Indonesia's Rule of Law in Peril: KPK vs Police Power Struggle

CAVEAT
INDONESIA’S MONTHLY HUMAN RIGHTS ANALYSIS

VOLUME 06/I, NOVEMBER 2009

MAIN REPORT |

Indonesia’s Rule
of Law is in Peril
The three-way struggle between the National
Police, the KPK and the Attorney General's Office
has been to the detriment of many; by far, it will
be the Indonesian public that suffers. The
responsibility of the three institutions to uphold
the country's rule of law has failed spectacularly.
To ensure that no one is above the law; that no
one is in a position to abuse the law; to enforce
law upon those who fall foul — the Indonesian
public is no doubt deeply disappointed in the
way that their taxes and votes are being used.

ADDITIONAL FEATURE |

Open Letter to the House of
People’s Representatives on
the Reviewing and Passing
of a New Criminal Code
It is to be welcomed that no one has been
executed in Indonesia so far in 2009. However,
Amnesty International and LBH Masyarakat
remain concerned that Indonesia continues to
retain the death penalty as a punishment under
the Criminal Code and in other laws.

OPINION |

Indonesian Police Torture
Must be Stopped
If an innocent person is tortured to confess a
crime he or she did not commit, it is human
nature to say anything the torturer wants to
hear in order to relieve the suffering. As a result,
the real criminal remains at large, ready to
commit further crimes, while the innocent
person may go to prison.

www.lbhmasyarakat.org
CAVEAT:
Let her or him be aware

C A V E A T | november 2009 | 1

CONTENT
THE EDITOR’S CUT | 2
MAIN REPORT | 3
Indonesia’s Rule of Law is in Peril

ADDITIONAL FEATURE | 7
Open Letter to the House of People’s Representatives on the Reviewing and Passing of a New
Criminal Code

OPINION | 12
Indonesian Police Torture Must be Stopped

CAVEAT is published by the Community Legal Aid Institute (LBH Masyarakat), Jakarta,
Indonesia. All rights reserved. Neither this publication nor any part of it may be reproduced
without prior permission of the LBH Masyarakat.
CAVEAT invites feedback and contributions. If you are interested in contributing a guest
editorial piece or article, please contact us: contact@lbhmasyarakat.org
Editorial Board:
Ricky Gunawan, Dhoho Ali Sastro, Andri G. Wibisana, Ajeng Larasati, Answer C. Styannes,
Christine Tambunan, Pebri Rosmalina, Antonius Badar, Feri Sahputra, Maryam Jamilah, Yura
Pratama
Special Adviser:
Ella Davison
Finance and Circulation:
Zaki Wildan
Address:
Tebet Timur Dalam III D, No. 2, Jakarta 12820, INDONESIA
Phone:
+62 21 830 54 50
Fax:
+62 21 829 15 06
E-mail:
contact@lbhmasyarakat.org
Website:
www.lbhmasyarakat.org
LBH Masyarakat welcomes any financial contribution for the development of CAVEAT
Name
: Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat
Bank
: Bank Mandiri
Branch
: Tebet Timur, Jakarta, Indonesia
No. Acc.
:124–000–503–6620
Swift Code
:BEIIIDJA

LEMBAGA BANTUAN HUKUM MASYARAKAT


THE EDITOR’S CUT
Over the past few months, Indonesia has
been stunned by the drama of the rivalry
between the Indonesian National Police and
the Corruption Eradication Commission
(KPK) as the anti-corruption saga reaches
new heights. There was public outcry when
police detained two of the KPK’s deputy
commissioners. This sentiment escalated
when the Constitutional Court heard
wiretapped recordings of conversations
between high-ranking law enforcement
officials and suspects in corruption cases.
The recordings indicate that there is a
systemic plot to eliminate the KPK and
further, that justice has not been served. In
this state of affairs, President Susilo
Bambang Yudhoyono’s awkward neutrality
is disheartening. His strong commitment to
fighting corruption must be translated into
practice as the epic between the “gecko”
(KPK) and the “crocodile” (Indonesian
police) – as coined by the latter – is
alarming and threatens to collapse the
country’s rule of law. Our main report in
this edition of CAVEAT will take you along
the journey of this saga and examine how
Indonesia should take the opportunity to
complete a thorough reform of its law
enforcement institutions.
In the additional feature, we present a joint
open letter by LBH Masyarakat and
Amnesty International addressed to
Commission III of the Indonesian House of
Representatives regarding a review of the
draft of the Indonesian Criminal Code. In the
open letter, we focus on several issues:
Torture, freedom of expression, the death
penalty, discrimination and violence against
women, and crimes under international law.
Finally, Ricky Gunawan raises a recent
torture case experienced by a transgender
sex worker in his opinion piece entitled,
“Indonesian Police Torture Must Be
Stopped.” He argues that the victim’s
audacity in coming forward to complain of
torture is heroic, given that he is a member
of a vulnerable group that is often


stigmatized and discriminated against.
Thus, “his courage should not go to waste.”
We hope the three features presented in
this edition’s CAVEAT will provide a better
understanding of Indonesia’s rule of law, in
the context of its human rights and
democracy.
Thank you for your ongoing support!
The Editor


MAIN REPORT

Indonesia’s Rule of Law is in Peril
THE STORY SO FAR

On March 14, Nasrudin Zulkarnaen, the
director of state-owned PT Putra Rajawali
Banjaran, was shot twice in the head upon
leaving Modernland Golf Club in Tangerang.
It is alleged that two suspects rode up on a
motorbike alongside the director's car,
firing the shots.
Nasrudin died in hospital the following day.
Shortly after, the police claimed to have
uncovered a plot of extortion, revenge and
corruption and named their suspects —
Daniel Daen, Heri Santoso, Hendrikus Kia
Walen, Fransiskus Tadon Kerans and
Eduardus Ndopo Mbete. The public were
further shocked when police detained three
more high-profile suspects — former South
Jakarta Police Chief Wiliardi Wizar and
businessmen Sigid Haryo Wibisono and
Jerry Hermawan Lodi.
However, the biggest scalp in the police
investigation was the questioning and
subsequent detention of Antasari Azhar,
chairman of the acclaimed Corruption
Eradication Commission (KPK).
Over the ensuing weeks, further details of
the sordid mess were revealed: it was
alleged that Antasari had ordered the
murder of Nasrudin in relation to a love
triangle with the third wife of the director,
golf caddy Rani Juliani, who was taken into a
witness protection program as the
investigation escalated. Possible motives
indicated that the commissioner might have
ordered the hitman-style murder after
Nasrudin and Rani embarked on a blackmail
scheme, threatening to inform Antasari's
family. Rani claimed to have had sex with
Antasari at the Grand Mahakam Hotel in
Jakarta, shortly before Nasrudin entered the
room. Even Nasrudin had his say from the
grave, with Rani's father testifying in court

that his son-in-law had confided he feared
Antasari would kill him.
Antasari pled his innocence, as his team of
attorneys, family and legions of supporters
stood by him. He claimed his arrest was an
attempt to dismantle the often controversial
and highly successful anti-corruption
commission and to ruin his reputation in the
process. He even turned on his colleagues,
alleging that two of his deputies had been
involved in accepting bribes from
businessman Anggoro Widjaja, the owner of
PT Masaro Radiokom, who was a suspect in
a graft case being handled by the KPK.
The backdrop to the whole case was the
debate surrounding a bill in the House of
Representatives, which, if passed, would
severely limit the KPK's ability to
investigate and prosecute corruption
suspects. Both local and international critics
accused the House of stalling on the bill, in
order to have it declared null and void when
the term ended. This bill would see the
Attorney General's regain its powers to
prosecute high-profile corruption cases, in a
move that concerned KPK backers, as the
rivalry between the two institutions — after
the KPK arrested a senior AGO official, Urip
Tri Gunawan, for accepting a bribe last year
— was well-documented and laden with
prejudice.
Despite public pressure, the nation's
primary anti-corruption fighter, President
Yudhoyono, has been unusually withdrawn,
refusing to take a clear stance. However, as
his popularity ratings plummeted, he
appointed an eight-person team to
investigate the KPK scandal, including the
arrest of Antasari, Chandra and Bibit. The
team stated that the charges were "forced"
and recommended that the charges against
the deputy commissioners be dropped due
to a lack of evidence.


The group also urged that institutional
reforms be undertaken at the National
Police and Attorney General's Office and
that any officials found to have fabricated
evidence be held accountable for their
actions.
The Team of 8 also recommended that a
separate inquiry be conducted into whether
Susno Duadji, the former National Police
chief of detectives, had illegally intervened
in the PT Bank Century bailout scandal.
RIVALS: GECKO VS. CROCODILE

Prior to the 2002 law on the Corruption
Eradication Commission, the police and
prosecution service had full power to
investigate and prosecute the litany of
corruption that has plagued the country's
bureaucracy since the 1950s.
In 2002, the law helped establish the
commission, and the reins were passed
over. In the ensuing years, the KPK's 100
percent conviction rate
has
riled
departments in Indonesia's
government,
and
its
investigations into highranking
officials
has
heightened
tensions
between those dedicated to
fighting corruption and
those intent on deception
and graft.

and Chandra M Hamzah, on charges of
extortion and abuse of power in the case of
businessman Anggoro Widjojo (who is
being investigated in relation to a Forestry
Ministry project involving his company).
The move sparked off a huge public outcry
and waves of public support for the
commission, and an independent inquiry,
known as the Team of 8, was launched into
the justification behind the arrests.
THE RECORDINGS

The commission has, on occasion, been
accused of wiretapping its suspects without
justifiable cause. However, some of their
recordings have now been used to absolve
the deputy commissioners of the
allegations.
After days of speculation, lawyers for the
KPK submitted 67 recordings to the
Constitutional Court. For five hours, two
television stations broadcast the damning
evidence across the country, as the
conversations recorded on the tapes
indicated a plot by senior officials and
underworld criminal figures
to implicate the two deputy
commissioners.
One
conversation
chillingly
discussed
the
planned
murder of Chandra in jail.

The tapes have smeared the
reputations of several highranking officials, including
The rivalry reached new
Susno and I Ketut Sudiharsa,
heights
when
the
deputy chairman of the
commission
allegedly
Witness
and
Victim
illegally wiretapped the
Protection Agency (LPSK),
National Police's chief of Figure 1: "I am a gecko, I dare to
Deputy Attorney General
detectives,
Commander fight against crocodile'.
Abdul Hakim Ritonga, Wisnu
General Susno Duadji, in
Subroto, a retired deputy
relation to the government's bailout of Bank
attorney general for intelligence, Anggoro
Century last year. Susno coined the "cicak"
Widjojo and his brother, Anggodo. The
(gecko) and "buaya" (crocodile) names to
impact of the tapes has reached the highest
describe the relationship between the
echelons of government; even President
National Police and the commission.
Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's name is
mentioned, although he has denied any
Seemingly in response to the investigation
wrongdoing.
into Susno, the National Police detained
deputy commissioners Bibit Samad Rianto
On Nov. 3, mere hours after the tapes were


played in court; Bibit and Chandra were
released from detention.

pressure increases on President Yudhoyono
to take action against those who have been
implicated.

UNDERSTANDING RULE OF LAW
AT RISK: INDONESIA’S RULE OF LAW

"We resolve: To strengthen respect for the
rule of law in international as in national
affairs and, in particular, to ensure
compliance by Member States with the
decisions of the International Court of Justice,
in compliance with the Charter of the United
Nations, in cases to which they are parties."
- Article 9 of the United Nations Millennium
Declaration, of which Indonesia is a
signatory.
The rule of law dictates that the law applies
to all and that no one is above the law. It
relies on a transparent judiciary to enforce
its laws, and prevents individuals or
organizations
from
benefiting
from
impunity. While rule of law often exists in
theory, it is vital that a government
establish public respect for the rule of law,
especially following a period of conflict, to
protect human rights and to allow a nation
to
progress
economically
and
democratically.
A judiciary that enjoys exemption from the
law, or uses its discretion to protect its
members from the law, fails in its
responsibilities to represent its citizens.
Indonesia's police force, Attorney General's
Office and intelligence services have long
been accused of enabling their own to evade
legal procedures. Suciwati, widow of
murdered activist Munir, has even made a
comparison between the alleged cover-up
after her husband's death and the current
plot to implicate members of the KPK.
"I see a very strong indication that the
judicial mafia played a role in Munir's case
by setting it up in such a way that the
prosecution's case was deliberately weak,"
Suciwati told local media recently.
What the Indonesian judiciary seems to
have failed to comprehend is that if they
lose the respect and trust of the public, they
are putting their positions in jeopardy as


The three-way struggle between the
National Police, the KPK and the Attorney
General's Office has been to the detriment of
many; by far, it will be the Indonesian public
that suffers. The responsibility of the three
institutions to uphold the country's rule of
law has failed spectacularly. To ensure that
no one is above the law; that no one is in a
position to abuse the law; to enforce law
upon those who fall foul — the Indonesian
public is no doubt deeply disappointed in
the way that their taxes and votes are being
used.
The fraught relationship between the three
— not to mention the exorbitant cost of the
investigations and subsequent court
proceedings — will have a strong impact on
the Indonesian psyche and its repeated
attempts to stamp out corruption.
Yudhoyono has led this call; he must also
lead the country from this quagmire of
corruption and failed leadership.
For Indonesia's rule of law to resurrect
itself, Yudhoyono's government must
enforce two key aspects. "I see a very strong
Firstly, the implication of indication that the judicial
the National Police and the mafia played a role in
Attorney General's Office, Munir's case by setting it
via the KPK's taped up in such a way that the
conversations,
indicate prosecution's case was
that
the
country's deliberately weak,"
Suciwati told local media
judiciary has failed to act
recently.
as an independent body.
The power and influence
wielded by senior officials and underworld
figures is testimony to this concept.
Secondly, all three bodies involved are
granted extraordinary powers to protect the
citizens of Indonesia. That they have
manipulated these powers to pervert the
law bodes poorly for the continuation of
Indonesia's
judicial
system,
and
subsequently, the strength of democracy in
the country.

LOOKING FORWARD

Indonesia's rule of law is on a downward
spiral. If this investigation has thus far
proven anything, it is that the nepotism and
corruption that has infiltrated the country's
bureaucracy since the 1950s continues to
affect the lives of its citizens.
Indonesians have flocked to their social
networking site of choice to click their
support for Bibit and Chandra, for the KPK.
The numbers total in the millions; but
whether this will translate into people
power
on
the
streets,
such
as
demonstrations the like of the late 1990s, is
yet to be seen. Certainly, Indonesia's
citizens have the ability for instigate change
through vocalizing their opinions and
rallying for their beliefs. However, it would
appear that there is a national crisis of
confidence in the judiciary and possibly in
Yudhoyono's ability to take a stance.
The Team of 8 has presented some strong
recommendations
for
the
judiciary,
including a series of reforms and
independent
inquiries
into
senior
individuals. It would appear that despite the
lashings of rhetoric on transparency and
accountability, many of those in positions of
power have failed to act on their
responsibilities. A lack of control in the
system can undermine public faith and
creates questions about the legitimacy of
the democracy.
President Yudhoyono must act on the
recommendations of the Team of 8, if the
public’s trust in the judicial system is to be
restored and the country’s rule of law is to
retain its credibility.
--


The fraught relationship
between the three — not to
mention the exorbitant cost
of the investigations and
subsequent
court
proceedings — will have a
strong impact on the
Indonesian psyche and its
repeated attempts to stamp
out corruption. Yudhoyono
has led this call; he must also
lead the country from this
quagmire of corruption and
failed leadership.


ADDITIONAL FEATURE

Open Letter to the House of People’s Representatives on the
Reviewing and Passing of a New Criminal Code
Ref: TG ASA 21/2009/45
AI Index: ASA 21/022/2009
Dr Benny Kabur Harman
Chair, Parliamentary Commission III
House of People's Representatives
Jalan Gatot Subroto
Tanahabang 10270
Indonesia
5 November 2009
Dear Dr Benny Kabur Harman,
OPEN LETTER TO THE HOUSE OF PEOPLE’S
REPRESENTATIVES ON THE REVIEWING AND
PASSING OF A NEW CRIMINAL CODE

On behalf of Amnesty International and LBH
Masyarakat (Lembaga Bantuan Hukum
Masyarakat), we would like to welcome you
in your new position as chairperson of the
parliamentary commission specializing in
legal matters. It is our hope that we will be
able to develop a productive relationship
with your committee and work towards
strengthening the rule of law in Indonesia,
in accordance with international human
rights law and standards.
In your first
few months
in office, we
hope that you
will give the
upmost
priority
to
the
review
and passing
of a new
Criminal
Code
respectful of the National Constitution and
the Law on Human Rights (No39/1999).
Furthermore the new Code should ensure
the
incorporation
of
implementing
legislation related to the international

In accordance with recommendations
of the UN Committee on Torture in
2001 and 2008, Indonesia’s Criminal
Code should be amended so as to
include a comprehensive definition of
torture as provided for in Article 1 of
the UNCAT. The Code must also ensure
that at least some acts constituting
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
or punishment as defined under Article
16 of the UNCAT are criminalised.


human rights treaties Indonesia has ratified
in recent years, including the UN
Convention on Torture and Cruel, Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
(UNCAT), the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).
As you are aware, the current Criminal Code
(KUHP, Kitab Undang-undang Hukum
Pidana) has been under revision for many
years; however so far the old version of the
code is still in place, although many of its
provisions fail to meet international human
rights law and standards or conform with
the provisions set out in the Indonesian
Constitution.
During the review of the Criminal Code,
recommend that your Commission pays
particular attention to the following areas:
ENSURE CRIMINALISATION OF TORTURE
AND
OTHER
CRUEL,
INHUMAN
OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT

In accordance with recommendations of the
UN Committee on Torture in 2001 and
2008, Indonesia’s Criminal Code should be
amended so as to include a comprehensive
definition of torture as provided for in
Article 1 of the UNCAT. The Code must also
ensure that at least some acts constituting
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment as defined under Article 16 of
the UNCAT are criminalised. For example,
offences must include, but not be limited to
the following acts (when not amounting to
torture): unnecessary or excessive use of
force, assaults, threats, and wilful neglect
and exploitation of detainees and prisoners,
and cruel, inhuman or degrading
punishments.
Such provisions and
appropriate penalties for those who commit
acts of torture and other ill-treatment

would be a significant step towards
protecting Indonesian citizens from torture
and other ill-treatment by members of the
security forces or with their instigation,
consent or acquiescence. It would ensure
that an adequate framework is in place to
deter future human rights violations and
ensure that victims can bring perpetrators
to justice.
REPEAL
PROVISIONS
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

CRIMINALIZING

Amnesty International has long expressed
concerns that the Criminal Code still
contains provisions which violate the right
to freedom of expression. In past years, the
organization has documented the arrest and
imprisonment of tens of peaceful political
activists in Maluku and Papua under
provisions from the Criminal Code, and in
particular
Article
106. 1 Amnesty
International
and
LBH
Masyarakat
recommend that these provisions be
reviewed, amended and in some cases
repealed
to
International
and
LBH
ensure that the
Masyarakat are concerned by
new
Criminal
legal
provisions
which
criminalize defamation acts
Code conforms
(Chapter
XVI
on
with
“Defamation”),
and
in
international
particular Articles 310, 311
standards
on
and 316 which have been used
freedom
of
in recent months in an
expression, and
apparent move to silence
in
particular
human rights defenders while
Article 19 of the
they conduct their legitimate
ICCPR
which
work on behalf of the human
Indonesia
rights of others.
ratified in 2006.
In the review, particular attention should be
paid to Chapter 1 on “Crimes against the
Security of the state”, Chapter 2 “Crimes
against the dignity of the President and Vice
President”, Chapter 3 “Crimes against
1

See Amnesty International, “Jailed for raising a
flag – Prisoners of Conscience in Maluku”, March
2009, AI Index: ASA 21/008/2009.
Weblink:
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA
21/008/2009/en/83bb8344-a4d3-425d-95d2d36eb886e307/asa210082009en.pdf, accessed
on 29 October 2009.


friendly states and against head and
representatives of friendly states”, and
Chapter 5 “Crimes against the public order”.
Furthermore, Amnesty International and
LBH Masyarakat are concerned by legal
provisions which criminalize defamation
acts (Chapter XVI on “Defamation”), and in
particular Articles 310, 311 and 316 which
have been used in recent months in an
apparent move to silence human rights
defenders while they conduct their
legitimate work on behalf of the human
rights of others. Amnesty International is
aware of at least seven human rights
defenders who have been charged with
criminal defamation, which carries formally
a punishment of over five years’
imprisonment.2
REPEAL PROVISIONS
PENALTY

FOR

THE

DEATH

It is to be welcomed that no one has been
executed in Indonesia so far in 2009.
However, Amnesty International and LBH
Masyarakat
remain
concerned
that
Indonesia continues to retain the death
penalty as a punishment under the Criminal
Code and in other laws. As you may be
aware, there is a global trend towards the
abolition of the death penalty. One of the
most recent countries to abolish capital
punishment is the Philippines. In 2006, the
Philippines abolished the death penalty for
all crimes. Currently 139 countries have
abolished the death penalty in law or
practice. Amnesty International and LBH
2

See Articles 311.1: “Any person who commits
the crime of slander or libel in case proof of the
truth of the charged fact is permitted, shall, if he
does not produce said proof and the charges has
been made against his better judgment, being
guilty of calumny, be punished by a maximum
imprisonment of four years” and Article 316:
“The punishments laid down in the foregoing
articles of this chapter may be enhanced with
one third, if the defamation is committed against
an official, during or on the subject of the legal
exercise of his office.” That means criminal
defamation carries formally the possibly of up to
five years and a few months’ imprisonment (four
years enhanced by one third).

Masyarakat hope that Indonesia will soon
follow this trend and join the Philippines in
showing human rights based leadership on
this issue by abolishing the death penalty.
The role of the death penalty as a deterrent
for future crimes has not been proven.
Recent UN sponsored scientific studies in
1998 and 2002 concluded: "… it is not
prudent to accept the hypothesis that
capital punishment deters murder to a
marginally greater extent than does the
threat and application of the supposedly
lesser punishment of life imprisonment.”3
Furthermore, its use carries the irrevocable
weight of miscarriages of justice.

Figure 2 Courtesy Amnesty International

So far death penalty as a punishment is
contained in many articles of the Criminal
Code for crimes such as premeditated
murder (Article 340) and attacks on the
President or Vice-President (Article 104).4
All these provisions should be removed in
respect of the right to life as enshrined in
Indonesia’s national constitution and other
international human rights law and
standards.

COMBATING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
AND GENDER BASED DISCRIMINATION IN
ALL ITS FORMS

Amnesty International has welcomed the
passage of the Law regarding the
Elimination of Violence in the Household
(Law No23/2004) which criminalizes a
number of acts of gender-based violence in
the context of the family. 5 However we
remain concerned that some acts of violence
against women are yet to be criminalized
under Indonesian law. For example sexual
harassment outside the domestic sphere
and rape in the context of marriage are yet
to be criminalized. Amnesty International
and LBH Masyarakat recommend that
specific provisions in the new Criminal Code
incorporate provisions prohibiting sexual
harassment in all its forms, and prohibit
rape inside and outside the context of
marriage.
note that definitions of rape and sexual
assaults in domestic criminal law should
provide effective protection to individuals’
right
to The role of the death penalty as a
physical and deterrent for future crimes has not
mental
been proven. Recent UN sponsored
integrity.
scientific studies in 1998 and 2002
Therefore
concluded: "… it is not prudent to
definitions of accept the hypothesis that capital
rape should punishment deters murder to a
reflect
the marginally greater extent than does
fact
that the threat and application of the
these crimes supposedly lesser punishment of life
1
imprisonment.” Furthermore, its use
are
carries the irrevocable weight of
committed,
miscarriages of justice.
not
just
through force or threat of force, but also
through coercion, or taking advantage of
someone who is unable to make a genuine
5

3

Roger Hood, The Death Penalty: A World-wide
Perspective, Oxford, Clarendon Press, third
edition, 2002, p. 230.
4
Other articles which provide provisions
allowing for the use of capital punishment
include Articles 111, 124, 140, 365 and 444.


See in particular “Exploitation and abuse: the
plight of women domestic workers in
Indonesia”, AI Index: AI Index: ASA
21/001/2007.
Weblink:
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA
21/001/2007/en/404b2f23-d3c5-11dd-8743d305bea2b2c7/asa210012007en.pdf, accessed
on 29 October 2009.

choice (for example, because they are
unconscious, asleep, or unable to make a
decision because of incapacity).
Further Amnesty International and LBH
Masyarakat are concerned that currently
the Criminal Code contains provisions
criminalizing adultery in contravention with
international human rights standards
(Article 284). Such provisions violate
international law and standards relating to
physical and mental integrity, and their
implementation tends to violate equality
before the law, as women tend to be
prosecuted disproportionately.
REPEAL
PROVISIONS
CRIMINALIZING
ABORTION AND ACCESS TO EDUCATION
ABOUT SEXUALITY AND REPRODUCTION

With one of the highest rates of maternal
mortality in the East Asia and Pacific region,
Indonesia is still a long way away from
meeting its Millennium Development Goals
targets of reducing by three-quarters
maternal mortality ratios between 1990 and
2015. Unsafe abortions and unwanted
pregnancies
Amnesty International campaigns
are among the
worldwide for the decriminalization
underlying
of laws on abortion to ensure that
causes of the
victims of rape and incest, and
current
high
women, who may be experiencing
lifethreatening complications due to
rates
of
pregnancy, can have access to
maternal
abortion-related services. Amnesty
mortality
in
International campaigns for any
Indonesia.6
woman who suffers complications
from an abortion to have access to
the medical services she needs,
whether she obtained the abortion
legally or illegally.

Decriminalizin
g abortion (see
Articles
346,
347, 348, and
349) would be a positive step towards
combating maternal mortality by ensuring
that women who have had an abortion and
6

It is estimated that 11% of maternal deaths in
Indonesia are due to unsafe abortions and that
7% of births are unwanted. In Indonesia’s
Progress Report on the Millenium Development
Goals, 2004.
Weblink:
http://www.undp.or.id/pubs/imdg2004/Englis
h/MDG-IDN_English_Goal5.pdf, accessed on 29
October 2009.

face medical complications are able to
access life-saving treatment. It would lift
fears amongst women and medical
practitioners that they may be facing
criminal prosecutions and imprisonment if
they seek care or provide medical
assistance.
Amnesty
International
campaigns
worldwide
for
the
decriminalization of laws on abortion to
ensure that victims of rape and incest, and
women, who may be experiencing lifethreatening
complications
due
to
pregnancy, can have access to abortionrelated services. Amnesty International
campaigns for any woman who suffers
complications from an abortion to have
access to the medical services she needs,
whether she obtained the abortion legally
or illegally.
Access to information on sexual and
reproductive rights without discrimination
is also vital to combat unwanted
pregnancies. Articles 534 and 535 of the
Criminal Code currently criminalize
supplying information to young people
relating to the prevention of pregnancy.
Such a provision is in violation of the right
to seek, receive and impart information
relating to sexuality and reproduction and
should be eliminated from the criminal law.
CRIMINALISE
CRIMES
INTERNATIONAL LAW

UNDER

The new Criminal Code should provide for
trials in Indonesia’s courts of crimes under
international law. These include genocide,
crimes against humanity and the war crimes
listed in the Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court, as well as war
crimes not listed in the Statute (such as
certain grave breaches and other serious
violations of Protocol Additional to the
Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and
relating to the Protection of Victims of
International Armed Conflict - Protocol I and certain violations of international
humanitarian law in non-international
armed conflict) and torture, extrajudicial
executions and enforced disappearances as
discrete acts. The definitions should be as
broad as the definitions in the Rome Statute,
but whenever international treaties (such as

Protocol I) or customary law contains
stronger definitions than those in the
Statute, these definitions should be
incorporated into national law.
Please do let us know if you have any
questions. We would be pleased to discuss
with you the reform of the Criminal Code
and other areas of mutual concern.
Yours sincerely,

Isabelle Arradon
Researcher on Indonesia and Timor-Leste
Ricky Gunawan
LBH Masyarakat Programme Director
--

Access to information on sexual
and reproductive rights without
discrimination is also vital to
combat unwanted pregnancies.
Articles 534 and 535 of the
Criminal
Code
currently
criminalize supplying information
to young people relating to the
prevention of pregnancy. Such a
provision is in violation of the right
to seek, receive and impart
information relating to sexuality
and reproduction and should be
eliminated from the criminal law.



OPINION

Indonesian Police Torture Must be
Stopped
By: Ricky Gunawan *
Jakarta, Indonesia — The chief of the
Indonesian National Police issued a
regulation earlier this year regarding
human rights protections for those in police
custody. One article clearly prohibits
arbitrary arrest and detention as well as
torture. Although this is positive action, the
regulation is useless, as torture by the police
continues.
On Oct. 27 and 28 a transgender sex worker
who goes by the name Riko was severely
tortured by police officers at the South
Jakarta Resort Police. It began when a
person filed a police report regarding his
lost cell phones five days earlier. According
to the complainant, the person who stole his
phones was a transgender person who liked
to hang out in the area.
On the night of Oct. 27, Riko was chatting
with transgender friends when seven police
officers, four in uniform, came with the
complainant, who accused Riko of the theft.
Riko denied the allegation and told the
police officers that he was at a friend’s
house when the crime was allegedly
committed. But the policemen forced Riko
into their car and drove to the South Jakarta
Resort Police Station, where he was forced
to confess. Still he insisted he was innocent.
Then he was driven to an empty street not
far from the police station where around 20
police officers, most of them drunk, were
waiting. It was close to midnight. Riko was
asked again whether he had stolen the cell
phones, and he replied he had not.
The police then threw a bottle of beer at his
head and began an assault that lasted
almost four hours. He was beaten and
kicked; his head was banged against a pillar
twice; his head and eyes were hit repeatedly

with police boots; his back was kicked; he
was stripped and verbally abused; his arms
and back were burned with cigarettes every
time he denied the theft.
Around 3:00 a.m. Riko was taken to Blok M
Police Post, where he was again tortured. He
was then locked in a small cell. In the
morning he asked for some water, but the
police refused to give him any. After more
than 12 hours in solitary confinement, at
around 4:30 p.m., Riko was released
without explanation.
Two days later Riko wanted to file a
complaint with the Jakarta Regional Police,
but he was rejected for the petty reason that
he did not have an ID card. Later his lawyer
filed a complaint on his behalf.
Despite ratification of the U.N. Convention
Against Torture 11 years ago and repeated
calls from the international community to
pass its own law against torture, Indonesia
is still reluctant to criminalize this practice.
Therefore victims have no legal avenue to
pursue justice.
Riko has not been provided any redress for
the injustice he suffered. It is hard to
imagine that he ever will. Until today, no
torture victims have obtained adequate
reparation.
Moreover,
no
police
perpetrators have been brought to justice,
given the absence of torture laws within the
country.
Police institutions have, on many occasions,
acknowledged that a suspect’s confession or
information is not the top priority as
evidence in criminal proceedings. Then why
is it so hard for the police to stop using
torture? Apparently they fail to comprehend

that torture undermines the criminal justice
system.
If an innocent person is tortured to confess
a crime he or she did not commit, it is
human nature to say anything the torturer
wants to hear in order to relieve the
suffering. As a result, the real criminal
remains at large, ready to commit further
crimes, while the innocent person may go to
prison.
Torture also erodes the possibility of a fair
trial. An important aspect of a fair trial is the
presumption of innocence. Only the court
has the authority to decide who is guilty and
what punishment is deserved. But in Riko’s
case, he was inhumanely punished by police
officers without any chance of a trial.
Instead of collecting testimony from
witnesses and other supporting evidence,
the police opted to torture Riko, as they
believed it was the easiest way to make him
confess.
Riko’s case is only one of many examples of
torture
frequently
experienced
by
transgender people and sex workers. His
audacity in coming forward to complain of
torture is highly appreciated, as a member
of a vulnerable group that is stigmatized
and discriminated against. His courage
should not go to waste.
Indonesia should make an example of his
case, conduct a thorough investigation into
his torture and hold the perpetrators
responsible. This is important not only to
bring Riko justice, but to send a clear signal
that this kind of illegal and abusive behavior
by police officers will not be tolerated.
-(Ricky Gunawan holds a law degree from the
University of Indonesia. He is program director of
the Community Legal Aid Institute, or LBH
Masyarakat, based in Jakarta. The institute
provides pro bono legal aid and human rights
education for disadvantaged and marginalized
people.)

--


This article was originally published on 4
November 2009 at:
http://www.upiasia.com/Human_Rights/2009/1
1/04/indonesian_police_torture_must_be_stopped
/8862/


About LBH Masyarakat
Born from the idea that all members of
society have the potential to actively
participate in forging a just and democratic
nation, a group of human rights lawyers,
scholars and democrats established a nonprofit civil society organization named the
Community Legal Aid Institute (LBH
Masyarakat)
LBH Masyarakat is an open-membership
organisation seeking to recruit those
wanting to play a key role in contributing to
the empowerment of society. The members
of LBH Masyarakat believe in the values of
democracy and ethical human rights
principals that strive against discrimination,
corruption and violence against women,
among others.
LBH Masyarakat aims for a future where
everyone in society has access to legal
assistance through participating in and
defending probono legal aid, upholding
justice and fulfilling human rights.
Additionally, LBH Masyarakat strives to
empower people to independently run a
legal aid movement as well as build social
awareness about the rights of an individual
within, from and for their society.
LBH Masyarakat runs a number of
programs, the main three of which are as
follows: (1) Community legal empowerment
through legal counselling, legal education,
legal clinics, human rights education,
awareness building in regard to basic rights,
and providing legal information and legal
aid for social programs; (2) Public case and
public policy advocacy; (3) Conducting
research concerning public predicaments,
international human rights campaigns and
advocacy.
These programs are conducted entirely in
cooperation with society itself. LBH
Masyarakat strongly believes that by
enhancing legal and human rights
awareness among social groups, an
independent advocacy approach can be
adopted by individuals within their local
areas.

By providing a wide range of opportunities,
LBH Masyarakat is able to join forces with
those concerned about upholding justice
and human rights to collectively participate
and contribute to the overall improvement
of human rights in Indonesia.


Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat
Tebet Timur Dalam III D, No. 2
Jakarta 12820
INDONESIA
P. +62 21 830 54 50
F. +62 21 829 15 06
E. contact@lbhmasyarakat.org
W. http://www.lbhmasyarakat.org


Indonesia's Rule of Law in Peril: KPK vs Police Power Struggle

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (20)

Similaire à Indonesia's Rule of Law in Peril: KPK vs Police Power Struggle

Similaire à Indonesia's Rule of Law in Peril: KPK vs Police Power Struggle (20)

Plus de LBH Masyarakat

Plus de LBH Masyarakat (18)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Indonesia's Rule of Law in Peril: KPK vs Police Power Struggle