Torture in Papua: What? A Trial?

The recent past has seen a number of videos of Indonesian soldiers torturing West Papuans have surfaced. One in particular, was especially graphic and gratuitous in the violence being perpetrated against the victims. The publishing of this video should have caused Indonesia significant embarrassment as it has continually claimed that Papuans for the most part want to be a part of Indonesia and that Papua is far less "restive" and "separatist" than the media portray it to be.

Unfortunately, the acute embarrassment that Indonesia feigned at the time passed very quickly. Suggestions that the type of brutality witnessed in the video was unacceptable and that the authorities would investigate fully and prosecute the perpetrators to the full extent of the law were greeted with some degree of skepticism . And, this skepticism has been proven to be justified.

Three Indonesian soldiers have gone on trial for their respective roles in the torture. However, they have not been charged with any offenses relating the physical abuse, the torture, that they committed. Instead they have been charged with disobeying orders.

At a military court hearing in Jayapura the reasons for the charge were laid out in the following terms:

1. Aside from the video there is no evidence that the three committed any offenses against the victims
2. The victims refused to submit any statements to the court.

The maximum punishment that could be imposed on the three is 30 months in a military prison.

To suggest that the trial is a whitewash of another dirty chapter in Indonesia's occupation of West Papua is an understatement. The outrages committed against the Papuans rival those committed against the people of Timor Leste. The difference, sadly, is that the UN was complicit in the integration of West Papua into the Republic of Indonesia through its participation in the fraud that was the "Act of Free Choice". It is estimated that almost one-fifth of the West Papuan population have perished during this often bloody occupation.

Yet, any serious consideration of Indonesia's ability to address human rights crimes must note that, the despite the enactment of a human rights law and the establishment of a human rights court, has been very, very, very poor. The President, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY), is a former general and a man with many skeletons in his closet that for the most part he has been given a pass on because of the promise he offered for change when elected to the presidency. However, he is also the president that promised a grieving nation that those responsible for the assassination of Munir in 2004 would be brought to justice.

So, the suggestion that the Papuan victims of these more recent outrages would see justice was more "omong kosong". This trial and the litany of failures throughout the SBY first, and now second, terms as president highlight that the President is not in control of the running of his own administration. The "reformasi" (or reformation) period in Indonesia has been like watching a wayang performance where you can clearly see the puppets but never see the puppet master (dalang).

But, I digress. The point is a simple one: for Indonesia, like any other country, to move forward it must face up to the ugliness of its past with respect to the violations of human rights that have been perpetrated against Indonesians. Furthermore, there is a need to not only acknowledge that these outrages are continuing in the present, but to be pro-active in ensuring that they stop.

Free West Papua!

Thus endeth today's rant and rail.

SBY To Make A State Visit To Vietnam...

I wonder if there are any RMS people in Vietnam who are willing and able to lodge a petition for SBY's arrest for crimes perpetrated against the people of South Maluku?

Hmmm...

RMS being the Republik Maluku Selatan or the Republic of South Maluku. Another band of separatists advocating their right to be free and independent.

Freedom for West Papua!

Freedom for West Papua is long overdue!

Disclaimer:
This post contains graphic footage of torture. Do not click play if you do not want to watch the embedded video.

The Act of Free Choice was nothing more than the granting of an open cheque book to Indonesia to rape and pillage the natural resources, and the people, of West Papua.

The Act of Free Choice was a farce then and remains a farce now. So, to stand idly by and let the universal, and may I add basic, human rights of our brothers and sisters in West Papua to be stripped away without fear or retribution is a sad indictment on all of us as people, as human beings.

You want to see, and understand, why this bothers me so...here, here, here, and watch the graphic torture footage.

I would like to know how this video footage came into the public domain. But it looks real, and I am sorry, but there is nothing that justifies this, absolutely nothing.

Shariah Law in Aceh, Indonesia...

This post deserves much more than what it is about to get!

I make it only to highlight a few things that are percolating in the grey matter inside my skull. If I had more time, then I probably would delve more deeply into the legal realm and analyse the implications of allowing Shariah law to be implemented in a secular state, even one with a large majority of Muslims as resident citizens.

Sometimes, I miss not having more time to write about the laws of Indonesia.

The photo attached here made me chuckle, I apologise if this seems flippant as caning generally does not lend itself to flippancy. Yet, check out the garb of the caner. It reminds me of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. I think it is the white stripe that cuts across the eyes in what is an otherwise all black ensemble befitting of an executioner.

The idea that Aceh has a right to implement Shariah law because it is "more" Muslim, in a devout sense, than the rest of Indonesia is absurd. It is also offensive to Muslims residing in other parts of the archipelago that the government does not think them Muslim enough to force Shariah upon them as well. This raises an important question, one that gets bandied around every now and then, but never really answered: "do the Acehnese really want Shariah law?"

There has always been this public spin machine that played up the idea that Aceh was so much more devoutly Muslim than anywhere else, so this must mean they want Shariah. After all, what "good" Muslim would not want it? Yet, it has never really been clear whether the people of Aceh wanted Shariah or just to be free from the interference and oppression of the Indonesian state. My guess would be that there are still plenty of Acehnese who would gladly trade Shariah law for some real "autonomy" from Jakarta (aka Indonesia) and even freedom in the form of independence.

Having a quick squiz at the legal foundations from Shariah law in Aceh. It is interesting that the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, and the five guiding principles encapsulated in Pancasila, make it pretty clear that Indonesia is a secular state. In the most simple terms, there is no preference to be afforded to one religion in preference to another. Or, all people are allowed to practice their faith according to the tenets of that faith (except of course if you belong to the Ahmadiyya sect).

The first steps towards Shariah occurred in 1999 with Aceh being given super special status, and presumably the 'right' to implement Shariah Law. In an attempt to clarify what that meant, the government stipulated some more basic terms as to how autonomy would work. The clarifications, in essence, allowed the locally elected government of Aceh to start the Shariah-nization of Aceh by establishing Shariah Laws (Regional Regulations known as Qanun) and Shariah Courts to hear cases that involved the breach of those laws.

This is problematic for a number of reasons. However, most important is that the implementation of Shariah Law in Aceh creates a two-tiered legal system where Muslims and non-Muslims are treated differently. This, above all else, means that the laws discriminate against some Indonesian citizens. The Constitution clearly prohibits this from happening. In many ways, the provisions of the Constitution are crafted to provide equal protection for all citizens. Simply, being Muslim should not expose you to harsher penalties than are otherwise available to non-Muslim Indonesian citizens.

Nevertheless, the granting of special autonomy in Aceh with the ability to ram through local regulations on Shariah has emboldened other less special provinces to embark on the Shariah-nization of their respective regions through the implementation of Shariah laws. Some have argued that this is Islamisation or the Wahabbi-nisation of Indonesia by stealth. I would argue that there is nothing stealthy about it. In fact, it is overt rather than covert, and politicians seem to think that the Shariah-nization of their regions is a real vote getter. After all, good Muslim politicians do not want to be viewed as being insufficiently devout, and what could be more devout than arguing for the stoning of adulterers and the cutting off of the hands of thieves, right?

The logic is all wrong.

Anyways, enough of the ranting and railing...back to work, there are assessment tasks due!

A Brief Overview of the New Law on Agricultural Land and Sustainable Crops...

This first appeared on http://en.hukumonline.com. This is a slightly modified version of that article.

The House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat / DPR) has passed the Bill on the Protection of Agricultural Lands for Sustainable Crops. The bill was enacted under the mandate of Law No. 26 of 2007 on Spatial Planning which requires that a law be enacted to protect agricultural lands for sustainable crops. The bill also recognizes the right to agricultural land for sustainable crops is a human right that must be guaranteed. The bill also recognizes that there is a need to ensure the supply of land for sustainable crops as a means of ensuring crop independence.

The premise of the bill is that agricultural land for sustainable crops is an integral part of the lives and prosperity of the nation. The rapid development of Indonesia that encroaches upon land that was previously farmed means that the ability to produce sustainable crops diminishes each time agricultural land is converted into residential or industrial zones. The government has determined that the best way to protect this agricultural land from future residential or industrial development is to designate it as agricultural land and then put in place provisions to protect it.

Therefore, the bill sets out that there are certain parcels of land that are protected for use for sustainable crops. However, the government has also realized that with an ever-expanding population, the mere protection of land for agriculture is not sufficient by itself. As such, the bill also sets out provisions to allow for enhancing the productive capabilities of that land. The bill achieves this by regulating all matters relating to planning, determining, developing, utilizing, managing, controlling, and supervising the lands.

It is worth noting that the provisions that protect agricultural lands designated for sustainable crops from transformation is not absolute. Where there is a public interest need to transform then land, then this may be authorized. The elucidation to Article 44(2) defines what sort of projects would constitute the public interest. Some of these projects include, among others, roads, irrigation channels, airports, train stations and rail networks, and electricity generation sites.

When the government acquires designated agricultural land in the public interest, compensation is to be paid. This compensation can be financial or it may be in the form of a land swap.

There are two types of sanctions set out in the bill: administrative and criminal. The administrative sanctions are standard warning letters and fines, among others. The criminal sanctions provide for terms of imprisonment up to a maximum of 7 years, and criminal fines of up to IDR 7 billion.

All implementing regulations mandated by the provisions in this bill are to be implemented within 24 months of the bill’s enactment.

Another issue that the bill sort of alludes to but does not really address is food sustainability with respect to supply. The idea that protecting agricultural land for sustainable crops is an honorable one. However, a more pressing concern over time is going to be feeding the people. Indonesia is heading towards a scenario where there are going to be more people to feed and an inability to feed them. Simply, there is not enough land to protect as agricultural land without reducing more of Indonesia's natural forests to farm land in order to be food self-sufficient.

Climate change, irrespective of whether it is attributed to human-made global warming or a natural phenomenon, is also going to be a major consideration going forward.

The bill is interesting for what it tries to protect, but really for the bill to have meaning it needs to be part of a much greater regulatory initiative directed to greater and longer-lasting food self-sufficiency.

Timor Leste -- A Decade of Independence

Timor Leste or East Timor has marked ten years of Independence from Indonesia. On an anniversary such as this one it is hard to look only in one direction. One must look forward, but one must also look back. Looking back and taking stock, taking stock of what has and what has not been achieved. It is impossible to move forward without first addressing the past.

I like Jose Ramos Horta. I like his commitment to the cause, I like his honesty, I like the fact that he calls things as he sees them. These are interesting traits for a man who has made his name as a diplomat, then as Prime Minister of his nation, and now as President.

However, I am not sure that I agree with his call that an international tribunal or commission is not needed in Timor Leste to address issues of war crimes and other crimes against humanity that may have been committed over the years of Indonesian occupation and the period during the direct ballot and the period immediately following the announcement of the results of the direct ballot.

Reconciliation is a nice thought, but as a process it does not really address the need for justice for victims or the families of victims. I am sure, no, I know, there are arguments that truth and reconciliation commissions are useful. The most obvious example is South Africa. Nevertheless, my personal belief is that justice is best served through a tribunal process. I am not sure that "slowly, gradually, steadily justice will prevail."

In an interesting side note, Indonesian Foreign Minister, Hassan Wirajuda, was 45 minutes late in arriving and the commencement of the ceremony was delayed until he arrived. So, I am guessing that this is indicative of Timor Leste seeing its former colonial master after the Portuguese, Indonesia, as being an important partner going forward. It might also be indicative of a complete lack of respect that Indonesia may have for Timor Leste. Then again, it might just have been a technical problem with an aircraft or something.

Congratulation to Timor Leste on the first ten years of independence!

May the next ten years see some drastic improvements on the poverty reduction, employment, and education fronts.

Viva Timor Leste.

The Pornography Law -- A Dead Document?

The Jakarta Post recently reported that Constitutional Law Expert, Irman Putra Sidin, saying, "How can we expect the law to be implemented when people and officials oppose it? Who's going to enforce it? It will end up as merely a dead document," based on the fact that at least four provinces were going to actively oppose the law and refuse to enforce it. Those provinces are Bali, North Sulawesi, Yogyakarta, and West Papua.

The rationale for this position is that if the law is not implemented nationwide then can it be valid anywhere. I would have thought that once the law was passed by parliament and enacted as law then it was the law of the land. Therefore, in a republic like the Republic of Indonesia, the law would apply everywhere.

A more interesting argument would be does the refusal to implement the law amount to the beginning of an act of secession? How far do the provinces want to push this? What sanctions could the State impose on rogue provinces that refuse to enforce state laws and regulations.

In fact this should be read as a preliminary movement towards seeking independence from the Republic of Indonesia. Quite clearly the intent of West Papua is to secede from the Republic if they are required to enforce the law. Andrikus Mofu, spokesperson for the West Papuan delegation said the following, "We will inform the international community of our aspiration and our intention to separate from Indonesia." This seems to leave little doubt where the West Papuan intentions lay.

The most likely course of action will be a Constitutional Court challenge to test the binding nature and legality of the provisions. The definitions of pornography and the manner that pornography is to be determined is arguably loose. Nevertheless, this is an issue that the Court will be asked to determine.

The reality is the laws of the land are to be applied and all are to be equal before the law. Special dispensation in one province compared to another means that there is no equality before the law and this is more likely to lead to problems than the enforcement of the law.

Of all the things that could trigger the disintegration of the Republic it is interesting that it is the Pornography Law that is being talked about as being this trigger.

4 July -- Rare Songs

Good luck happens to thrifty shoppers more often than one might think. Yet, it is always a good story when it does. Considering today is the Fourth of July and the US is celebrating its independence from those pesky British Colonizers it is interesting to find a story that seems to combine all of the essential elements.

A rare and original manuscript of one of America's most patriotic songs, America (My Country 'tis of Thee), has been bought for 10 dollars. Well, the person buying this rare and original manuscript thought they were buying a picture of a framed flower, but when they opened the frame they found something considerably more valuable than 10 bucks.

The manuscript was written early in 1831 by Samuel Francis Smith and it was first performed in public on 4 July 1831. It was performed in the First Baptist Church in Newtown, Massachusetts. What is funny is that the song was written to the tune of "God Save the Queen" which is the national anthem of the UK.

A patriotic song written to the national anthem of the UK. Smith obviously had a good sense of humour or a sense for the ironic.

China, Tibet, and Sharon Stone

The fact that celebrities are always hungry for just that, celebrity, it must not be surprising to see Sharon Stone throw herself into the thick of things in the fight for a Free Tibet. Yet, this might come at some cost, personal and professional, to her. However, one might argue that this is in fact karma.

The 12 May earthquake that struck China was devastating in terms of not only the destruction of infrastructure but in human life! The official death toll is now above 68,000 and is expected to continue to rise.

The Sichuan province where this quake occurred has been beset by aftershocks and the biggest current fear is that dams in the area have become unstable and are likely to burst. The Chinese government is currently evacuating people from in and around the most seriously threatened dams. So far some 160,000 people have been moved and that number could swell to more than 1.3 million in the worst case scenario.

The idea that there is 50,000 Olympic sized swimming pools of water that could be released in a catastrophic dam burst is difficult to visualize in terms of the sheer scope of what that would look like.

With more than 45 million people affected by the quake and some 5 million homeless the idea that this is bad karma coming back to level the score is in bad taste. The idea of what goes around comes around in individual cases may be acceptable but when the bad karma to which you claim affects the lives of so many innocents then there are issues of common human decency to be explored.

I think that Tibet should be free of Chinese rule. I think that Tibet should be independent. However, His Holiness the Dalai Lama has recently been on the record stating that he only wants greater autonomy to be afforded to the people of Tibet rather than independence. Whether he harbors other desires for an independent Tibet he is not saying so publicly at the moment.

Back to Sharon Stone. A brief interview with her where the comment were made has appeared on You Tube where she is claiming that the destructive earthquake that caused such huge loss of life was just a case of bad karma coming back to haunt China for the way that it has mistreated Tibetans.

The response has been swift. Chinese biggest theatre chain has decided to ban her movies from their theatres. This will severely limit the revenue that her films will take in Asia's biggest film market.

I guess though that bad karma is true as the remarks she made have also come back to haunt her as well. I am all for people expressing their personal opinions and beliefs. I am more than happy for Sharon Stone to express her disgust at the treatment of Tibetans by the Chinese government. I am a lot less sympathetic to comments that justify the extent of the human suffering on karma alone.

This in no way belittles the suffering of the Tibetans at the hands of the Chinese. The idea that bad karma comes back to haunt you might logically be applied in reverse, that is maybe the Tibetans have done something to deserve their bad karma.

Thinking before one speaks is always good advice!