Scrap territorial-command system to make police independent

A major obstacle of democracy is the failure to make the police an independent force of the military, says noted lawyer and member of an independent body set up to probe recent bombings, the Indonesian Forum for Peace (FID), Todung Mulya Lubis.

Question: As a FID member, what is your experience in working with the police?

Answer: In enforcing the laws the police tend to do their jobs in a repressive military style. That's why there have sometimes been victims. If we fail to establish an independent, clean and respected police force, we won't be able to have real democracy, uphold human rights and the rule of law. All these need the crucial role of the police.

We now see the police trying to change their image. But only a few things have been done so far. We should remember that the police have many limitations.

There are only 150,000 active police officers serving a population of 210 million people. In the United States, for example, which is another huge country, each state has its own police department. Here, the police force is centralized.

Q: What about their professionalism?

A: This is about improving education and training. In the past, people who wanted to join the police force had to attend the School of Joint Military Command which was heavily militaristic in style. We need to have educational institutes for the police to make them a real state apparatus dealing with law enforcement.

The police also lack sophisticated facilities and equipment for communications and information.

Many international bodies like the International Monetary Fund, the United Nations Development Program and other overseas donors say that if Indonesia wants to be a democratic nation, the police should be stronger.

I recently met with officials from the U.S. State Department and Congress. I told them they should focus on Indonesia's police force. Strengthening the police should be Indonesia's present main agenda.

Without improvement, the police won't be able to finalize investigations of recent bombings in Jakarta simply because they don't have the capability. They are unable to investigate those who should have been investigated.

Over 100 people could have been questioned in relation to the bombing at the Philippines' ambassador's residence in Jakarta last year, but I'm not sure that the police have investigated the case comprehensively.

That's why the police should also have much more training in handling terrorism. Bombing for instance, is not too complicated, people can download documents from the Internet on how to make bombs. Terrorism has become our daily threat.

Q: Do you think the police are powerless or unable to conduct the investigations of the bombings?

A: There could possibly be pressure on the police (in the investigations). If so, they are involved in a cover up (of the case). Then, we wouldn't have to wonder why there has been no results of the investigation.

FID got information that a person was held in relation to the bombing in the Cathedral (in Central Jakarta) but later ... unconfirmed information said this person was later taken by the military. If it is true, the police are really weak.

Civil society should play a role in establishing an independent police force. We can't improve the police overnight, but it must be a priority.

Q: Do you think the military pressures the police?

A: There could have been military pressure, institutionally or noninstitutionally. If the police can be suppressed, the future of human rights and democracy in Indonesia is gloomy.

This is also about power. Some military officers are unhappy with the separation of the military and the police (since 1999), and that the police now (officially) handle security and order. People in numerous places outside Jakarta have complained that the police were powerless to face the military.

I agree with the idea to remove the Indonesian Military territorial commands to spur the police to become an independent force. So far, the police have been in the shadow of these territorial commands.

Nonbudgetary sources and spending should be more transparent. Some in the military are also unhappy with the reduction of their role in politics. But it's best to have professional soldiers. Just let the police and civil society handle democracy.

Q: What kind of role should civil society play in improving the police?

A: Civil society should realize that a stronger national police force will benefit them in guaranteeing any kind of democratic rights. Society should empower the police to do so as democracy can only work in an orderly and peaceful condition.

For instance, the police have the right to guard demonstrations to avoid anarchy. But the police should not make it hard for those who want to hold rallies. Also, people should not think that the police are over zealous when they arrest those who violate laws in a rally.

Such a condition needs a process, so civil society can be more responsible and the police more persuasive.

Q: Has FID experienced any pressure from the military or police?

A: No. FID is an independent forum with no power or rights to investigate someone. So, our investigating team doesn't interfere with the duties of the police. But we are worried that the police are not entirely independent, that they are under pressure.

FID limits its duty to the case of the Christmas Eve bombings.

Q: What has FID found so far?

A: We have had some preliminary findings, indicating that the bombings are related to groups from Maluku, East Timor and West Java. We are still investigating the types of the bombs, the material of the bombs and the modus operandi.

We have proposed setting up a joint fact-finding team with the government. It is still being discussed at the coordinating minister for political, social and security affairs office.

A panel which includes the government, the police and FID, is likely to be preferred by the government. I think such a panel will become only a kind of bridge to connect the investigations held separately by the police and FID. (I. Christianto)