SBY's anti-terror policy

SBY's anti-terror policy

Ridarson Galingging
Jakarta

We have yet again experienced a terrorist attack. The recent
bombing in Poso, Sulawesi and the "attack" on the Indonesian
Embassy in Australia show that we have failed to learn from
similar incidents in the past and only react after innocent
people's lives are taken.

The government conducts investigations and tries to prosecute
the perpetrators. For the most part, the government just looks
helpless. Do we really think these terrorists are scared of
prosecution and the threat of heavy prison sentences? What is
missing is a comprehensive anti-terrorism policy that can reduce
the likelihood of more attacks occurring in the future.

It is risky and erroneous to assume that terrorists will be
deterred by criminal prosecution alone. People willing to blow
themselves up in attacks -- as we saw in the Bali, the JW
Marriott, and Australian Embassy bombings -- do not fear
imprisonment or the death penalty. For religious extremists of
all faiths, death and sacrifice for their ideology is a blessing
from God. Prosecution works only against the direct perpetrator
in the field. If we lock them up forever, they cannot commit the
same acts of terror again. But what about their networks, their
financial sources, and sleeping cadres and cells? Every time a
terror attacks occur, we see new perpetrators appear.

The evidence suggests that the kind of terrorism that is
operating successfully in Indonesia, making common people suffer,
has links to widespread networks domestically and
internationally. As a parallel, the government cannot rely on
domestic prosecution alone to combat these brutal criminals.

The world community no longer defines terrorism as a domestic
crime. UN Security Council Resolution 1373 (2001) has clearly
stated that terrorism in any form and manifestation is a threat
to international peace and security. Thus terrorism has a dual
character as both a domestic and an international crime.

Every state and government has an obligation to punish
terrorists and also deal with the threat at all levels.
Indonesians must not blame other countries in the international
community when they demand that we take the terrorism issue
seriously. They are reminding us of our obligation as members of
an international community committed to peace and security.

It is also erroneous to always view foreign condemnation of
Indonesian inaction and offers of help and cooperation as
intervention in our domestic affairs. Indonesia's neighbors and
friends in the international community are affected by the
country's response to terrorist networks.

Foreigners have been killed in large numbers on Indonesian
soil, and religious extremists do not care about national
borders. If Indonesia waits to prosecute the perpetrators of
actual attacks rather than adopting a proactive approach,
terrorists can silently train on Indonesian soil and then go
anywhere around the world to carry out their attacks. Foreign
governments have a clear interest in whether Indonesia takes the
terrorist threat seriously and responds to it effectively.

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has condemned terrorism
repeatedly, most recently during his visit to Washington, D.C. He
wants everyone to think that his government is taking a strong
anti-terror stand. But he has not created an anti-terrorism body
or policy that translates into actions to ensure that attacks
will be prevented in the future.

There must be a single body entrusted to implement a
comprehensive anti-terror policy with the power to order
implementation and compliance across all relevant government
agencies. The coordinating minister for political and security
affairs that is currently in charge of this matter is not
powerful enough. This minister cannot order law enforcement
agencies, the military, and other ministries to implement anti-
terror policies.

The urgent need for a single body with a broad mandate on
terrorism matters cannot be postponed any longer if we want to
avoid the loss of more innocent lives. President Yudhoyono alone
has too limited time and energy to produce a comprehensive anti-
terror policy. The House of Representatives must also be involved
in the terrorism issue.

What are some of the key components that should be included in
a comprehensive plan of action on antiterrorism?

First, we need a long term effort to modernize the education
system of various Islamic boarding schools throughout Indonesia.
A much more careful system of records at the provincial level is
also important, as provinces issue state identity cards. We also
need tighter requirements for issuing passports.

Indonesia's control of the distribution of chemical substances
that can be used to make explosives is inadequate, as are
controls on guns and accountability for military weapons. It is
difficult to control and patrol Indonesia's borders. But a much
better job can be done than we see today. International police
and judicial cooperation must also be a part of these anti-terror
measures.

The existing anti-terrorism Law No. 15/2003 needs to be
amended and complemented with UN sponsored anti-terrorism
conventions through ratification of the convention related to the
safety of civil aviation, the conventions related to the safety
of maritime navigation and fixed platforms, the convention
related to dangerous materials, and the convention on the
financing of terrorism.

It is also crucial that victims of terrorist attacks be
compensated by issuing an implementing regulation to Article 36
of the antiterrorism law on providing compensation. At present
the article is not clear as to which agency is responsible for
providing monetary compensation.

The writer is a lecturer in law at Yarsi University in Jakarta
and currently a doctoral candidate at Northwestern University
School of Law in Chicago.