but said it would be similar to the internal security acts used in Singapore and Malaysia.
Mulya said the criminal code, if used effectively, should be sufficient to deal with internal disturbances.
He noted that the law enforcement agencies are still applying the criminal code somewhat halfheartedly.
The government is currently also in the process of drafting a new criminal code to replace the existing one which Indonesia inherited from its Dutch colonial rulers.
Mulya said the government should let the House of Representatives as well as the public scrutinize the bill on the new criminal code.
"We need a criminal code that can last for a long time. We therefore need plenty of time to deliberate it," he said.
On the proposed internal security act, Mulya said Malaysia and Singapore are not good examples for Indonesia to emulate.
Their laws allow the authorities to detain suspects virtually for an unlimited period. Although the act stipulates a maximum detention of two years, in practice, the period could be extended an unlimited number of times, he said.
The internal security acts in Malaysia and Singapore also deprive suspects of various rights, including the principle of presumption of innocence, he said.
Hendardi speculated that the proposed internal security act would replace the infamous subversion law. "It is simply changing the bottle but the content remains the same," he said.
Carrying a maximum penalty of death, the 1963 law allows the authorities to detain a suspect up to one year without trial. (16)