Security bill needs public aspiration

Security bill needs public aspiration

JAKARTA (JP): Experts and the House of Representatives (DPR)
agreed here on Tuesday of the need to accommodate public
aspiration and revise the controversial, government-sponsored
bill on state security, which some observers have called
oppressive.

The House commission deliberating the state security bill
invited three scholars to give their opinions of the bill. The
experts were presidential military adviser Sayidiman
Suryohadiprojo, Police Staff College dean Awaloedin Djamin and
Nazarudin Syamsudin of the Indonesian Institute of Sciences.

Sayidiman said Indonesia needed a state security act which
respected the people's interests. "A state security law is still
needed because threats of national disintegration are mainly
local in nature and in the form of subversion," he read from a
prepared speech.

"In the future, it would be unlikely for open war to occur,"
Sayidiman said, citing the example of the rivalry between the
United States and the former Soviet Union which never resulted in
open hostilities.

"A state security law endorsed by a DPR representing the
people will give a legal basis for the military to take necessary
actions to accommodate the people's interest," Sayidiman said.

Nazarudin questioned the timing of the state security bill,
with the current House scheduled to end its term on Sept. 24.

Awaloedin, a former National Police chief, discussed the
consequences of such a law. He said declaring a state of
emergency in Aceh would have been preferable to the undefined
military operations which took place in the province for 10
years.

"It was a mistake not to declare a state of emergency in Aceh,
which meant the troops had no legal basis for their actions,"
Awaloedin said.

Had the 1959 State of Emergency Law, which will be revoked
with the introduction of the new state security bill, been
implemented in Aceh, soldiers would have known who their enemies
were and victims of violence could have been declared victims of
war, he said.

Nazarudin said the state security bill was harsher than
government decree No. 23/1959, which will also be replaced by the
bill. "The bill appears to be complete. It encompasses the
(approaches of) the New Order, Old Order and the colonial era,"
he said, adding such a bill was a setback for the country.

Nazaruddin's opinion was contradictory to that of Minister of
Justice Muladi, who said the bill was not as harsh as the 1959
decree.

"A declaration of a state of emergency could lead to
unpredictable risks," Nazarudin said.

Then president Sukarno declared a state of emergency in 1957
and imposed the so-called Guided Democracy, which was followed in
1960 by his becoming a dictator, he said.

Nazarudin was referring to Article 20 of the new bill, which
stipulates the president holds the highest power in declaring a
state of emergency or martial law.

"Once the bill is endorsed, we will repeat what happened in
Aceh and Irian. We did not know what was really happening there,"
Nazarudin said.

He said an undeclared state of emergency existed in Aceh when
the military operations were launched there in 1989.

Nazarudin admitted the importance of replacing the 1959
decree. However, he said new legislation must not enable the
suppression and violation of human rights, concluding the current
bill on state security must be revised.

The spokesman for the United Development Party (PPP) faction
in the House, Hussein Umar, said the state security bill "had a
New Order spirit. No wonder people are suspicious of the bill".

The spokesman for the Indonesian Military faction in the
House, Taufik Ruky, said if the bill was rejected, "the
government would still be able to use the tougher decree No.
23/1959 if it wished to declare a state of emergency". (05)