walking contradiction

Indonesia's legal system biased and unfair

2009-12-16T18:22:00.000+07:00

By Ricky Gunawan

Published by UPI Asia Online, December 09, 2009

Jakarta, Indonesia — Three shameful cases brought before Indonesian courts recently reveal that the country’s legal system is in very poor shape. The law is applied forcefully against the poor and vulnerable, while the rich and powerful evade it with impunity.

Minah, an illiterate 55-year-old grandmother who lives in a small Indonesian village near Banyumas in Central Java, was taken to court last month for stealing three cocoa fruits worth 1,500 rupiah (US$0.15) from a plantation. She was confused that, after having returned the fruit with apologies to the plantation, the owner still reported her to the local police station.

She had to travel a long distance on foot and by bus to face questioning and trial. Minah, who stood trial without a lawyer, said she took the cocoa fruits in September to grow plants from the seeds. The local district court gave her a 45-day suspended sentence and three months’ probation. It means that if Minah commits a similar offence within three months from the date of conviction, she will have to serve her 45-day sentence.

A similar case took place in Kediri, East Java, where local police arrested and detained two farmers, Basar Suyanto and Kholil, for stealing a watermelon from a neighboring field. The two remorseful farmers made their first court appearance, like Minah, unaccompanied by lawyers. They remained in detention more than two months before a court-appointed lawyer obtained their release. Their case remains unsettled.

Aguswandi Tanjung, a 57-year-old tenant in an apartment in Jakarta, was arrested on Sept. 8 for stealing electricity. He was detained for charging his mobile phone in a corridor inside the apartment block after the building management cut off the electricity to his apartment.

Compare the three cases above with that of Indonesian businessman Anggodo Widjojo, who allegedly conspired to frame two commissioners of the Indonesian Corruption Eradication Commission. Based on wiretapped conversations heard in a Constitutional Court hearing a few months back, the evidence is strong that he tried to interfere in cases with several high-ranking law enforcement officers.

He also has said on national television that he gave nearly 6 billion rupiah (US$636,000) to a case broker to deal with the problem of the anti-corruption body. Yet the police have been unable to pin charges on him and until today Anggodo remains untouchable.

These are just a few cases that have come to public attention; certainly there are many similar examples of injustice. These abysmal stories show that in Indonesia the law is powerful against the poor, yet impotent against those with power and money.

In the context of protecting human rights, laws are intended to uphold the rights that are inherent to all human beings. The laws allow everyone to claim their rights and oblige the state to prosecute those who deny them.

Indonesia’s dysfunctional legal system cannot protect its people’s human rights. If past abuses are left unresolved, future human rights violations are likely to take place and remain unresolved as well.

Indonesia needs to reform and strengthen its legal system. Otherwise, the country will end up in pandemonium where laws are only paper and human rights turn into human wrongs.

--

(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.)

Addicted to corruption in Indonesia

2009-12-16T18:20:00.000+07:00

By Ricky Gunawan
Published by Asia Catalyst, December 3, 2009

Rose (not her real name) has been using drugs for more than ten years. During that time, she had been arrested a number of times, and her life has been harrowing. Not long ago, she began to feel hope for the first time, when in a breakthrough decision, Indonesia's judges decided to send her to a rehabilitation center to treat her addiction.

However, Indonesia's rotten and corrupt judicial system dashed her hopes.

Rose was arrested by the police on January 23, 2009 and after a lengthy legal process, received a court decision on July 27. Normally, Indonesia's courts sentence drug users to prison. In this case, the court ordered her to be imprisoned for one year and eight months, but to begin with a period of rehabilitation for six months. This meant that once she got out from rehab she would only need to stay in prison for one year and two months. Since she had already served six months in detention waiting for her court hearing, that would be deducted from the total sentence, and Rose would only need to serve eight months in prison after her time in rehab.

The court's decision to sentence Rose to rehab was a breakthrough and a first for Indonesia. It signaled that courts are finally beginning to consider drug users as victims from a health perspective, and to understand that putting them in prison will not treat their addiction. In fact, Indonesia's poor correctional facilities will only deteriorate their health.

However, as of this writing - more than three months after the court decision - Rose is still waiting in a detention center.

What went wrong? After the court delivered its decision, the prosecutor's office should have executed the judgment; in this case, they should have transferred Rose from Pondok Bambu Detention Center to Drug Dependence Hospital in Cibubur, Jakarta, for six months, and then sent her on to the correctional facility for eight months.

But the prosecutor, detention center and hospital officials had no idea of how to transfer such a person. Rose is the first person detained in the Pondok Bambu Detention Center to be sentenced to rehab. The prosecutor claimed that they have no standard operational procedure for transferring a person from a detention center to a rehab center.

Poor administration and bad bureaucracy have led Rose's sentence-execution letter to ping-pong from one unit to another within the prosecutor's office, with many typos added along the way, thus necessitating repeated rewriting of the letters. Disgracefully and predictably, the prosecutor has tried to extort Rose for fees in order to "expedite the process".

It seems that the prosecutor doesn't understand the concept of drug dependence. A drug user who is suffering from serious addiction, and who is detained for more than three months without proper medication, is of course having a very hard time. Ignoring Rose's dire need to get drug dependence treatment simply amounted to ill-treatment. Rose is suffering terribly in detention.

It is deeply disappointing to see that after more than ten years of efforts at institutional reform, the prosecutor's office has failed to eradicate the cancer eating away at its heart: that is, corruption. If in this petty case, a prosecutor is unable to handle the execution of a straightforward sentence to rehab, then it is no wonder that in cases involving corruption of high-rank government officials, members of parliament, or even in the case of Munir - Indonesia's assassinated human rights defender - the prosecutor is utterly impotent.

The key to successful institutional reform lies in the ability of institutions to recognize their own weaknesses. They need to be able to acknowledge that there are internal problems that need to be fixed, and be open to constructive criticism as well as expert assistance from outside. Without this ability to diagnose and fix its own weaknesses, the institution itself will be left behind and excluded by other enhanced and modern institutions that are transparent, accountable, and that have zero tolerance of corruption.

Indonesia's prosecutors should learn a lesson from Rose's heartrending story. It should be a basis for the prosecutor in developing procedures to handle similar cases in the future, so that no one again will undergo what Rose has -- and still is -- suffering.

--
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, Indonesia. The institute provides pro bono legal aid and human rights education for disadvantaged and marginalized people.

Indonesian police torture must be stopped

2009-12-16T18:10:00.001+07:00

By Ricky Gunawan

Published by UPI Asia Online, November 04, 2009

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.)

Double standards of Indonesian police

2009-10-08T09:43:00.000+07:00

By: Answer C. Styannes
Guest Commentary
Published by UPI Asia Online, October 07, 2009

Jakarta, Indonesia — Two vice chairmen of Indonesia’s Corruption Eradication Commission are under police investigation for alleged abuse of authority. Yet lawyers and activists have widely criticized the investigation of Chandra M. Hamzah and Bibit Samad Riyanto, suggesting the two are being persecuted because the police hope to weaken the commission and undermine its effective anti-corruption efforts.

Rivalry between the two law enforcement institutions surfaced in July 2009, when the commission began investigating the national police’s chief detective, Commissioner General Susno Duaji, for allegedly using his power to force Bank Century to return a large amount of deposited funds to their owner unlawfully. In return, it is alleged, Duaji received 10 billion rupiah (US$1.06 million).

The commission’s investigation of Duaji is widely believed to have triggered the police investigation into the alleged abuse of power by the two commissioners. This view is strengthened by the fact that the police charge was inconsistent and apparently fabricated – the police first said that the commissioners were involved in bribery but later said it was abuse of power.

This lack of professionalism is not new among Indonesia’s police. In this case the police reprisal against the anti-corruption commission was on the national level, but such behavior also prevails at the grassroots level.

For example, a case came to light recently in which an underage girl was raped by a 40-year-old man. Her family filed a complaint with the Jakarta police, but no proper inquiry was conducted. Worse, after her family found the perpetrator and brought him to the police station, instead of detaining him the police released him, citing lack of evidence.

In cases such as torture and other police abuses, victims are often reluctant to complain to the police because they are asked to provide witnesses and other evidence. As police torture and abuses take place in a closed setting, it is hard to fulfill such requirements.

The only witnesses in a torture case are the police officers themselves. It would be rare for an officer to testify against his colleagues and support the victim’s complaint.

The police are guilty of negligence in some cases, and abuse of power in others, as is evident from the different handling of the cases involving the commissioners and the young rape victim. While the police acted swiftly to investigate the commissioners, they neglected their duty concerning the young girl.

These are common problems reflecting the lack of professionalism within Indonesia’s police force. The police often fail in their duty. When they are supposed to respond quickly, they are often overly cautious. And when conditions require that they react with care, rash measures are taken.

Professionalism in the police force is important, as it is closely related to human rights enforcement. It is a police obligation to protect human rights. An unprofessional police force can impede people’s access to justice, as it is the only institution with the authority to handle almost all criminal cases.

Furthermore, instead of implementing their slogan “to serve and protect,” Indonesia’s police have caused distrust in people about law enforcement. As a famous cynical saying goes, “Complaining to the police about your lost chicken will only cause you to lose your goat.” This describes the state of policing in Indonesia.

Distrust toward the police can lead to social unrest if people start taking the law into their own hands, as was seen recently in Pelalawan, Pekanbaru when angry residents attacked a red light district, smashing property and setting fire to buildings.

If the police could so hastily launch an investigation into the two commissioners who threatened them, they should be able to quickly launch their own internal reforms, as misconduct within the force in the long term is a much bigger threat to the cause of law enforcement they are pledged to protect.

--

(Answer C. Styannes is a research associate at the Community Legal Aid Institute in Jakarta, Indonesia. She is currently studying in the Faculty of Law at the University of Indonesia, majoring in constitutional law. Her work focuses on issues of constitutional law, judicial and legislative reforms, labor laws, and civil and political rights).

Counterterrorism must not flout human rights

2009-09-11T13:47:00.000+07:00

By Ricky Gunawan

Published: September 09, 2009

Jakarta, Indonesia — The recent decision of U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a prosecutor to investigate allegations of torture by the country’s Central Intelligence Agency during its interrogations of terror suspects is commendable. This action demonstrates the strong commitment of U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration to end the use of brutal interrogation techniques against prisoners and detainees, and to hold responsible those guilty of using such techniques.

It is also a step forward to ensure that such evil practices do not recur. On a global scale, hopefully this important measure will send the message that torture is a despicable crime that is morally wrong and clearly illegal.

The inspector general of the CIA wrote a report in 2004, kept secret until its recent release, describing the agency’s inhuman treatment during interrogations. This included sleep deprivation, holding prisoners in a cold cell, and water boarding – all of which undoubtedly qualify as torture.

The use of torture by the United States in its so-called “war on terror,” orchestrated by former U.S. President George W. Bush’s administration, has been strongly condemned by human rights groups around the world. Rights groups worried that if the United States justified torture in its fight against terrorism, other countries would follow similar sordid actions, including Indonesia.

Ever since two near-simultaneous bomb explosions struck luxury hotels in Jakarta in mid-July, Indonesians have been at odds over how to implement counterterrorism measures. No one questions the need for comprehensive and effective prevention measures and severe punishment for those responsible. However, the actions of the Indonesian military, police force and government have raised questions as to the toll such measures will take on the people’s freedoms.

The government’s counterterrorism actions have so far been excessive and disproportionate. This underscores the threat posed to Indonesians’ civil rights as the crackdown on terrorism continues unchallenged.

Several recent cases – including the arrest of suspected bombing conspirator Muhammad Jibril and the police raid to capture alleged terrorist Noordin M. Top in a safe house in Central Java – have raised questions as to the state’s commitment to protect human rights when conducting counterterrorism activities.

Was Jibril kidnapped by the police or legally arrested? What implications does the suspension of his rights have on justice? Indonesia’s crack counterterrorist squad carried out the raid in Central Java, which involved an 18-hour siege and shootout. The operation was filmed live and generated superfluous hysteria when publicly broadcast.

In this atmosphere of fear, it is very easy for the public to wrongly justify the arbitrary arrest, detention, and – as some high-profile cases have shown – torture of people suspected of links to terrorism.

In the case of the U.S. war on terror, several reports have revealed secret detentions and clandestine interrogations through rendition operations. Likewise in Indonesia, counterterrorism measures have not been conducted in a transparent manner. The Indonesian police have not adequately informed the public how detainees were arrested and their whereabouts.

Furthermore, how do the police gain information on terrorist networks in the country and their plans from detainees? Do they use so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques” – in other words, torture?

The issue of torture practiced by the police or its counter-terror unit is wide open to debate. Law enforcement agencies argue that to prevent future terror attacks the terrorists must be unearthed quickly, and the fastest method of gaining information is by torturing suspects. But is this logic acceptable?

For centuries, mankind has observed that people will tell their torturers what they want to hear so as to escape torture. Torture is not a reliable way to obtain accurate information.

In Indonesia, torture and ill treatment occur in both political and ordinary criminal cases as well as in other settings. If these petty criminals are tortured, it is hard to believe that terrorists would not be tortured to gain information, even though the techniques are not as sophisticated as those used by the CIA.

Sketchy evidence shows that torture is widespread, although it is not possible to document and report it systematically. The Jakarta-based Community Legal Aid Institute found that a thief’s ears are cut to differentiate between those that commit motor theft and others. Among drug users, those arrested or detained are sometimes given electric shocks to gain information about their dealers.

Terror attacks are a serious threat to Indonesia. Even as it tackles them, the government must remember its profound commitment to uphold the tenets of global counterterrorism strategy and protect human rights at all costs.

Terror attacks should not be countered by measures that attack human rights. The mentality that the end justifies the means, or that desperate times call for desperate measures, must not prevail. Otherwise Indonesia will end up desperately trying to remedy its own failures, as the United States is currently doing.

--

(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.)

Torture and bribery codependent in Indonesia

2009-08-27T16:41:00.000+07:00

By: Ricky Gunawan
Published by UPI Asia Online, 26 August 2009

--
Jakarta, Indonesia — Indonesia ratified the U.N. Convention against Torture almost 11 years ago. This means Indonesia is legally obliged to take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other action to prevent torture within its jurisdiction.

Further, it has to ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its national laws. However, Indonesia still has no national legislation outlawing torture, placing it in violation of its international legal obligation under the convention.

The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture has recommended that Indonesia should set up an independent national authority, such as a national commission or ombudsman, with investigative and prosecutorial powers. The institution’s task would be to investigate torture cases in an independent manner, without affiliation to any government body.

Furthermore, such an authority would maintain the impartiality of its prosecutors and investigators and implement the principle of equality before the law in its entirety, especially in cases involving police or military officers as perpetrators.

To minimize the increasing number of torture cases, the government needs to be more proactive in its efforts to prevent torture. The Association for the Prevention of Torture has pointed out that this requires three integrated elements: transparency in institutions, an effective legal framework, and capacity strengthening.

But implementing these elements is not easy. According to the Community Legal Aid Institute, or LBH Masyarakat, Indonesia’s detention and correctional facilities are closed to detainees’ lawyers and the public, which makes it hard to verify reports of torture happening there. In addition, these places are not subject to any monitoring mechanism.

The fact that torture mostly takes place behind closed doors makes it extremely difficult to pin down the perpetrators. Therefore, transparency in penal and correctional institutions is urgently required. This would pave the way for justice for torture victims.

In a closed environment it is observed that detainees feel powerless to deal with the police. So victims and their families and relatives prefer bribing the police to escape torture instead of pursuing justice the legal way. The bribes continue, although the reward is only temporary. It is believed that paying bribes neither ends a victim’s suffering nor decreases the attacks. Rather, bribes simply institutionalize the practice of torture.

This phenomenon occurs as a result of social behavior when dealing with torture cases. Bribing an officer to end torture creates negative repercussions in the fight against torture. By bribing a law enforcement officer, torture victims and their families constantly provide them financial benefits or incentives. This relationship substantiates one of the key difficulties in fighting torture.

According to the principles of law and economics, incentives and disincentives are not merely related to getting or not getting money; they are to ensure that laws induce compliance instead of fear. Scholars of law and economics argue that rational criminals will commit a crime only if the benefits are higher than the costs. Such costs are influenced by the probability of the crime being detected, the degree of law enforcement and the severity of punishment. Hence, a good law implies that committing a crime produces a higher cost compared to its benefits.

This approach has a deterrent effect on crime when both the probability of detection is high and criminal punishment is severe. As mentioned earlier, the three integrated elements of torture prevention fit well with efforts that increase the probability of crime detection, which in turn means a higher level of law enforcement with respect to torture.

Similar to other crimes, corruption in government agencies, including law enforcement agencies, represents the profit maximizing behavior of criminals. What makes it different from other cases is that when bribery is committed the victim also plays a very significant role in the crime. This suggests that redress provided to torture victims and their families can reduce and prevent the occurrence of torture.

Torture victims and their families need to be aware that they are a catalyst in stopping the practice of torture and ill treatment. The knowledge of events and courage to complain has considerable weight in determining who deserves to be punished. If torture victims are afraid to speak out about their suffering, the evil practice of torture will continue to reign in Indonesia.

(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.)

Indonesia's AIDS policy and human rights

2009-08-18T10:40:00.000+07:00

By Ricky Gunawan

Jakarta, Indonesia — The Ninth International Congress on AIDS in Asia and the Pacific opened Sunday in Bali, Indonesia, with calls to strengthen the commitment to prevention of AIDS, as well as care, support and treatment of AIDS sufferers. Hosting the event has sent a strong signal to the international community that Indonesia is a place of pluralism and tolerance.

The five-day event, which ends Thursday, also proves Indonesia’s ability to host a top international forum despite suffering a setback from terror attacks on two deluxe hotels in the capital Jakarta on July 17.

ICAAP is vital in stepping up the discussion and finding ways to eliminate the AIDS pandemic not only in the region but also globally. The forum’s slogan, “Empowering People, Strengthening Network,” is suggestive of a strong platform to support people living with HIV/AIDS through a strengthened network across Asia and the Pacific and beyond.

In Indonesia, as in other parts of the world, people with HIV/AIDS are stigmatized and often discriminated against. To lead the global fight against human rights violations that surround people with HIV/AIDS, Indonesia must first have a strong and strategic national AIDS policy to address the epidemic and at the same time implement actions to overcome stigmatization and discrimination.

Indonesia, through the National AIDS Commission, has a three-year National Strategic Plan that ends in 2010. Therefore it is important to learn from past experience and synthesize a more effective response in future plans.

The next national AIDS policy must promote human rights and public health efforts rather than undermining them. Bad policy will lead to bad laws that will further marginalize key groups such as sex workers and people who self-inject drugs.

Basic human rights norms have to be placed at the heart of Indonesia’s HIV/AIDS policy. These include equality in rights and dignity, non-discriminatory public participation and accountability. All target groups should be treated equally under the policy. Further, HIV prevention and treatment programs enshrined in the policy should be implemented irrespective of people’s background, social status, religion, race and sexual orientation.

Indonesia’s National AIDS Commission, or KPAN, should involve the public and people living with HIV/AIDS in decision-making, and all programs to tackle the epidemic must be responsibly implemented with accountability.

Aside from including human rights norms in the national AIDS policy, KPAN must manage real problems routinely faced by people with HIV/AIDS. First, it must effectively publicize information regarding HIV/AIDS. One hardly hears about its programs and work for the prevention and treatment of AIDS. Indonesia’s National Narcotic Agency, or BNN, is much better at bombarding people with public service announcements than KPAN.

A lack of socialization makes it hard for AIDS sufferers to combat the stigma and discrimination they experience. A classic case in Indonesia’s North Sumatra province illustrates the point. A boy was expelled from his village because his parents were HIV positive and villagers were afraid that the boy would transmit the virus to the whole village. This case shows that many people in Indonesia are ignorant as to how HIV/AIDS is transmitted. The consequences of ignorance and poor awareness of AIDS can be tragic.

The above example raises several questions: What is KPAN doing to deal with such issues? Does it have the expertise and is it making the necessary effort to reduce or end discrimination? Does it have adequate complaint mechanisms for victims? Does it provide protection and assistance to those who file complaints?

KPAN’s current program does not include access to legal aid for AIDS victims whose rights are ignored or violated. Several cases have surfaced of people with HIV/AIDS being fired from their jobs or asked to quit their studies at schools and universities because of their HIV status.

KPAN has a strategic position in the context of a political-legal structure to address the issue. It has local offices in every province, which are headed by the governor. So it has the ability and the mandate to coordinate and facilitate efforts to support people living with HIV/AIDS, to allow them to report discrimination and help them to proactively overcome barriers.

Another major issue KPAN needs to address is overcrowded correctional centers with poor sanitation, which make the transmission of AIDS easy. Also, many self-injecting drug users that are imprisoned do not receive proper medication or treatment, making them vulnerable to infections. Moreover, limited HIV treatment for prisoners and overcapacity contribute to the widespread transmission of HIV/AIDS in such places. KPAN should work with other stakeholders, such as the Directorate General of Correctional Institutions, to resolve this problem.

HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment programs fall under the health sector. But problems within the sector undermine the delivery of such programs, including poor accountability, lack of funds and implementation, and lack of adequate information.

All of these essential elements must be integrated into Indonesia’s national AIDS policy. If that cannot be achieved, it will be difficult to win the battle against stigmatization and discrimination.

--

(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.)

Indonesia's outdated laws need revision

2009-07-30T16:54:00.000+07:00

By Answer C. Styannes

Jakarta, Indonesia — Indonesia’s legal system is still influenced by that of the Dutch, who colonized the country for more than three centuries. The civil code, commercial law and penal code are all legacies of the Dutch colonial government. Drafted 100 years ago, many provisions enshrined in the laws are no longer relevant in present-day society.

The Indonesian penal code is the most problematic, as some of its articles were drafted to accommodate colonial interests rather than protect society. These include several articles that deal with insulting the president, which the Constitutional Court has declared unconstitutional. But some problematic articles are still intact and a threat to democracy in Indonesia. Article 160 is one of them.

Article 160 says, "Any person who orally or in writing incites in public to commit a punishable act, a violent action against the public authority or any other disobedience, either to a statutory provision or to an official order issued under a statutory provision, shall be punished by a maximum imprisonment of six years."

This article has become a favorite of both the police and prosecutors in criminalizing human rights activities in Indonesia, especially in conflict areas such as Papua and Aceh. In 2008, eight human rights activists from the Aceh Legal Aid Institute were found guilty and convicted – on the basis of Article 160 – of committing an act of violence against the government. The activists had gone to villages in Aceh and distributed pamphlets about alleged land expropriations involving the PT Bumi Flora Company and the local government.

Similar cases were also slapped on Buktar Tabuni and Iwanggin Sabar Olif, human rights defenders in Papua.

Based on the notion that Article 160 not only threatens democracy but also violates freedom of expression guaranteed under Indonesia’s 1945 Constitution, several calls for a judicial review have been made, without success.

On a complaint filed by Rizal Ramli, founder of the Indonesia Awakening Committee and a political activist critical of the neo-liberal practices of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s administration, the Constitutional Court insisted that Article 160 did not violate the freedom of expression guaranteed in the Constitution. Such declarations were also made previously in 2007, and the provisions under the article were found not unconstitutional.

The court argued that the Constitution itself allowed limitations on human rights for the purpose of guaranteeing the recognition and respect of rights and freedoms of others and of satisfying just demands based upon considerations of morality, religious values, security and public order in a democratic society.

Besides, judges say that incitement is an offence under any legal system, despite the fact that it was drafted under the Dutch colonial rule. They refused the complainant’s arguments that Article 160 was a strategy by the Dutch colonial government to preserve their power against the Indonesian people. They said incitement was recognized under any legal system as an offence and so was a punishable crime. This shut the door on any debate about incitement as an offence.

However, what has been missing in the discourse on Article 160 versus the freedom of expression is the phrase “a violent action against the public authority” in the article. Historically, the article was drafted so the Dutch could repress society and preserve their power over the Indonesian people. Therefore, it is no longer relevant in the democratic Indonesian state.

A judicial review of Article 160 is needed specifically for clauses like the above, which are redundant now. Even if the clause is erased, those who incite violence against public authority can still be arrested and convicted. But several clauses in the article are prone to wrong interpretation by authorities, allowing them to arrest anyone who opposes them.

There are two ways to eliminate the clause of incitement against public authority. A judicial review in the Constitutional Court is perhaps the quickest. However, the complainant would have to specifically refer to specific clauses, instead of complaining about the article as a whole. According to law, the Constitutional Court can only deliver its verdict on the specific complaint filed.

The other way is to use the process of revising the penal code. In the draft of the revised text, Article 160 is unchanged and so has to be read in its “material meaning” – meaning that, although all the elements contained in the article apply to the alleged perpetrator, the person cannot be punished if the crime has not taken place.

Article 160 versus freedom of opinion has been overly discussed, yet the important part has not been touched – the phrase of “incitement to commit violence against public authority.” Without focusing on the existence of such phrases, anyone who incites against public authority will always be held accountable.

Moreover, the government will continue to use the article to criminalize human rights defenders, specifically in conflict and post-conflict areas. The criminalization of acts by human rights defenders is an attack against human rights.

--

(Answer C. Styannes is a research associate at the Community Legal Aid Institute in Jakarta, Indonesia. She is currently studying in the Faculty of Law at the University of Indonesia, majoring in constitutional law. Her work focuses on issues of constitutional law, judicial and legislative reforms, labor laws, and civil and political rights).

Indonesia must protect children's rights

2009-07-16T16:19:00.001+07:00

By Christine Tambunan

Jakarta, Indonesia — July 23 is National Children’s Day in Indonesia, set up to remind people that children’s rights must be respected, protected and fulfilled; otherwise the future generation is likely to be blighted. Sadly, many Indonesians were shocked this month by the prosecution of children in a case which has come to be known as the case of the ten shoe-shiners.

Ten boys who work as shoe-shiners at the international airport in Jakarta are now facing a long and exhausting court hearing. It began on May 29 when they were arrested for allegedly gambling in the airport area. The youngest is 11 years old and the oldest 15 years old. They are all from impoverished families living near the airport and work daily as shoe-shiners to earn a living.

Unfortunately, on that day there was a security operation at the airport that forced them to hide in the bus park. According to the boys, while waiting for the operation to be over, they spent their time spinning a coin and guessing whether it would land on heads or tails. To make the game more interesting, they placed bets of 1,000 rupiah (about 10 US cents) per child.

The children were interrogated without legal assistance and then transferred to the Children’s Prison in Tangerang, where they were detained for a month before finally being released on June 26, due to considerable public pressure. Unfortunately, the police transferred the case to the Tangerang District Prosecutor and the boys are now facing trial.

Apart from their traumatic experience, as a consequence of their one month’s detention the boys missed their national exams and failed to be promoted to the next grade. During the investigation they had little support from their parents, who were too poor to travel easily to the police station, which was far from their homes.

According to Indonesian law, juvenile cases should be tried before the Juvenile Court. The law calls for special consideration and treatment when dealing with crimes involving underage children. Under the law, juvenile cases should place the best interest of the child as the utmost priority.

For juveniles facing criminal charges and the legal system for the first time, the police play a significant role in the initial stages. Police officers essentially determine whether the juvenile should be released without charge or face the next stage of prosecution. If an arrest is deemed necessary, the public prosecutor then decides whether the offender should be released or face juvenile court.

In this case, one month’s detention was of course disproportionate punishment. The police should have known that these children were students and the national exams were coming. Detaining them would surely bring them more harm than good. Shockingly, when their parents requested bail, the police refused to release them and decided to extend the detention.

This case reflects two serious problems in Indonesia, apart from the technical legal issues. First is the poverty that surrounds these children. Their parents’ income is only around 5,000 rupiahs, (about 50 US cents) per day, which forced these children to gain extra income for the family by being shoe-shiners after school.

Neither they nor their parents are to blame for their decision to do this work. For children from underprivileged families, playing around after school would be deemed a waste of time. Pressure from the social environment leaves them no option other than earn money to meet their families’ needs.

This poignant situation is common in poor families as the parents encourage their children to work. Of course they cannot work in the formal sector. Thus shoe-shining in the airport, which is close to their homes, is preferable.

Second is the problem of the police who want to create a good image for themselves by sending more people to prison. This suggests to the public and their superiors that they have succeeded at their jobs. By sending these ten “gamblers” to prison, the local police give an impression that they are putting a stop to criminal acts and creating a clean and comfortable airport.

But was the police action in investigating and detaining these children a wise option? Creating a nice image at Indonesia’s main international airport should not take precedence over children’s rights. A case like this should be handled with extra attention as it involves vulnerable youngsters. If they are stamped with the status of suspects, defendants and prisoners, this will only bring negative effects and blacklist them as adults.

Considering the conditions in Indonesia’s penitentiaries, detention is a particularly serious threat to a child’s interests. Children’s prisons, like adult facilities, are overcrowded and poorly equipped at best. Moreover, many children are forced to remain in adult prisons while they await trials and verdicts. In adult prisons children are vulnerable to physical, sexual and mental abuse.

Indeed, there should be institutions other than prisons to reform children’s behavior if it is deemed criminal. Ultimately, to protect children’s rights in relation to criminal issues, Indonesia should tackle its poverty problem as well as reform its penal and juvenile systems.

--

(Christine Tambunan is a research associate at the Community Legal Aid Institute, LBH Masyarakat, in Jakarta, Indonesia. She is currently studying at the Faculty of Law University of Indonesia, majoring in legal practice. Her interests include issues of torture, monitoring detention, freedom of religion, social justice and development. LBH Masyarakat provides pro bono legal aid for disadvantaged and marginalized people.)

Indonesian candidates ignore human rights

2009-07-02T18:30:00.000+07:00

By Ricky Gunawan

Jakarta, Indonesia — Hundreds of millions of Indonesians will cast their votes next week to elect the next president and vice president. The three options are very clear: Megawati-Prabowo, Yudhoyono-Boediono and Kalla-Wiranto. Yet their human rights visions and programs remain unclear.

During the campaign, the three teams have bombarded the public with their images and spent a great deal of money to advertise themselves in newspapers and on radio, television and websites. Each of them claims that they are pro-people and better than the other two. However, an important ingredient that has been missing from the whole campaign is a meaningful discourse on human rights.

Former President Megawati Soekarnoputri and her running mate, Prabowo Soebianto, came together as they claim to share a nationalist platform. They persistently depict themselves as pro-people. To strengthen this image, they even chose Bantargebang, Jakarta’s main dumpsite, as the site to declare their candidacy. Their main campaign message is that they will fight for the prosperity of laborers, farmers and fishermen. In terms of human rights, this pair intends to improve the economic, social and cultural rights of poor and disadvantaged people. But can they do that?

Prabowo himself was convicted by the Military Honorary Council of kidnapping rights activists in 1997-98. How can someone possibly protect people’s human rights if he has been involved in kidnapping rights activists? Furthermore, Prabowo was allegedly among the officials suspected of involvement in the May Riot of 1998, in which many ethnic Chinese were killed and raped.

Current President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and his running mate, economist Boediono, are best known for their calmness and elegance. In the initial stages of the campaign, these two were branded as agents of neo-liberalism, particularly Boediono. However, the label didn’t stick as none of their attackers succeeded in explaining it. Although much of the public deems this pair to have a cleaner human rights record than the other two, one must not forget that Yudhoyono has not yet succeeded in resolving the Lapindo Mud Flow case. Hundreds of civilians are still without livelihoods in the area where the mud volcano erupted in May, 2006. Also, the struggle to eradicate Indonesia’s pervasive corruption is in peril as Yudhoyono has not taken necessary measures to enact the Law on Corruption Court, although the deadline is running out.

Indonesia’s third set of candidates, current Vice President Jusuf Kalla and former military commander Wiranto, is known for the catchphrase: “The faster (you do), the better (you get).” Completely different from the previous candidates, they portray themselves as quick decision makers and an easygoing pair. Kalla even took off his shoe in public to show that his shoes were locally made. Kalla has a relatively clean record in terms of human rights; however his vice presidential candidate, Wiranto, has been accused of being responsible for serious human rights violations. Wiranto is allegedly the man behind the killings of students at Trisakti University in 1998 and at Semanggi in 1999, and also the massacre in East Timor during the same time period. The Commission of Truth and Friendship – a joint commission established by Indonesia and Timor Leste – has named him in its report. In its analysis of past documents, especially the indictment of the U.N. Serious Crimes Unit, the commission revealed the role of Wiranto, who was blamed by omission for the violence because as the highest-ranking military officer, he should have known of the militia groups' movements. This report cites important findings around the time of the referendum in East Timor in 1998, in which crimes against humanity took place.

Obviously, all three pairs of candidates have promised to better protect human rights. Unfortunately, however, they have failed to present detailed ideas on how to do this or explain adequately to the public how they will fulfill their obligation to protect human rights in the upcoming administration.

The Lapindo Mud Flow is one of the biggest human rights violations during Yudhoyono’s presidency. It has been more than three years now and Yudhoyono has not provided a remedy for the victims. In the context of next week’s election, the public should know how each of the three presidential candidates would resolve this case. If one of them becomes the next president, will the elected candidate be able to end this tragedy? If so, how? If not, the public should not vote for him, as it will only prolong the victims’ suffering.

Also, what is their position toward the most controversial human rights issue, the death penalty? Yudhoyono seems to be a true believer in the death penalty; he has solidly proven his position by executing ten people during his presidency. How about Megawati-Prabowo and Kalla-Wiranto? They must also retain the death penalty as it will bring them more support.

These are just a few examples of how human rights should have been an intense topic of discourse during the campaign, rather than just a make-up tool. Even though the General Election Commission set up a national debate on good governance, the supremacy of law and human rights, the event failed to serve as a forum for the candidates to debate about human rights problems in Indonesia. It was not even a “debate,” as it was only a plain dialogue between the candidates.

Each time issues of human rights have been raised – particularly past abuses – the candidates have insisted they have all been resolved and there is nothing more to be done. Often, they have said there is no need to look back, just look forward.

Sadly, Indonesia’s next president has failed to acknowledge that if past human rights violations have never been fully resolved, it will burden future generations and haunt them with only mysteries – which, to be honest, are not theirs to solve.

--

(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.)

INDONESIA: New police regulations but still no criminalization of torture

2009-06-24T18:27:00.000+07:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AHRC-STM-148-2009
June 24, 2009

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission on the occasion of the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, June 26

INDONESIA: New police regulations but still no criminalization of torture

On June 25, 2009 Indonesia's new police regulations will come into effect, just one day before the UN International Day in Support of the Victims of Torture this Friday, June 26. While the new regulations are a steppingstone to the long-awaited police reforms in Indonesia, the key to end the prevalent practice of torture is to criminalize the act itself as required by international standards. However, that requirement is still lacking and this allows torture to go unpunished, even with the new regulations.

Indonesia signed the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in October 1998 but even during the last review of the countries implementation of its commitments by the UN Committee Against Torture it was found that serious shortcomings and legal gaps have not been addressed by the legislators.

However, the new police regulation refers to torture in ten different articles (article 5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 23, 24, 37, 38.2, 41) covering the prohibition of ordinary torture, the use of sexual torture in particular (article 13(a)) and even prohibits torture in cases of state of emergencies in article 41. Article 10(e) of the regulation requires that officers or personnel of the national police "refrain from instigating or tolerating any act of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, nor may any law enforcement official invoke superior orders or exceptional circumstances such as a state of war as a justification of torture". Article 11(b) then continues to state that the police "shall not commit (…) torture" of detainees or crime suspects, which remains a widespread phenomenon as recent cases received by the AHRC show.

The relationship between the right to fair trial and torture as part of police investigations is acknowledged in Article 37, which requires that the national police "must not" make use of torture. The document titled Regulation of the Chief of the Indonesian National Police, No. 8/2009 regarding the implementation of human rights principles and standards in the discharge of duties of the Indonesian National Police can be downloaded in a full English version here from the AHRC's Indonesia website.

While the new regulations are a key development in the country’s human rights protection, the act of torture is still not a crime. That means that police officers using torture can still not be held accountable for torture in a court of law and be punished with imprisonment, as is common in other countries and required by the convention Indonesia ratified more than 10 years ago.

In April 2009 two cases of torture lead to the death of the victims. Mr. Bayu Perdana Putra was reportedly tortured in the North Jakarta Police station and Carmadi, another victim, died during his detention at the Tegal area police on Java as a result of the torture he had to endure. In another case, Mr. Zaenal M. Latif was lucky and survived the torture he had to endure in the Cilegon police station. As so often, also in these cases the policemen did not even wear their uniforms when conducting arrests.

These cases from Java are the tip of the iceberg as most cases are not even reported due to the intimidation victims are subjected to by the perpetrators. In particular, suspects of crimes or other illegal acts receive a "punishment" by the police even before an investigation takes place and their guilt was proven before a court in a fair trial. How can this be called justice?

Torture is particularly rampant in crisis regions such as Papua were political prisoners have been reported to have repeatedly subjected to torture. But not only political prisoners suffer from police or military torture. It is mostly the ordinary public, in particular the poor, who become the first targets of security forces. In Papua, where major parts of economic and civilian life are subjected to control of the military in a power struggle against the police the, violence by security forces against civilians is systemic.

Many rights groups in Jakarta and other regions in Indonesia are planning to launch demonstrations and voice their continued demands on the coming day against torture on Friday: Make Torture a Crime! The AHRC is of the view that what Indonesia requires most is the review of its outdated Penal Code in order to make torture a crime and an end to the militarization of the remote areas of the country such as the provinces Papua and West Papua.

# # #

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.

ASIA: Working against torture fundamental to human rights work

2009-06-23T20:00:00.000+07:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AHRC-STM-142-2009
June 23, 2009

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission on the occasion of the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, June 26

ASIA: Working against torture fundamental to human rights work

The practice of torture is endemic in Asia, and the region’s governments show no political will to eliminate it. In fact, states treat torture as a necessary aspect of social control, directly or indirectly approving the practice. The clearest indication of the states’ unwillingness to eliminate torture is the refusal to criminalise the practice, as well as the inadequate implementation of laws against torture. In most Asian countries, civil society has also not shown sufficient interest or commitment to press for the elimination of torture. The International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, June 26, should be an occasion to seriously reflect on the failures in Asia to eliminate this unacceptable and cruel practice.

Since its inception, the Asian Human rights Commission (AHRC) -- a regional human rights organisation committed to the promotion and protection of human rights--has focussed its attention on the issue of torture prevention in Asia. In the coming years, particularly the next one year, the AHRC will campaign for the criminalisation of torture in Asian states. The campaign will be formally launched on June 26. The following reflections on the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture are based on the information gathered by the AHRC over several years of work.

Torture is practiced by law enforcement agencies in the region as a crude shortcut for criminal investigation. Law enforcement agencies function with the belief that the deterrence quotient against a crime is the possibility of being tortured, rather than the crime being detected and punished in the legal process. Custodial torture and other forms of violence are used by the state for social control, with torture as one of the most common forms of punishment.

Torture neither promotes democracy nor supports the rule of law. On the contrary, torture and its open or clandestine use undermine the fundamentals of democratic governance. States in the region allow law enforcement agencies, particularly the police, to practice torture. The police being one of the most visible presences of the state, its directives are permeated into society through fear. In some countries this fear is so immense that obtaining a confession does not require torture; a suspect in custody admits anything and everything required by the police in fear for his life. Criminal investigation in most Asian countries begins and ends with a confession. Fair trial has no place in such an environment.

The practice of torture is not limited to policing. Paramilitary and military units and other agencies around the region also resort to torture, often brutal. Whether torture is practised by a military detachment or by the local police, the possibility for a victim of torture to complain does not exist in many Asian states. The absence of witness protection laws, proper investigation mechanisms including medico-legal facilities, and prosecution mechanisms, render complaint making suicidal for a victim. This allows torture to also be used for blackmailing, as a form of revenge and for monetary gain.

In the past four years, there have been attempts by countries inside and outside the region to form alliances to engage in torture. Countries where torture is criminalised have entered into clandestine pacts with countries where the practice is a routine phenomenon, to detain and question individuals using torture. Of particular relevance are torture cells run by military dictatorships or governments subjugated by the military in Asia, to detain and question individuals of foreign as well as domestic origin. Prolonged periods of detention and extreme forms of torture are the unique characteristics of these torture centres. Often such centres are manned by foreign troops or run under the supervision of foreign states. Some of these non-Asian entities have in the past been champions of anti-torture campaigns. Their engagement in torturing suspects and often outsourcing torture cells to certain Asian states has made a severe dent in international efforts to condemn and campaign against torture.

The trend of condoning torture in the name of national security has encouraged many Asian states to consciously refuse to recognise that torture is a crime against humanity, or to have a legal framework against torture. On the contrary, Asian states are increasingly providing statutory protection and impunity for state agents to engage in torture. States are fielding criticisms by juxtaposing critiques with fake nationalism.

The practice of torture remains the central defect in protecting, promoting and fulfilling human rights in the region. From the standpoint of state responsibility to protect, promote and fulfil human rights, the fight against torture is an important component of human rights work. In essence, human rights work is engaging in a dialogue with the state, reminding the state of its responsibility to serve the people and identifying its failures in meeting people's demands.

In most of Asia, states notoriously attempt to reduce the space for this dialogue by instilling fear, largely through law enforcement agencies. By using law enforcement agencies as a tool in this way, the state engages in a counter dialogue with citizens, reminding them it has the means to silence dissent and enforce its writ.

Enforced silence nurtures resistance. In the absence of a democratic framework where common humanity and equality are the key principles, resistance movements look to other elements for cohesion and identity. In many Asian states these elements have been religion or political ideology rooted in violence. For a silenced community, violence becomes the liberator, with individuals finding commonness in the fight against the oppressor. The state then resorts to impunity for its agents using torture and other means of violence to fight back. This cycle of violence only reduces the space for peaceful dialogue.

Working against torture is thus crucial to enlarging the space for democratic dialogue. Human rights work in the region and globally has yet to appreciate this fact. In fact, the challenges of campaigning against torture -- including individual activists confronting omnipresent state agencies -- often prevent human rights groups from working on this key issue.

Fighting torture involves walking with the victim, encouraging the victim to speak and finding means for their speech to be heard, often in an environment where redress is remote. In most Asian countries, attempts to speak or amplify the voice of the victim face stiff opposition.

The work against torture in Asia has thus been reduced to advocating international norms and standards, while ignoring the reality that these norms and standards have no meaning in countries where even minimum human rights protection does not exist. In countries where laws addressing torture exist, they may not cover the universally accepted definition of torture. Or, the victims do not have safe mechanisms through which to complain or obtain witness protection. In other countries, the possibility of impartial investigations, prompt prosecutions and proportionate punishments are limited or non-existent. As a result, the few attempts by domestic mechanisms to address torture are easily subjugated and court decisions not followed. The open dismissal of judicial directives in this manner creates the perception that the state and its agencies are above the law.

By criminalising torture and bringing a torture perpetrator within the realm of accountability and punishment, the biting teeth of the state are blunted, enlarging the space for dialogue. In fact, the governments of Asia are fully aware of the potential of an anti-torture framework. Such a framework will however, be detrimental to those in power as well as vested interest groups. The prevention of torture and its consequent reform of law enforcement agencies have far-reaching effects. It is for this reason that most states are resistant to the implementation of any robust law concerning torture.

Twenty-two years since the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment came into force, most Asian states are yet to ratify the convention or have a functioning domestic legal framework to combat torture. Their abstention in combating this brutal crime against humanity has reduced the space for democracy and the rule of law in their respective countries. By not attaching adequate importance to the work against torture, domestic and international human rights organisations have also failed to play their part in addressing this fundamental issue.

To begin a strong and serious campaign to eliminate torture in Asia, the AHRC makes the following recommendations:

1. Asian states should urgently consider eliminating torture and to therein carryout necessary reforms to their respective justice institutions. This should be reflected in legal frameworks, as well as the allocation of human and material resources;

2. The AHRC urges countries that have not yet ratified the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and its Optional Protocol, to do so as a matter of priority. Upon ratification, governments must enact corresponding domestic legislation to guarantee that torture in all its manifest forms is recognised as a serious, punishable crime. Legislation should also provide victims with the possibility to obtain adequate compensation. Countries where domestic laws already exist should review and streamline the laws in accordance with the principles of the Convention;

3. Torture is directly linked to the policing systems in Asian states. To prevent police from relying on torture for criminal investigations, governments need to undertake thorough police reforms. These reforms should be geared towards creating credible civilian policing systems suitable for modern societies. Adequate budgetary allocations must be made to these ends;

4. All states are obligated to eliminate impunity. This means ensuring accessible complaint mechanisms, effective investigations by competent, independent and impartial investigators, and the prosecution of all offenders, particularly on complaints concerning torture. The funds necessary for investigation must be provided. Another important aspect in eliminating impunity is the application of command responsibility;

5. Training for law enforcement officers, the military and the judiciary must include information about the Convention and the states' treaty obligations. Superior courts should develop jurisprudence and guidelines relating to the elimination of torture as a priority. Subordinate courts need to be effectively guided and supervised on their obligation to punish the crime of torture;

6. Fair trial and torture cannot coexist. Legal professionals in Asia however, often condone torture or see it as the mere use of force, the reasonability of which is to be decided in a court of law. They need to be more informed of torture as a grave crime attracting universal jurisdiction;

7. Finally, the AHRC encourages civil society organisations throughout Asia to make the elimination of torture as their priority, irrespective of their current focus. A more visible role must be played by civil society, particularly human rights groups, in promoting the Convention regionally, as well as developing awareness on torture prevention as a key prerequisite to rule of law and democracy.

# # #

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.

Indonesia's torture of addicts must stop

2009-06-18T09:58:00.000+07:00

By Edwina Kharisma

Jakarta, Indonesia — Moral theorists tend to agree that nearly all instances of torture are unjustifiable, irrespective of the motive. Although universally condemned, local values continue to allow the practice of torture. This is because certain individuals and communities tend to view torture as “acceptable” if it is conducted on particular people, such as prison inmates or convicted criminals.

In Indonesia this attitude prevails toward people charged with or convicted of drug abuse. It is standard, although unofficial, practice for police to torture detainees and inmates charged with this crime. What is worse, the individuals themselves often feel they deserve to be treated in such a manner. They believe they have committed a terrible crime, which makes them unworthy of being treated with dignity. The concept that they deserve to be tortured makes it extremely difficult to eradicate this practice.

In Indonesia, almost all drug-related arrests are accompanied by the practice of torture. In this context, the act of torture – cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment – is conducted in a nondiscriminatory manner.

Police torture involves different parts of the anatomy, depending on the victim’s gender. For women, the customary method is sexual abuse; the victim is ordered to strip and perform various sexual acts. For men it is likely to include regular beatings, sleep deprivation and electric shocks to the genitals. These practices are regarded as common and acceptable, not only by police officers, detainees and inmates but also by society.

Indonesians who use drugs are considered lowly human beings. They are often seen as people who engage freely in sexual activities, come from bad family environments, or have bad characters and personalities. In addition, they are susceptible to HIV/AIDS.

Drug use is considered inconsistent with local values, customs and religious teachings, therefore users and addicts tend to be disowned by their families and ostracized by society. This contributes to the hardship that often drives drug users to commit bigger crimes like theft, rape and murder. The moralistic approach to their problem has been most damaging to this vulnerable group.

Scholars of both culture and law have attempted to explain this phenomenon. One theory postulates that law is a reflection of cultural values within a particular society. The cultural values of a society can be observed in the people’s attitudes, which are heavily affected by both external factors and intrinsic moral values.

In the case of drug users, both social attitudes and moral values in Indonesia lead people to think that torture is justifiable, both in detention and after conviction. Social acceptance makes it hard to label torture a crime, although the law perceives it otherwise.

These circumstances are depressing, as they are erroneous. Application of the law must be strengthened so police officers understand they have an absolute duty to refrain from torture. The misperception that the torture of drug addicts is acceptable must be corrected.

Whether by coincidence or intent, the U.N. International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, established in 1997, falls on the same day as the International Day against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking of Drugs, created a decade earlier. Both are on June 26.

It is a day to voice concern for both those who have endured the evil practice of torture as well as for drug users that are marginalized by society.

The fight against drugs should be conducted with the aim of protecting and rehabilitating drug addicts, as opposed to torturing them. Recognizing the human rights of drug users is essential, not least because it helps prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS and mitigate the impact of drug use on public health.

Criminalizing and targeting drug users will never solve the root problems of global illicit drug trafficking. Severe punishments such as the death penalty – which is the ultimate denial of the right to life and a form of cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment – have failed to lower drug trafficking levels.

It is time for international human rights standards to be incorporated at the heart of international drug policies. The torture of any human being is unacceptable, and this includes drug users. Failure to implement humane policies will merely prolong the drawn-out sufferings of drug users as well as the mistaken attitudes of society.

Manfred Nowak, the U.N. special rapporteur on torture, rightly said, “It is high time to rethink the punitive approach to drug policies and to replace it with a human rights-based approach, which ensures inter alia the protection of the most vulnerable groups.”

We should not ignore this terribly mistreated group any longer in the name of a pointless war on drugs carried out by daily torture.

--

(Edwina Kharisma is a research volunteer at the Community Legal Aid Institute, LBH Masyarakat, based in Jakarta, Indonesia. She is currently studying law at the University of Indonesia. Her interests include issues of torture, indigenous people, business and human rights. LBH Masyarakat provides pro bono legal aid and human rights education for disadvantaged and marginalized people.)

Indonesian environmental law paralyzed

2009-06-03T21:35:00.001+07:00

By Andri G. Wibisana
Guest Commentary

Jakarta , Indonesia — Last week was the third anniversary of an event that changed the lives of Indonesians living in Porong, Sidoarjo, East Java province. On May 29, 2006, a massive eruption of hot steam, water and mud occurred, inundating village after village, forcing thousands of people to abandon their homes and property. The tragedy which is known as the Lapindo mud flow took their livelihoods and also deprived them of their dignity.

The mud flow – which still continues – originated from an onshore oil-drilling operation owned by a joint-venture between Indonesian oil companies PT Lapindo Brantas and Medco, and Australian company Santos. Interestingly, Lapindo’s parent company is owned by Aburizal Bakrie, one of the richest people in Indonesia, who also serves as the country’s coordinating minister of people’s welfare.

Although Indonesia is a disaster-prone country, not many people are covered by first-party insurance, including disaster insurance. In addition, mandatory liability insurance, environmental damage insurance and compensation funds are not in place. This means that high-risk activities may still be permitted even though they are not covered by liability insurance, and there is no guarantee that the victims of any damage resulting from these activities will be compensated.

Accordingly, the victims of an environmental disaster are left with tort law as their only avenue to get compensation. This is unfortunate for the victims, who are usually poor and lack political power, considering how the Indonesian judicial system works. In fact, none of the victims has filed a lawsuit against Lapindo.

The Indonesian government may of course intervene by allocating public funds to provide relief for the victims of a disaster. Such relief, however, will be in principle available only after the government announces an incident as a disaster. Declaring the Lapindo mud flow a disaster has unfortunately proven to be a complicated business. Many have opposed such a declaration out of fear that this might actually mean disguised protection for Lapindo.

Amid political tensions and the need to react in a timely way, the government issued Presidential Regulation No. 14 in 2007, later amended by Presidential Regulation No. 48 in 2008. By these regulations, the government not only allowed the use of public funds for mitigating the effects of the disaster, but also obliged Lapindo to buy the land and houses of the residents in certain affected villages. The government claims that by issuing these regulations it has done its best to protect the interests of the victims.

Yet the regulations should be criticized for several reasons. First, they create a compensation mechanism in which Lapindo is obliged only to buy the land and houses of the victims. Under such a program the pain, agony, suffering and decreased quality of life of the people, let alone damage to the environment, are left uncompensated.

Second, Lapindo’s obligations are limited to only directly affected villages. This limitation means that the victims who lived outside those villages will not be compensated at all, simply because their land or houses are outside the government’s map of the directly affected area. The government, however, seems not to comprehend that the mud continues to erupt and inundate more and more villages, and the number of uncompensated victims will certainly increase.

Third, by allowing the use of public funds for an allegedly manmade disaster, the government is actually protecting the interests of Lapindo, not the victims. In this sense, the government can be considered as providing a disguised subsidy for Lapindo, and hence violating the “polluter pays” principle.

Finally, the government apparently does not have the power even to force Lapindo to buy the land and houses it has designated. This is especially true since Lapindo keeps defiantly arguing that the mud flow was triggered by an earthquake that hit Yogyakarta – around 300 kilometers from the drilling site – two days before the first mud eruption. Without such power, the regulations become hardly applicable. Thus, the payment of compensation runs very slowly and ineffectively.

Theoretically, the government could have chosen to take over Lapindo’s responsibility to compensate the victims and to control the mud flow and its impact. This option should be followed by two simultaneous legal actions. On the one hand, the government should continue its criminal investigation concerning alleged gross negligence in the drilling operation.

On the other hand, the government should also exercise its legal standing, as provided for in Article 37 paragraph 2 of the Indonesian Environmental Management Law, by suing Lapindo in order to seek reimbursement of all public funds used by the government in dealing with the tragedy.

Unfortunately, this option has been unashamedly ignored by the government. As a result, three years after the first eruption, the mud continues to erupt and flood larger surrounding areas with no indication of ceasing. During these years, the victims have been largely deprived of their right to just and prompt compensation. In fact, this right seems to have been almost forgotten.

The Lapindo mud flow incident has thus substantiated that in the interests of a powerful corporation, Indonesia’s environmental law and pollution compensation system are easily and virtually paralyzed.

--
(Andri G. Wibisana is research and development director of the Community Legal Aid Institute, LBH Masyarakat, based in Jakarta. He is also a lecturer on environmental law at the Faculty of Law University of Indonesia. He holds a masters degree in law and economics from Utrecht University and a PhD from Maastricht University. LBH Masyarakat provides pro bono legal aid and human rights education for disadvantaged and marginalized people.)

Summer Internship 09: It's time to see the unseen

2009-06-01T20:37:00.004+07:00

Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat proudly presents:

Summer Internship 2009: It’s time to see the unseen

SI 09 offers you a wide range of activities, such as:
*Community legal empowerment
*Institutional visit to various human rights NGO, Government Agencies, and many more
*Human rights education
*Legal aid and human rights advocacy at the national and international level

Who can participate??
University student
Law students
Non-Law student (min. 2007)

I had a priceless experience in the Summer Internship (SI) 2008 which I couldn’t get from other place. Prior to joining SI, I used to fight for people’s rights, but I never knew which part of it. In SI I could see the reality in the community I had visited. I loved to go to MK, KontraS, etc. Everyone I met in LBHM made my struggle as a student even firmer because we owe much from Indonesian people. (Fildzah, FISIP UI, 2007)

Summer Internship could open your mind to see what is the actual condition of Indonesian people whose rights are deprived. Through SI we had the opportunity to empower those who are less-fortunate. (Joy, FH UNTAR, 2004)

It was a great time joining LBH Masyarakat in the Summer Internship. I learned a lot about human rights and visited institutions. I even had a presentation about domestic violence in front of mothers of victims of human rights violations. LBH Masyarakat trusted me to handle labour case too. People in LBH Masyarakat were like your own family, I had so much fun there. Wow, what a great experience. (Jesco, FH UI, 2006)

Send ur resume and CV to: contact@lbhmasyarakat.org no later than 12 June 2009, 5pm

--
LBH Masyarakat is the place where young, dynamic, and vibrant people like you can contribute to the enhancement of our society

LBH Masyarakat provides pro bono legal aid for disadvantaged and marginalised people as well as conduct community legal empowerment at the grass root level by providing legal and human rights education

Indonesia can learn from Korean uprising

2009-05-22T11:01:00.002+07:00

By Ricky Gunawan

Jakarta, Indonesia — In May 1980, hundreds of civilians were brutally killed by soldiers in the city of Gwangju, South Korea, after demonstrating against the military junta. Although the tragedy resulted in the deaths of hundreds of innocent people, it laid a solid foundation for Korean democracy and human rights.

There was political turmoil when President Park Chung-hee, after 18 years of authoritarian rule, was assassinated on Oct. 26, 1979. Choi Kyu-hah then became his successor. However, army General Chun Doo-hwan took over the government with his armed forces on Dec. 12, 1979, and declared martial law, marking the beginning of a long struggle for democracy.

The whole country was outraged. In the beginning of March 1980, students began to campaign for democracy and professors later joined their movement. Student unions were formed, which swept the country with a tide of nationwide demonstrations.

Demonstrators urged Chun to immediately revoke martial law and appealed for press freedoms. Finally, the series of activities culminated in an anti-martial law demonstration on May 15, 1980 in which about 100,000 students and ordinary citizens took part. Gwangju turned into a city of blood and death when Chun responded by sending out his soldiers to kill those who opposed him.

Eighteen years later, a similar uprising took place far away from South Korea, in Indonesia.

It was triggered by the killing of four students of Trisakti University on May 12, 1998. This tragedy fuelled atrocious riots in Jakarta and several major cities in Indonesia from May 13 to 15. Outraged students from all over the country then marched and protested against former Indonesian President Soeharto’s dictatorial regime, calling for reforms.

The demonstrations culminated on May 20 when thousands of students occupied the House of Representatives. They specifically demanded that Soeharto step down from power. On the morning of May 21, Soeharto resigned from office and handed over the administration to B.J. Habibie, his vice president. It was an historic moment of triumph for Indonesians.

This year marks the eleventh year of Indonesia’s reformasi, or reforms, which have somehow succeeded in reforming government institutions, legislative as well as judiciary bodies. As a result, Indonesia has several monitoring agencies to ensure that the policymaking process is transparent and accountable.

The establishment of the National Human Rights Commission, Judicial Commission, Police Commission and the Corruption Eradication Commission came to existence only after reforms were introduced. Also, the separation of police institutions from the military was one of the most important and positive achievements.

Both Indonesia and South Korea have passed from despotic regimes to democratic governments that uphold human dignity. However, if one compares the results of Indonesia’s reformasi with the Gwangju uprising, it is clear that South Korea gained much more than Indonesia.

Today, South Korea is highly regarded as a model of democracy in Asia and is spreading its spirit not only across Asia but also beyond. The international community has witnessed how South Korea has developed and is now enjoying its wealth.

Indonesia is regarded as the third largest democracy in the world. But there is nothing to be proud of in that because the phrase “largest democracy” refers to the population and not the structure of its democracy.

So what makes Indonesia end up on a different platform compared to South Korea, although both went through a similar type of political transformation?

South Korea overcame its past human rights abuses by convicting former presidents Chun Doo-hwan and Roh Tae-woo separately for mutiny, corruption and treason for their roles in the 1979 coup and the 1980 Gwangju carnage. In 1997, Chun was initially sentenced to death but later commuted to life imprisonment, while Roh's 22½-year jail sentence was reduced to 17 years on appeal. Both were pardoned a year later in a reconciliatory move initiated by former President Kim Dae Jung.

South Korea’s magic act of effectively dealing with perpetrators such as Chun and Roh is the spirit of Gwangju. Every May, the Gwangju uprising comes to life involving young people in its commemorative spirit. It embraces the nation and urges it to remember the past struggle and victory and prevent future abuses.

This type of a strong national aspiration for democracy has unfortunately not taken place in Indonesia. This will be possible only if Indonesia has the courage to bring to justice those responsible for past human rights violations.

Indonesia’s failure to break the chain of impunity creates a notion that human rights abuses are tolerated. Repeated impunity makes the criminal justice system vulnerable and if that happens, it is like a house of glass that can shatter sooner or later.

South Korea has shown us that the long struggle to achieve human rights and democracy is possible and achievable. It has succeeded in laying human rights at the heart of its democracy.

Indonesia has much to learn from the Gwangju uprising. However, it first must pass the test of bringing to justice those who violated human rights.

--

(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.)

Eleven years after the May riot: We have not forgotten

2009-05-12T12:31:00.000+07:00

by: Maesy Angelina and Ricky Gunawan
Published by The Jakarta Post, 12 May 2009

On this day (May 12) eleven years ago, Indonesia witnessed the killing of four Trisakti University students in an incident known ever since as the Trisakti Tragedy. This horrific tragedy was soon followed by an appalling riot.

A national and international audience watched the national tragedy on television, but the terror was much closer to Indonesian hearts. The killing triggered nationwide protests, which eventually forced Soeharto to step down from his 32-year dictatorial rule.

As Indonesians of Chinese descent that lived in a Chinese neighbourhood, we witnessed our parents and neighbours attempt to defend us by raising barricades around the complex as we felt the panic rising as the riots moved closer to our area. The fear was not just that our houses would be raided and scorched, but that Chinese women and girls would be brutally raped and that the men would be violently attacked.

The phone rang constantly – either from relatives asking whether we are safe or from neighbours warning that the rioters were nearing. We were lucky though, as the closest riot took place a few hundred meters away from where we lived. However, not all Indonesian Chinese citizens were that lucky.

Many people disappeared. Hundreds of houses and commercial buildings were burnt down and thousands of people lost their livelihoods. Worse, it has been estimated that thousands of people were killed during the three-day riot.

Hundreds of women were victims of extreme sexual violence. Those who were not directly affected suffered vicarious trauma and many fled Indonesia.

It took a while for the government to respond. It commissioned a fact finding team, which released its report in October 1998. The report acknowledged that the above atrocity took place, that a majority of victims were Chinese Indonesians and that the number of victims was not verifiable.

Both of us were teenagers back then, yet the tragedy has remained with us and to a certain degree influenced the paths we chose in our lives. Now that we are young adults who understand what human rights are, we want to ensure justice is served. We want the state provide reparations for the victims and see the perpetrators dealt with. Unfortunately, this has not happened yet.

Only two of the eight recommendations presented by the fact finding team have been addressed by the state. The ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and the Convention against Torture, as well as the passing of victims and witness protection law and the subsequent establishment of the agency are indeed progressive steps.

The support for the formation of the National Commission on Violence against Women is also appreciated. Even so, these things did not directly address the tragedy itself.

Direct recommendations, including a commission for the further investigation of the incident and the establishment of a database for victims have not been properly followed-up. Moreover, the two most crucial recommendations of prosecuting alleged perpetrators and providing remedy for victims have been blatantly ignored.

Some of the alleged perpetrators have been named in the report yet none of them have been effectively brought to the court. This clearly signifies the absence of the state’s good will to resolve human rights violations. If the state fails to comply with its obligations, it is crucial for society to take action.

While civil society has tirelessly urged the state to fulfill its obligations, it is essential public amnesia of the tragedy is actively prevented. Campaigns against amnesia on the issue are of the utmost importance. The fact that alleged perpetrators even gained significant support
in this year’s legislative election show that the public is either uninformed or does not care enough to ensure that those responsible are held accountable.

Initiatives such as the annual candlelight vigils or the weekly Silent Thursday (Kamisan), which are relentlessly attended by the families of the victims, are good examples of what have been done. But more importantly, advocacy for the inclusion of the May 1998 tragedy into the national educational curriculum is urgently needed to raise the awareness among younger generations.

We hope that voters do not to vote for alleged perpetrators who are running in the forthcoming presidential election. Casting your vote for such candidates would send a message to the state that the public does not consider the trial of alleged human rights violators important. Aside from condoning impunity, this also poses the threat of having human rights violation reoccurring in the future.

We consider this piece not mere opinion, but a principal message worthy of being spread by any means possible to as many people as possible. Those who survived, witnessed and remember the tragedy bear the responsibility to say never again – or nunca mas, as the Argentinians say.

We shall not forget, we shall not forgive — until justice is achieved.

--
Maesy Angelina is a feminist, youth activist and development worker.
Ricky Gunawan is a human rights activist and has an interest in the issues of civil and political rights.

Indonesia must combat AIDS ignorance

2009-05-06T17:38:00.001+07:00

By: Ricky Gunawan

Jakarta, Indonesia — Just a week ago a five-year-old boy living in Sipoholon village in North Sumatra, Indonesia, was expelled from his village by local residents for a simple and irrational reason: he has AIDS. This is understandable only if one examines how misinformation spreads among people who are not fully aware or appropriately informed about HIV/AIDS.

The child Rudy (not his real name) lost his mother in February and his father in December last year. Both died due to AIDS. He is now hospitalized in the Pirngadi General Hospital in Medan and cared for by his elder brother. Other family members are reluctant to touch him, as they are terrified of getting infected. Neighbors have excluded him from the community.

Rudy’s condition is deteriorating as he is also suffering from malnutrition. Due to these problems, his brother has dropped out of school to ensure that Rudy receives proper medication.

In Jakarta, Sally (not her real name) is HIV positive. Her husband died last August. She has a two-year-old son who does not have AIDS. According to Indonesian family law, her only son can be a beneficiary to the family’s wealth. However, family members from his father’s side decided against transferring any property to him due to his mother’s condition. In addition, they have expelled her and her son from their family.

According to the Medan Health Agency, a government institution under the Ministry of Health, only seven hospitals out of 65 in Medan, North Sumatra, are willing to provide medicines to people with AIDS. Surprisingly, those hospitals unwilling to treat AIDS patients are scared that patients might transmit the disease through the air.

It seems that even hospital workers do not know that HIV/AIDS is transmitted through unsafe sexual intercourse with an infected person, blood transfusions with contaminated blood, contaminated syringes, needles or other sharp instruments and from an infected mother to her child during pregnancy, childbirth and breastfeeding. It is not passed on through the air.

These tragedies remind us that people living with HIV/AIDS are still vulnerable to human rights violations such as discrimination as well as social exclusion. These heartbreaking stories show how hard it is for such people to live with dignity.

In Indonesia, it is widely known that people with AIDS face discrimination and are stigmatized by society. They are denied the right to the highest attainable standard of health, the right to work and to education. They are also frequently deprived of their right to protection and equal status before the law.

In Indonesia’s patriarchal culture, where women’s status is lower than that of men, women are more vulnerable and susceptible to serious human rights violations if they suffer from AIDS. Moreover, regardless of the source of infection, society tends to stigmatize them as leading transmitters of the disease.

Health centers with poor facilities are prone to prejudice and stigma against people with HIV/AIDS, particularly women. Social guilt and domestic violence add to the problems and often prevent women from seeking treatment.

At the 2006 High-Level Meeting on AIDS in New York, world leaders reaffirmed their commitment to fight the disease in a statement that said, “The full realization of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all is an essential element in the global response to the HIV/AIDS pandemic.” Yet, locally in Indonesia and globally elsewhere, this “essential element” remains deficient in the struggle against the disease.

In Indonesia, human rights have not been effectively merged with the fight against AIDS. The country’s national HIV program lacks adequate measures to combat discrimination, social exclusion and other human rights violations against those who suffer from this fatal disease.

Even human rights defenders in Indonesia seem to be confused and unable to comprehend the significance of HIV prevention and treatment programs. Such groups often ignore those who face the highest risk of getting HIV, such as drug addicts, sex workers and men who have sex with other men. These vulnerable people receive the least amount of interest when it comes to human rights advocacy.

The criminal-based approach implemented by the Indonesian government toward the worst affected has generated stigma and revulsion. It has dragged these people away from civil society so they have become a “hidden population,” without access to health services, preventive measures or treatment.

The numbers of people with HIV/AIDS in Indonesia are alarming. The Indonesian government has done much to tackle the problem and deserves appreciation. But further challenges need to be immediately addressed, like providing HIV treatment with adequate regard for human rights.

Health officers must be educated to erase the stigma and discrimination against HIV-positive persons. Criminal laws and drug policies must be reformed so that those who face the highest risk of HIV can receive medical treatment, rather than incarceration.

HIV/AIDS is not just a health issue. It is a human rights issue as well. Until the war is won against this disease, those who suffer from it must be treated with dignity and their human rights must be protected.

--

(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.)

Post-election prospects for human rights

2009-04-25T16:29:00.001+07:00

By Answer C. Styannes
Guest Commentary

Jakarta, Indonesia — Indonesians throughout the world cast their votes on April 9 to elect representatives to the country’s local and national legislative bodies, in hopes that the newly elected parliamentarians will contribute to the betterment of people’s lives and the protection of human rights.

Although the General Elections Commission has not yet published the official results, the outcome has been predicted by various “quick count” polls. These polls are somewhat surprising as they indicate there will be changes in the political configuration in the new House of Representatives.

Although the quick count results are not official, political parties are using them as their guide in building strategic coalitions for the presidential election in July.

According to the polls the Golkar Party, the winner in the 2004 election, got only around 14 percent of the vote, down from 21 percent, which means it stands to lose some of its seats in Parliament. The Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) is in the same boat. Its vote count is an estimated 14 percent, a decline of approximately 4 percent from the previous election. It is estimated that the combined parliamentary seats of both parties will not exceed 100 out of the 560 total seats.

This year’s election champion appears to be the Democratic Party (PD), with 20 percent of the vote, up from 7.5 percent in the last election. This will enable the party to have more than 100 legislative seats.

Apart from the top three, the political configuration in the upcoming Parliament will be influenced by six other parties – the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS), the National Mandate Party (PAN), the United Development Party (PPP), the National Awakening Party (PKB), the Great Indonesia Movement (Gerindra), and the People’s Conscience Party (Hanura), which is predicted to win between 2 and 5 percent of the vote. The latter two are new emerging parties.

How will the new political configuration affect the Parliament in shaping the Indonesian face of human rights? Or, in plain language, what good will they bring to the Indonesian people? A look at the track records of the various parties gives some idea.

During the past five years Parliament enacted several laws that contradicted human rights principles. One of the most controversial was the Pornography Law. Controversy raged even before the law was passed, with opponents arguing that it did not comply with legislative procedures, was vague, lacked philosophical reasoning and threatened pluralism.

Those who supported it argued that it was urgently needed to combat pornographic materials and strengthen the nation’s morals. The law was enacted after being endorsed by the major political parties, except the PDI-P and the Prosperous Peace Party (PDS). Among its supporters were the PKS and PD.

A few months prior to the enactment of the Pornography Law, another polemical law came into existence – the Information and Electronic Transaction Law – which was deemed an overzealous attempt to define criminal acts. Although this law was endorsed by all political parties, apparently none realized that provisions contained therein were contradictory to the freedom of expression as enshrined in the Constitution.

Interestingly, Prabowo Subianto, the patron of the new Gerindra party who has been accused of violating human rights himself, denounced the law for violating the freedom of expression.

Political parties have also failed to resolve the 2006 Lapindo mud flow issue – hot mud that spewed from a gas exploration rig in Sidoarjo, East Java, operated by oil and gas company PT Lapindo Brantas, which rendered the neighborhood uninhabitable. Almost three years later, the victims are still neglected by the government and the Parliament has taken no effective measures to resolve the problem. It appears that the parties’ failure to bring an end to this problem was not a consideration for voters in this election.

The shifts in the Parliament’s political configuration are not likely to bring any weighty changes, as the same parties will still largely occupy the seats.

Although it may lose some seats, the Golkar party is likely to continue to play a key role in the legislative process, as its members are experienced politicians. The PD, which strongly pushed the Pornography Law, will hold more seats than others. The PKS, which supported the Indonesian Ulama Council’s fatwa to prohibit nonvoting, especially in areas where qualified Muslim candidates were running, will slightly strengthen its position as it is predicted to gain more seats.

Other parties such as the PAN and PKB, deemed to have lost many seats in the current election, are not likely to advance the course of human rights in the future, as they have contributed little to their protection so far.

The Gerindra party’s position cannot be clearly forecast since it is a new party. During the campaign it constantly used the issues of economic, social and cultural rights to woo voters. However, its contribution to the enhancement of these rights in Indonesia remains unclear.

Furthermore, some Gerindra officials are allegedly involved in human rights violations. Prabowo Subianto has been accused of involvement in the kidnapping of activists in 1998 along with Kivlan Zen, who is also a member of Gerindra. Muchdi Purwopranyoto, the party’s deputy chairman, was allegedly involved in the murder of key Indonesian activist Munir Said Thalib, although the Supreme Court acquitted him. Retired General Wiranto, chairman of the Hanura party, was also allegedly involved in human rights violations during the Indonesian army’s withdrawal from the occupied territories of East Timor in 1999.

Given these facts, it is hard not to be pessimistic about the new Parliament’s concern for human rights. The only good news is that some human rights activists will potentially become legislative members. Hopefully their voices will not be silenced by the power of their political parties.

--

(Answer C. Styannes is a research associate at the Community Legal Aid Institute in Jakarta, Indonesia. She is currently studying in the Faculty of Law at the University of Indonesia, majoring in constitutional law. Her work focuses on issues of constitutional law, judicial and legislative reforms, labor laws, and civil and political rights).

Indonesia's appalling prison conditions

2009-04-13T15:06:00.000+07:00

By Christine Tambunan
Guest Commentary

John – not his real name – is a prisoner who was taken into custody by the Kebayoran Baru Sector Police in Jakarta, Indonesia, on March 12. But what makes him different from other detainees is that he is HIV positive. He has been held under conditions so miserable that they amount to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.

On March 23, his parents found out that John was suffering severely. He was sick, and had neither eaten nor drunk for a very long time. His face was pale and he couldn’t stop trembling.

John had been held at the police station from March 13, but due to his poor physical condition he was transferred to the Soekanto Police Hospital on March 25, after his family’s bail request had been rejected. In the hospital, he was placed in an isolation room in a building reserved for sick prisoners.

The ambience at the medical facility is more like a prison than a hospital, with patients kept in rooms behind iron bars and locked with huge padlocks. Apart from the smell of drugs, the place is permeated with the unpleasant odors of blood and feces.

The hospital wards contain four or five beds, fully occupied. There is a toilet in the room behind a low wall, with no door.

John was placed in one of three isolation rooms in the building. Normally, only mentally ill detainees are put in these rooms, which are only about two square meters in size. The room contained no bed or mattress. There was no proper light or ventilation, the walls were dirty and full of graffiti and the floor was covered in puddles and dirt. There was a toilet behind a low wall, and no clean water. Sanitation was appallingly lacking.

John was found lying in this room, staring blankly and unable to talk. He had received no medical treatment since his arrival. He would be seen by a doctor only after April 13, for the absurd reason that April 9 is a general election, April 10 is Good Friday, and April 11 and 12 are a weekend.

The poor treatment John received at the hands of the police is more or less typical for prisoners in Indonesia, especially those with HIV/AIDS.

The U.N. Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners state that sick detainees should be transferred to specialized institutions or to civil hospitals, where they should receive proper medical care and treatment from suitably trained personnel.

The rules require that a medical officer examine every prisoner as soon as possible and take all necessary measures to restore his or her health. The medical officer is responsible for the physical and mental health of the prisoners, and should daily see all sick prisoners and all who complain of illness.

The officer must also ensure the hygiene and cleanliness of the institution and the prisoners, the sanitation, heating, lighting and ventilation of the building, and the suitability and cleanliness of the prisoners' clothing and bedding.

Furthermore, the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime, in conjunction with the World Health Organization and UNAIDS, has recommended that Indonesia reform its correctional facilities and detention centers with regard to the health conditions of detainees. It stated that clinical services are an important component of programs to cope with HIV/AIDS and drug abuse.

In response to the recommendations, Indonesia issued a plan to strengthen the clinical services in prisons by 2010, in which the government promised to provide optimal services to every prisoner in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights treaties, as well as national regulations concerning the treatment of prisoners.

With so many laws regulating the right to health for the detainee or prisoner, how could there be such a place as the hospital to which John was sent? The head of the Health and Medical Center of the National Police General, Brigadier (Pol) Bambang, in an interview in 2005 stated that insufficient funds were the main problem. Also, apparently there is no law stipulating which institution is responsible for financing prisoners’ medical care. Therefore the costs have been taken from the police’s health and medical budget, placing serious financial restraints on services.

John’s condition is indeed grave and the care he is receiving is far from adequate. He is suffering truly inhuman treatment, incompatible with human rights principles. His sad story demonstrates the urgent need for an independent monitoring body to ensure that prisoners receive adequate care and treatment in the future.

--

(Christine Tambunan is a research associate at the Community Legal Aid Institute – LBH Masyarakat – in Jakarta, Indonesia. She is currently studying at the Faculty of Law University of Indonesia, majoring in legal practice. Her interests include issues of torture, monitoring detention, freedom of religion, social justice and development. LBH Masyarakat provides pro bono legal aid for disadvantaged and marginalized people.)

Human rights checklist for Indonesia

2009-03-26T12:21:00.001+07:00

by: Ricky Gunawan

Campaigning has begun for Indonesia’s general election on April 9. There are 44 political parties and literally hundreds of thousands of candidates competing for seats in the national and local legislative bodies.

From the main streets in big cities to alleys in small villages there is a profusion of banners, posters and flags. But what is lacking among the myriad campaign tools is a clear message as to each candidate’s platform, including their human rights agenda.

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s administration is in debt concerning human rights – there are so many human rights conventions that should have been ratified during his five years’ presidency, but some are overdue. For example, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court should have been ratified in 2008, but there is no visible sign that it will be ratified by Election Day. Ratifying this statute would send a strong signal that Yudhoyono is committed to preventing human rights violations.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, according to the Indonesian National Action Plan on Human Rights of 2004-2009, should have been ratified in 2007. Two years have passed and yet there is no sign that the convention will soon be ratified.

Another key human rights document which is in arrears is the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Indonesia was expected to ratify this in 2008. The ratification of this protocol would strengthen the struggle to erase torture in Indonesia.

Once the OPCAT is ratified, the government should establish a national preventive mechanism that provides for the regular examination of the treatment of detainees. This would be a good starting point for the government to guarantee that the practice of torture does not occur in the country.

On top of that, the long-awaited Indonesian Penal Code and Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code have not yet been enacted. It is odd that some unimportant laws have been hastily enacted by the Parliament and president, while laws that are essential to the protection of human rights have been on the waiting list for more than five years.

Apart from these conventions and laws that must be passed, there are many human rights violations that should be addressed by the government without further delay. Victims of past human rights violations – such as the 1965 massacre, the Tanjung Priok case in 1984, the Talangsari case in 1989, and the May riot and kidnapping and killings of activists in 1998 – have not been compensated. They have not been offered restitution, compensation, rehabilitation and guarantees that such acts will not reoccur.

Without belittling other human rights cases, there have been two major occurrences under the present administration – the assassination of human rights activist Munir Said Thalib and the Lapindo mud flow that displaced hundreds of families.

Munir was poisoned during a flight from Jakarta to Amsterdam on the national airline, Garuda Indonesia Airways. The suspect, an off-duty pilot named Pollycarpus Budihari Priyanto, was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment while the alleged instigator, Muchdi Purwopranjono, was acquitted. Anyone who has followed this case is still wondering who ordered Pollycarpus to kill Munir.

The Lapindo mud flow case is entering its third anniversary this year. The Lapindo Brantas Corporation – whose drilling for gas set off a huge flow of mud that forced thousands of people to flee their homes – has repeatedly failed to compensate the victims. The government has not succeeded in enforcing the law and prosecuting those responsible.

Yudhoyono is likely to be running for another term as president, backed by the Democratic Party. Many victims of human rights abuses feel he has failed to keep his promise to resolve their cases. He still has about six months to demonstrate his determination to pay his human rights debts and win the heart of the Indonesian people. If he fails to do so, he will not gain votes from victims of human rights violations all over Indonesia.

This basic tenet is also applicable to other presidential candidates, political parties, legislative candidates and others who are bidding for positions in the forthcoming administration. Failure to take account of and prioritize these important issues will result in zero votes from the human rights communities.

In brief, those who don’t have a visible human rights agenda, the capacity to resolve past human rights violations, and an eagerness to promote and protect human rights, should not be elected.

But what if none of the political actors include this human rights checklist on their agenda? Will the Indonesian people vote for nothing?

--

(Ricky Gunawan is program director of the Community Legal Aid Institute (LBH Masyarakat) based in Jakarta, Indonesia. He holds a law degree from the Faculty of Law University of Indonesia and is a human rights activist focusing on issues related to civil and political rights, democracy, social and international relations. LBH Masyarakat provides pro bono legal aid for disadvantaged and marginalized people, empowering those at grassroots level through legal aid and human rights education.)

To Vote or Not to Vote

2009-03-16T11:14:00.002+07:00

On Sunday cloudy afternoon, I found a campaign brochure lying on top of a small table located in my garage. This makes me wanted to write down a short yet low-class political analysis of the recent campaign period.

The brochure which I noticed was dropped few days ago is a brochure of a candidate of parliamentarian or better known as caleg from a nationalist-democrat party. It’s neither PDIP nor Democrat, FYI. At first, I thought it would be useless to read that brochure given that all kind of caleg’s campaigns are all the same. It’s made from a thin-murky recycle paper with colourful cover so that people who read it can clearly see her face. My first cynical impression was that “is she an Indonesian or Dutch?” because there are so many red-white-blue colours which I believe associates with the Netherlands’s national flag. Well, then I opened up the brochure, and there is this box with quotation from Mohammad Hatta reading, in essence, that: choosing is not an obligation, rather, it’s a right; right to self-determination as a citizen, and by which we are also responsible of our fate as a nation whether it will be good or bad. It’s good to put quotes from Hatta, however, my second cynical impression was: so what?

On the first page, there is a brief history of the respective caleg, saying that she has three kids; all of them are graduates from the US. And oo, mind to notice that her three children are graduates from “respectable universities at the US.”

The following paragraphs tell about her brief-life-experience from nothing to something. She also has already written two books; sharing her accomplishment to those who want to follow her path as a successful entrepreneur. And also she mentions that she likes to cook for her family and swimming as her hobby. She enjoys variety of arts and culture from various regions in Indonesia. Seems a typical of nationalist-democrat huh?

At the end of this first page, she writes that for someone like her who has a stabile financial condition, decided to go with the politics is solely on a purpose to actively contribute to Indonesia, with no intention to obtain some profit back.

On the second page, she puts her vision and mission with two big photos of her activities. There is no something new from her vision, still the old same crappy words dreaming of a better Indonesia. As for her mission are as follows: to allocate education budget in line with the Constitution, minimum 20%; to establish an adequate condition for teacher; and to ensure gender equality as well as an education which is free from all kinds of discriminatory policy. Her three missions, to be honest, are also the same old crappy words. Come on, I can do better than her. If I am a caleg too I can write down my mission as follows: to promote the Rule of Law; to uphold the law and human rights; to ensure the prosperity of teacher, labour, peasant, and farmer; to provide a six-year-free-education; to create ten million of job opportunity; to enhance poor people; and the bre and the bro and the bru. See, I am so much better than her. But that’s not the issue. What I am trying to say is that you caleg, please give us, your voter, at least three reasons why we should vote for you on April 9, and how can you implement or realise your mission, your god damn programme?

At the time I was writing this post, there was a campaign advertorial aired in the TV by one small-medium political party. The message is still the same: Free education, job opportunity, “bridge of change”. But the big question of all this shitty campaign is never change: How can you do that? What are the steps you are going to take in order to realise a free education, for example? Etc.

We can find hundreds of caleg’s faces, handsome, beautiful, young, old, fat, slim, Moslem, non-Moslem, look-smart, look-like-an-idiot, all over the place. But can we find one political campaign which explains to us how they will breakdown their programme within five years or so?

If there is, at least, one caleg or political party that can elaborate its programme properly, it should be made public, because if not, it would be dicey for us to vote merely based on the reason because we often know or heard their name/face. This is not a beauty contest, for sure!

PS: The opinions expressed here are my personal views.

ASIA: Ethical issues relating to the use of mobile phones by judicial officers

2009-03-11T16:38:00.000+07:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AHRC-STM-055-2009
March 11, 2009

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission

ASIA: Ethical issues relating to the use of mobile phones by judicial officers

A core element in any judicial function is impartiality. The common saying is that judges need not only to be impartial but need to be seen to be impartial. Over the centuries codes of conduct have been developed which places limits on the judicial officers contacts so as to ensure that parties to cases before them will not approach the judges directly or indirectly when the cases are before a judge. However, with the changes in communication there are now many complaints of judges having been contacted by various means although there may not be direct physical contact between a judge and a party to a case or the agents of such a party. The widespread use of mobile telephones is being perceived often as breaking the ground rules relating to the impartiality of judges.

The following types of contact have often been complained of, more so privately than in public, because public complaints can carry sanctions on the basis of contempt of court and other kinds of punishments:

Contacts by politicians at high government levels or local politicians regarding parties that they have an interest in, either wanting favours or punishment depending on the nature of their interest.
Contacts of lower ranking judges by judges from above who may directly interfere or make such inquiries as to indicate their interest.
Contacts by various other government officers, particularly police officers who may have some interest in a case either due to bribery or other reasons.
Contacts by civilians interested in a particular party for reasons of their own.
Sometimes even the parties to the conflict themselves through some form of direct access or through attorneys who may claim special relationships with the judges.
Under normal circumstances there used to be restrictions which are practiced almost universally by the judges themselves or anyway, imposed on judges in order to maintain their impartiality as well as ensuring respect for the judiciary. For example, if a politician were to contact any judge for whatever reason it would be done through the proper hierarchy and records of such contacts would be maintained. Proper protocol would require anything other than formal meetings, for example at public gatherings where judges are expected to attend, would exclude any form of discussion on the cases before them. The keeping of records of any other form of meeting safeguards the judges from being approached by politicians for improper reasons. Where the names of persons who request a meeting with a judges is recorded in proper registers, which are, in fact, public documents this acts as a deterrent for any unscrupulous politician from approaching judges for improper reasons. It is of course presumed that there will not be anything other than an official meeting. Judges will not hold private meetings with politicians. Even in the case of using official telephones normally, judges are expected to make a proper record of any contacts with a politician or an agent of a politician. Through such practices a record is kept of whatever transactions that might occur and this also protects the judges themselves from baseless allegations. However, with the use of personal mobile phones such public records are not maintained and therefore it is more open for unscrupulous politicians to contact judges without making a physical appearance and therefore without making some kind of physical impression of an improper contact with a judge.

The above considerations also apply to the cases of contact between any member of the higher judiciary and the lower ranking judiciary. All contacts other than those which are entirely personal would be done through proper channels with proper records at all levels. However, with easy access to communications when physical contact is no longer needed there is always the possibility of abuse. In some countries some judges of the lower courts who have resented contact by officers of the higher judiciary for improper reasons have kept notes in their diaries, even making journal entries about such contacts. This has been done in order to ensure some form of evidence in case judges are subjected to some kind of harassment if they have failed to comply with direct or indirect requests communicated to them by a member of the higher judiciary. Members of the higher judiciary often hold positions also in disciplinary bodies regarding the judges of lower courts and therefore there is always the fear of being manipulated into some kind of fabricated allegations if they do not comply with the requests of those who hold higher positions. The same difficulties exist in making records regarding calls made to private mobile telephones. On other occasions when a judge may himself be open to such improper approach, private mobile telephones provide an easy avenue for such discourse without this being noticed by others. (Of course it is possible to argue that even calls to private mobile telephones can be traced through telephone records. This can happen only if there are serious inquiries which takes place, if at all, only when an allegation is established already to a higher degree). With the earlier forms of recording of physical contacts it is possible to prove at an early stage that a contact has been made which would create the need for some form of an explanation on the part of the judicial officer as for what purpose such a contact was made.

Even more problems are created through contacts between the police and the judges, particularly in many countries where the police hold a predominant role in criminal justice administration and they are also very frequently accused of trying to subvert justice for their own purposes. Normal contacts between the police and the judges are maintained by way of official records. Criminal procedures codes and the police departmental codes often lay down the type of contacts and the type of records that need to be maintained on all such occasions. However, such record keeping applies only where physical contact is needed or where contacts are made officially. When the contact is made through mobile phones and other means such records are not maintained.

The meeting of a party to a case with a judge would be considered a scandal under normal circumstances. The judges maintain protocol in a way to avoid parties to a case contacting them. Even where a lawyer is to contact a judge relating to a case this would normally be done only in the presence of the lawyer for the other party. Besides this the exact content of what is discussed would be made in proper records, often in the case file itself. However, with the capacity to make contact without having a direct physical presence far more avenues have been opened for unscrupulous litigants, their lawyers and the judges who are open to such approach in order to exploit new avenues for personal benefit.

As a result of the perception of contacts being made by one or the other party to a judge by any of the means mentioned above or by any other means, there are often instances where there are allegations or at least suspicions of prearrangements about the outcome of cases. The fear of such prearrangements has increased widely in recent years in many countries. With that there is also the temptation not only for one party but also for the other to try to exploit the situation for their benefit or at least to get even. Thus, a psychological atmosphere of approaching courts has begun to change in many places. Lawyers from several countries cite examples of their clients wanting to find out what links the lawyers have with a particular judge hearing a case. Admonitions of lawyers to such clients and assertions of professional conduct on their part sometimes lead clients to look elsewhere.

The most important consequence of all this is the loss of belief in the trial at open court. The concept of trial before a court has been developed over centuries in order to ensure that trials are decided by evidence lead before court which is open to the public. Judges arrived at decisions only on the basis of evidence which is given openly and which is known to anyone who has attended the court during the trial. The perception of prearranged outcomes of disputes thus, fundamentally challenges the very notion of fair trial.

In many countries in the Asian region trial by jury is not a normal practice. Trials are normally heard by a single judge. Therefore there is more the possibility for a judge to be contacted improperly by parties or their agents. This has created a serious crisis in the confidence of the judicial process. Among those who complain most are also many lawyers who feel that their unwavering commitment to proper professional conduct has disadvantaged them in the present circumstances.

Therefore there is a need for public debate and discussion on bringing about codes of conduct relating to the prevention of improper contacts particularly through mobile telephones and other forms of modern communication.

# # #

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.

A President, a Boy and Genocide

2009-03-05T13:26:00.000+07:00

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
March 4, 2009

When the International Criminal Court issued its arrest warrant for Sudan’s president on Wednesday, an 8-year-old boy named Bakit Musa would have clapped — if only he still had hands.

I met Bakit a couple of weeks ago in eastern Chad, near the border of Darfur. He and two friends had found a grenade left behind in fighting after Sudan’s president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, armed and dispatched a proxy force to wreak havoc in Chad. The boys played with the grenade, and it exploded, taking both of Bakit’s hands, one eye and the skin on half of his face.

So Bakit became, inadvertently, one more casualty of the havoc and brutality that President Bashir has unleashed in Sudan and surrounding countries. Other children laugh at him, so Bakit plays by himself in the dust on the outskirts of a huge camp for people displaced by Mr. Bashir.

One of Mr. Bashir’s first actions after the arrest warrant was to undertake yet another crime against humanity: He expelled major international aid groups, including the International Rescue Committee and the Dutch section of Doctors Without Borders. In effect, he is now preparing to massacre the Darfuri people in still another way, for Darfuris are living in camps and depend on aid workers for food, water and health care — even as deadly meningitis has broken out in one of the camps.

“The consequences are going to be dire,” notes George Rupp, the president of the International Rescue Committee, on which 1.75 million Sudanese depend for water, sanitation, education and health care. “If Sudan persists in this decision, it’s difficult to see how the outcome will be anything other than serious suffering and death for hundreds of thousands of people.”

Mr. Bashir is now testing the international community, and President Obama and other world leaders must respond immediately and decisively, in conjunction with as many non-Western nations as possible.

The first step is to insist that aid groups be reinstated immediately to prevent this genocide in slow motion. A second step could be to destroy one of Mr. Bashir’s military planes with a warning that if he takes his genocide to a new level by depriving Darfuris of food and medical care, he will lose the rest of his air force.

Yet it’s also important to understand that Mr. Bashir engages in a consistent pattern of destruction and slaughter, not because he is a sadistic monster, but because he is a calculating pragmatist.

Mr. Bashir saw early in his career that atrocities can constitute an effective policy — shooting villagers and gang-raping women is quite useful to depopulate rural areas, thereby denying support to rebel militias. Best of all from Mr. Bashir’s perspective, there’s no downside as long as the international community averts its eyes or backs down. His aim in expelling aid groups is apparently to divide the international community and to try to force the United Nations Security Council to delay International Criminal Court proceedings.

Mr. Bashir assumes, not unreasonably, that he can get away with it. That culture of impunity is what the I.C.C. arrest warrant may begin to change. It is one way of attaching costs to systematic brutality, and thus to change the calculations of pragmatists like Mr. Bashir in Sudan and elsewhere.

So now President Obama and other leaders — hello, Gordon Brown, you there? — need to back up the I.C.C. arrest warrant and push to reverse the expulsion of aid workers, while working with Arab countries like Qatar that want to help.

Intriguingly, Khartoum is full of rumors that the handful of leaders just below Mr. Bashir are thinking of throwing him overboard to save themselves. We can encourage that by making it clear that Sudan will pay a price if the killings continue.

We also must call on China to stop training the military pilots used by Mr. Bashir to strafe villages, and to stop supplying weapons and spare parts to Sudan as long as Mr. Bashir is in office. There are precedents: China was a strong supporter of the Khmer Rouge and of Slobodan Milosevic, but distanced itself from both when they came under the spotlight for genocide.

President Obama could also announce that from now on, when Sudan violates the U.N. ban on offensive military flights in Darfur by bombing villagers, we will afterward destroy a Sudanese military aircraft on the ground in Darfur (we can do this from our base in Djibouti in the Horn of Africa).

I won’t pretend that we can end all genocides. But we can attach enough costs so that it is no longer in a leader’s interests to dispatch militias to throw babies into bonfires. The I.C.C. arrest warrant marks a wobbly step toward accountability and deterrence.

So let’s applaud the I.C.C.’s arrest warrant, on behalf of children like Bakit who can’t.

•

Sisters, Victims, Heroes

2009-02-23T13:51:00.001+07:00

by: Nicholas D. Kristof

So I’m bunking with George Clooney in a little room in a guest house here in eastern Chad, near Darfur in Sudan. We each have a mattress on the floor, the “shower” is a rubber hose that doesn’t actually produce any water, and George’s side of the room has a big splotch of something that sure looks like blood.

He’s using me to learn more about Darfur, and I’m using him to ease you into a column about genocide. Manipulation all around — and, luckily, neither of us snores. (But stay tuned to this series for salacious gossip if he talks in his sleep.)

The slaughter in Darfur has continued for six years largely because world leaders have been complacent and preoccupied. In the coming weeks, the International Criminal Court is expected to issue an arrest warrant for Sudan’s president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, for orchestrating the killings — and that will give the world a new opportunity to end the slaughter.

But to seize that opportunity, world leaders will have to summon some of the same moral courage that Darfuris show all the time.

Take Suad Ahmed, who is in the pantheon of my personal heroes. I introduced her to George in her little thatch hut.

Suad, 27, fled from Darfur to a refugee camp in Chad five years ago with her husband and beloved younger sister, Halima, who is now 12 — if she is still alive.

Then Sudan dispatched its janjaweed militias into Chad to slaughter members of black African tribes — applying to eastern Chad the same genocidal policies that had already gutted Darfur.

Shortly before I met Suad two years ago, she was out gathering firewood with Halima. A group of janjaweed fired into the air and yelled at them to stop.

Suad, who was married with two children and another on the way, ordered Halima to run back to camp. Then Suad made a decoy of herself and ran loudly in the opposite direction, making sure that the janjaweed saw her.

That night, after the janjaweed had left, the men from the camp found Suad semiconscious in the bush, brutally beaten and raped.

Suad refused medical treatment, for fear that word would get out that she had been raped, and she didn’t even tell her husband, instead saying that she had been robbed and beaten. Yet she revealed the full story to me and allowed me to use her name.

I grilled her to make absolutely sure she understood the dangers of publicity — from stigma and revenge — and finally asked her why she was willing to assume the risks. She replied simply, “This is the only way I have to fight genocide.”

Ever since, in a world that has proved so craven in the face of Sudan’s genocide, Suad’s courage has haunted me. Thus on this trip I tracked her down and introduced her to George and to Ann Curry of NBC News, who for years has borne powerful witness to the madness of Darfur.

Alas, Suad’s latest news isn’t good. Her back, injured in the beating, still pains her. She doesn’t dare go outside the camp to get firewood, so she must buy wood, which leaves the family poor and short of food. Her baby, Abdel Malik, whom she was carrying at the time of the rape, is one and a half years old and was just hospitalized for malnutrition.

The most heartbreaking news concerns Halima. Ten months ago, Halima decided to go back to Darfur to the camp where her parents were living. They had sent messages that they were sick, and that there were too many soldiers around for them to escape to Chad.

So Halima, at age 11, resolved to walk back through janjaweed lines into Darfur to rescue her parents and bring them to safety.

The girl disappeared into the desert.

“I haven’t heard from her since,” Suad said grimly. “I don’t know if she got there, or if she was killed on route.” Suad has spent a fair amount of money trying to call people in the camp to find out news of her sister and parents, but she has found out nothing. We tried with our satellite phones and couldn’t get through either.

This is my 10th trip to Darfur and the area around it, and people always ask how reporters and aid workers keep their sanity among such horrors. Yet the truth is that genocide spotlights not only the worst of humanity, but also the best — the courage and altruism of people like Suad and Halima.

So the most indelible memories I will take back from the region aren’t from my famous roommate on the mattress beside me, but from uncommon heroes like Suad and Halima. We can learn so much from them.

[ALRC Joint Statement] ASIA: Human right to peace versus racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and other forms of intolerance

2009-02-23T13:39:00.000+07:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 23, 2009
ALRC-CWS-10-09-2009

Language(s): English only

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Tenth session

A joint written statement submitted by the Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC) and 163 NGOs (134 with ECOSOC status and 30 without this status)

ASIA: Human right to peace versus racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and other forms of intolerance1

Joint written statement submitted by International Alliance of Women (IAW), Commission of the Churches on International Affairs of the World Council of Churches (CCIA/WCC), Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University (BKWSU), International Association of Soldiers for Peace, Zonta International, International Federation of Settlements and Neighbourhood Centres (IFS), International Council Of Women (ICW-CIF), International Women's Tribune Centre, International Federation of Business and Professional Women (BPWI), International Youth and Student Movement for the United Nations (ISMUN), International Association for Religious Freedom (IARF), Soroptimist International (SI), World Movement of Mothers, Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC), Women’s Federation for World Peace International (WFWPI), CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, World Vision International (WVI), Buddha’s Light International Association, International Council on Social Welfare (ICSW), World Young Women’s Christian Association (World YWCA), Association for Progressive Communications (APC), nongovernmental organizations in general consultative status

Conscience and Peace Tax International (CPTI), Dominicans for Justice and Peace (Order of Preachers), Federación de Asociaciones de Defensa y Promoción de los Derechos Humanos (España), Interfaith International, Pax Romana (International Catholic Movement for Intellectual and Cultural Affairs and International Movement of Catholic Students), Temple of Understanding (TOU), Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), Women’s World Summit Foundation (WWSF), International Society for Human Rights (ISHR), International Federation of University Women (IFUW), Femmes Africa Solidarité (FAS), Lutheran World Federation (LWF), Worldwide Organization for Women (WOW), Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), Union of Arab Jurists, Rencontre Africaine pour la Defense des Droits de l’Homme (RADDHO), Foundation for the Refugee Education Trust (RET), International Bridges to Justice (IBJ), Inter-African Committee on Traditional Practices Affecting the Health of Women and Children (IAC), American Association of Jurists (AAJ), Lassalle-Institut, UNESCO Centre of Catalonia, Anti-Racism Information Service (ARIS), Colombian Commission of Jurists (CCJ), Pan Pacific and South East Asia Women’s Association (PPSEAWA), Ius Primi Viri International Association (IPV), Permanent Assembly for Human Rights (APDH), International Movement for Fraternal Union Among Races and Peoples (UFER), Women's International Zionist Organization (WIZO), International Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA), International Federation of Women in Legal Careers (FIFCJ), Canadian Federation of University Women (CFUW), International Association for Women's Mental Health (IAWMH), European Union of Women (EUW), European Women’s Lobby, International Women’s Year Liaison Group (IWYLG), African Services Committee, Inc., International Federation of Family Associations of Missing Persons from Armed Conflict (IFFAMPAC), Institute of International Social Development, African Action on AIDS, International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (ISTSS), Lama Gangchen World Peace Foundation (LGWPF), Pax Christi International, International Catholic Peace Movement, Tandem Project, Al-Hakim Foundation, Canadian Voice of Women for Peace (VOW), Organization for Defending Victims of Violence (ODVV), Solar Cookers International (SCI), Medical Women’s International Association (MWIA), World Federation for Mental Health (WFMH), United States Federation for Middle East Peace, Susila Dharma International Association, Network Women in Development Europe, Nord -Sud XXI, General Arab Women Federation , United Towns Agency for North-South Cooperation, World Association for the School as an Instrument of Peace, International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Latin American Committee for the Defense of Women’s Rights (CLADEM), African Women’s Association (AWA), United Nations Association of Spain (ANUE), Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers, Maryknoll Sisters of St. Dominic, International Forum for Child Welfare, BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residence and Refugee Rights, Virginia Gildersleeve International Fund, African Commission on Health and Human Rights Promoters, Arab Lawyers Union, General Federation of Iraqi Women, Wittenberg Center for Alternative Resources, International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW), International Association of Peace Messenger Cities (IAPMC), Interreligious and International Federation for World Peace (IIFWP), Committee for Hispanic Children and Families, Peace Boat, Prison Fellowship International (PFI), MYOCHIKAI (Arigatou Foundation), International Association of Charities (AIC), National Council of Women of Great Britain (NCWGB), Indian Movement Tupaj Amaru (MITA), Peter Hesse Stiftung Foundation, The Salvation Army, Action Internationale pour la Paix et Developpement dans la Region des Grands Lacs (AIPD), Federation for Peace and Conciliation (FPC), National Council of Women of the United States of America, Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS), Comite International pour le Respect et l’Application de la Charte Africaine des Droits de l’Homme et des Peuples (CIRAC), World for the World Organisation (WFWO), Education International (EI), Universal Esperanto Association, National Council of German Women’s Organisations, Associated Country Women of the World (ACWW), International Grail, Council of American Overseas Research Centres, ICVolunteers (ICV), International Association for the Defence of Religious Liberty (AIDLR), Zenab for Women in Development, The Grail, nongovernmental organizations in special consultative status,

Institute for Planetary Synthesis (IPS), International Peace Bureau (IPB), UNESCO Centre Basque Country (UNESCO ETXEA), 3HO Foundation (Healthy, Happy, Holy Organization), Dzeno Association, Country Women Association of Nigeria (COWAN), International Movement against all Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR), Association Nigeriènne des Scouts de l’Environnment (ANSEN), International Peace Research Association (IPRA), International Association of Gerontology and Geriatrics (IAGG), Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD), International Progress Organization (IPO), non-governmental organizations on the Roster

----------

I

The Spanish Society for International Human Rights Law (SSIHRL) welcomed on 30 October 2006 the adoption of the Luarca Declaration on the Human Right to Peace. It was drafted by a Committee of independent experts and it was the culmination of a process of extensive consultations with Spanish civil society, with the support of the Catalonian Agency for Cooperation to Development.

Following the adoption of the Luarca Declaration, the SSIHRL has continued in all regions of the world the process of consultations with civil society through the organization of conferences and expert meetings on the human right to peace2 . In 2010 the SSIHRL will call for a World NGO Conference to analyze and incorporate inputs received from international civil society and to adopt the final text of the Universal Declaration on the Human Right to Peace which will be submitted to the HR Council, urging its Member States to initiate the official codification of the human right to peace.

On 15 March 2007 the Luarca Declaration on the Human Right to Peace was presented to the fourth session of the Human Rights Council in an oral statement delivered by UNESCO Etxea on behalf of SSIHRL. Since then several parallel meetings have taken place at the Palais de Nations in Geneva during the following sessions of the Human Rights Council3 .

II

In recent years the reported acts of incitement to racial, ethnic and religious hatred have dramatically increased in the world. In all Continents vulnerable communities, especially members of minorities, are victims of public utterances calling for intolerance and discrimination and, in some cases, physical and psychological violence. They are often associated with certain types of crimes, such as drug trafficking, illegal immigration, pick-pocketing or shoplifting4 . Furthermore, as a result of the overriding focus on prioritizing security over the international human rights law in the prevailing political context, treatment of immigrants, refugees and asylum-seekers is characterized by suspicion that they may be dangerous5 .

As recognized by the former Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, discrimination, racism and xenophobia constitute by definition a rejection of or a failure to, recognize differences 6. Combating racism requires not only identifying its manifestations and expressions but also analysing and better understanding its underlying causes. The resurgence of the racist and xenophobic culture and mentality can feed and foster a dynamic of conflicts between cultures and civilizations, which constitutes the most serious threat to world peace7 and therefore to the human right to peace.

The lack of recognition of multiculturalism is an underlying factor of racism and the central issue in present-day crisis in most of the regions of the world. Although societies are the outcome of lengthy historical processes involving contact between peoples, cultures and religions, the central problem of most modern societies lies in the fundamental contradiction between the framework of the nation state, the expression of an exclusive national identity and the dynamic of multiculturalization8 .

The identity crisis is developed around the dilemma of whether to preserve an ethnic centred identity or to recognize the reality of cultural and inter-religious pluralism. Identity should be not an obstacle to, but a factor that enables dialogue, mutual understanding, rediscovery of the proximity of the other and pluralism. The concept of diversity should not be interpreted as radical difference, inequality and discrimination against the other, but as a vital element enabling to build a new social vision based on the dialectic of unity, diversity and promotion of the value of cross fertilization between cultures, peoples, ethnic identities and religions9 . This new social vision should lead to peace.

The concept of clash of civilizations, cultures, ethnic identities or religions has been the new front of the cold war theorists. This ideology has not only shaped the world view of a growing number of influential politicians and media leaders, but it also became a new paradigm for some intellectuals and academics. The ideological paradigm was based both on the use of the defence of national identity and security10 , and the creation of an enemy in the process of the construction of a national identity.

In their contributions to the Durban Review Conference the African Group stated that, against the culture of fear, is necessary to promote dialogue, peace, cultural diversity and mutual understanding 11; and the Latin American and Caribbean Group concluded that the promotion of tolerance and cross-cultural values is closely linked to the spirit of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action12 .

Educational policies and programmes should be orientated to promote peace, respect for cultural diversity and universal human rights. Furthermore, as indicated by Intergovernmental Working Group on the Effective Implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, human rights education should play a prominent role in combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and promoting a culture of peace and dialogue13 .

Nevertheless, racial discrimination and xenophobia will rise dramatically up in our societies unless States would adopt effective measures designed to correct persistent forms of structural racism and to eradicate social inequalities which represent the legacy of slavery and colonialism, and feed poverty.

Since peoples of the world are entitled to equality of opportunity and the enjoyment of their human rights, including the right to development and the right to live in peace 14, actions undertaken by Governments aimed at eliminating racism should include economic and social measures in support of peoples marginalized by racial discrimination. As emphasized by the Asian Group “poverty, underdevelopment, marginalization, social exclusion and economic disparities are closely associated with racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and contribute to the persistence of racist attitudes and practices which in turn generate more poverty”15 .

Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance manifest themselves in an aggravated and differentiated manner for women and girls "causing their living standards to deteriorate, generating multiple forms of violence and limiting or denying them the exercise of their human rights ..."16 . As we are approaching the 15th Anniversary of the Beijing Declaration and Programme of Action, it should be reaffirmed that all forms of gender-based violence should be eliminated. Moreover, gender-based violence, such as battering and other domestic violence, sexual abuse, sexual slavery and exploitation, and international trafficking in women and children, prostitution, pornography and sexual harassment, are often aggravated by or resulting of racism, cultural prejudice, racial discrimination and xenophobia17 . The Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, as well as its Committee’s General Recommendations, in particular GR 19 (1992) on violence against women, including older and inmigrant women, should also be stressed.

A transformed partnership based on equality between women and men is needed as a condition for people-centred sustainable development and world peace18 . In addition, the role played by men and boys in advancing gender equality is vital, as recognized both by the Beijing Declaration and the Commission on the Status of Women19 . Therefore leaders at all levels, as well as parents and educators, should promote positive male role models that facilitate boys to become gender-sensitive adults and enable men to support, promote and respect women’s rights20 .

Discrimination and racism is an extended phenomenon affecting people of African descent and indigenous peoples. Although some legal and administrative measures have been adopted to promote, enhance and strengthen the ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic identities, participation of minority groups at the political, economic, social and cultural spheres, continues to be irrelevant in many countries were racial policies based on superiority, xenophobia or discrimination are prevailing21 . This is in flagrant violation of the Charter of the United Nations and relevant international human rights treaties. To efficiently implement main human rights standards, States should promote dialogue among cultures and religions, enhance respect for the dignity of peoples of diverse racial origin and belief, including indigenous peoples and people of African descent; and finally, promote the human right to peace.

As requested in Article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination 22, States Parties should adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incitement to, or acts of, racial discrimination. In addition, the Human Rights Committee stated in its General Comment 18 23that the principle of non-discrimination, together with equality before the law and equal protection of the law without any discrimination, constitute a basic and general principle relating to the protection of human rights.

In addition, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination requested States to take all necessary measures in order to avoid any form of discrimination against immigrants, in particular asylum-seekers of Roma origin 24 and undocumented non-citizens25 .

As stated in paragraph 17 of the Preamble of the Luarca Declaration on the Human Right to Peace, adopted on 30 October 2006,

"Affirming that the effectiveness of the right to peace will not be achieved without the realisation of equal rights for men and women and the respect for their difference, without respect for the various cultural values and religious beliefs compatible with human rights, and without the eradication of racism, xenophobia and the contemporary forms of racial discrimination"

CONCLUSIONS

We therefore urge the Human Rights Council to further promote the rights of minority groups, African descent people and indigenous peoples suffering from racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia, to social justice and equity, non-discrimination and gender equality, respect of all human rights, cultural diversity, linguistic rights, solidarity, peace and friendly relations among all nations, races, ethnicities or religions.

We recommend that the Human Rights Committee update its General Comment 11 (1983) on Article 20 of ICCPR (war propaganda should be prohibited by law) in order to address current challenges.

We also request the Human Rights Council to remind Member States to be aware of the existing links between efforts to combat racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia, and the construction of democratic, interactive and egalitarian multiculturalism, as well as the promotion of dialogue among cultures, civilizations and religions, as a means to achieve the human right to peace and to combat racial and religious intolerance.

We further request Member States to take necessary measures aiming at the realization of fundamental rights of minority groups, as contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, the Convention on the Political Rights of Women, the Durban Declaration and Plan of Action, the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, the UNESCO Convention against Discrimination in Education, and the ILO Convention No. 111 on non-discrimination in access to employment and occupation.

The Human Rights Council should request the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to analyse the issue of multiple discrimination and aggravated forms of discrimination with a racial component, and to adopt general recommendations on the methodology for countering this phenomenon.

We also urge Member States to recognize the need to eliminate discrimination against women as requested by the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women and the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action of the Fourth World Conference on Women of 1995; to promote women participation at all levels of decision-making on peace and security issues, as provided for in Security Council Resolution 1325; and to foster the role of men and boys in advancing gender equality.

We further recommend that a Draft Declaration on human rights education and training be proposed by the Advisory Committee to define positive obligations of States regarding the incorporation of human rights education in their education systems, including private, religious, and military schools; to ensure access to a continuous life-long education at all ages in a society marked by professional mobility and migration; and to include the right to education on peace and human rights.

Finally, we invite all international actors to fully participate at the Workshop on the right of peoples to peace, to be organized by the High Commissioner in April 2009 pursuant to Council resolution 8/9, adopted on 18 June 2008.

-----

Footnotes:

1 The following NGO and peace research centres and foundations without consultative status with ECOSOC are also supporting the statement: Alberico Gentili International Studies of the University of Jaen, Foundation Research Seminar on Peace (Zaragoza), Association for Peace Research Gogoratuz-Gernika, Association of Trebolgar Coviello, Culture of Peace Foundation, Galician Seminar of Education on Peace, Spanish League for Human Rights, the Catalan Network of Organizations on the Human Right to Peace (Catalan Federation of NGOs for human rights, Catalan Federation of NGOs for Development, Association for Human Rights in Afghanistan, Human Right Institute of Catalonia, Justice and Peace –Catalonia-, Group of Jurist Roda Ventura, Jurists without Borders, Foundation for Peace, Foundation Culture of Peace –Barcelona-, Foundation Alfonso Comin, UNESCO Center of Catalonia, Escarré International Center for the Ethnic Minorities and Nations, Peace International University, Virtual Peace Culture Center of Catalonia), Luna del Sur (Oaxaca, Mexico), Women's Doctors in Algeria, Peace and Conflict Institute of the University of Granada, Mexican Commission on Defense and Human Rights Promotion, Educaterapia Association, Association for the Recovery of Historical Memory of Catalonia, Federation of Action Verapaz Associations, International Press Club of Galicia
2 Conferences and expert meetings have already taken place in the following places: Bilbao and Geneva (November 2006); Mexico (December 2006); Bogotá, Barcelona and Addis Ababa (March 2007); Caracas and Santo Domingo (April 2007); Morelia (Mexico, 12 May 2007), Bogotá (12 May 2007), Oviedo and Santa Fe (New Mexico, USA, 16-17 May 2007); Washington (14 June 2007) , Nairobi (15 June 2007), Geneva (28 June 2007); Feldkirch (Austria, 31 August 2007); Geneva (11, 12 and 21 September 2007), Luarca (28 September 2007); Madrid (23 October 2007); Monterrey (1st November 2007), Mexico DF, Geneva, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Zaragoza and Navía, Asturias (December 2007); on the occasion of the UN Commission on the Status of Women, New York (February 2008); Geneva (March 2008); Parliament of Catalonia, Barcelona, Geneva, Dakar, Madrid and Valencia (April 2008); Rome and Gwangju, Republic of Korea (May 2008); Geneva and Bilbao (June 2008); Cartagena and Geneva (July 2008); Paris, Geneva and Montevideo (September 2008); Oviedo, Turin, New York and Basque Parliament, Vitoria (October 2008); La Plata and Buenos Aires, Argentina, and Bosco Marengo, Italy (November 2008); Luxembourg, Geneva and Barcelona (December 2008); Geneva and Barcelona (January 2009); Yaoundé, Cameroon (February 2009). For more information on these meetings, please see http://www.aedidh.org
3 On 15 March 2007 both the SSIHRL and the International Society of Human Rights (Frankfurt) convened an open Information Meeting on the Luarca Declaration; on 16 March 2007, the SSIHRL organized a Technical Meeting with NGO and human rights experts with a view to building a common strategy for a world-wide campaign on the human right to peace; 11 June 2007, both UNESCO Etxea and SSIHR organized an additional parallel meeting on the relationship between peace and solidarity rights; on 12 September 2007, the SSIHRL in collaboration with the UNESCO Liaison Office in Geneva organised a Roundtable on the legal content of the human right to peace; on 21 September 2007, the SSIHRL organised the commemoration of the International Day of Peace in the Council Chamber of the Palais de Nations; on 7 March 2008, the SSIHRL, the International Society of Human Rights (Frankfurt) and UNESCO Etxea organised a Roundtable on the relationship between extreme poverty and the human right to peace; on 4 June 2008, the SSIHRL and UNESCO Etxea organised a Roundtable on the right to education on peace and human rights; on 12 September 2008, the SSIHRL and UNESCO Etxea organised a Roundtable on the human right to peace and indigenous peoples; on 19 September 2008, the SSIHRL, UNESCO Etxea and the NGO Liaison Office of UNOG organised the commemoration of the International Day of Peace in the Council Chamber of the Palais de Nations
4 Report submitted by Mr Doudou Diène, former Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, E/CN.4/2004/18, 21 January 2004, paragraph 8
5 Report submitted by Mr Doudou Diène, A/HRC/7/19, 20 February 2008, paragraph 51 and 65
6 Report submitted by Mr. Doudou Diène, supra note 3, paragraph 5
7 Report submitted by Mr Doudou Diène, E/CN.4/2006/54, 13 January 2006, paragraph 5
8 Report submitted by Mr Doudou Diène, Addendum E/CN.4/2006/16, 18 January 2006, paragraph 29-30
9 Report submitted by Mr Doudou Diène, , E/CN.4/2003/24, 30 January 2003, paragraph 13-15
10 Report submitted by Mr. Doudou Diène, supra note 4, paragraph 56
11 Report of the Regional Preparatory Meeting for Africa for the Durban Review Conference (Abuja, 24-26 August 2008), A/CONF.211/PC.3/4, 3 September 2008, paragraphs 10 and 18
12 Report of the Regional Conference for Latin America and the Caribbean, Preparatory to the Durban Review Conference held in Brasilia on 17-19 June 2008, A/CONF.211/PC.3/3, 29 September 2008, paragraph 20
13 Compilation of conclusions and recommendations adopted by the Intergovernmental Working Group on the effective implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, doc. A/CONF.211/PC.2/7, 15 April 2008, paragraph 19
14 Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, Preamble, paragraph 21
15 Reports of preparatory meetings activities at the international, regional and national levels, Durban Review Conference, Preparatory Committee, A/CONF. 211/PC.3/5, 10 October 2008, p. 7, paragraph 10
16 Ibidem, p. 10, paragraph 29
17 Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, Fourth World Conference on Women, 15 September 1995, A/CONF.177/20 (1995) and A/CONF.177/20/Add.1 (1995), paragraph 225
18 Ibidem, paragraphs 1 and 132
19 Report of the Expert Group Meeting that took place in Brasilia, Brazil from 21 to 24 October 2003: The role of men and boys in achieving gender equality. United Nations Division of Advancement of Women, EGM/MEN-BOYS-GE/2003/REPORT, 12 January 2004; Report of the Secretary General, Thematic issue before the Commission: the role of men and boys in achieving gender equality, Commission on the Status of Women, E/CN.6/2004/9, 22 December 2003
20 Special Session of the UN General Assembly on Population and Development, held in New York in June/July 1999, paragraph 50
21 According to Yakin Ertürk, Special Rapporteur on violence against women, “the positive cultural elements should be emphasized, while the oppressive elements in culture-based discourses should be demystified”, paragraph 52, A/HRC/4/34, 17 January 2007
22 Adopted and opened for signature and ratification by General Assembly resolution 2106 (XX) of 21 December 1965, entry into force 4 January 1969
23 Human Rights Committee, General Comment 18, Non-discrimination (Thirty-seventh session, 1989), Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 (Vol. I) of 27 May 2008, pp. 234-236 (Spanish text)
24 General Recommendation XXVII on discrimination against Roma, Fifty-seventh session (2000), HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 (Vol. II) of 27 May2008, pp. 30-35 (Spanish text)
25 General Recommendation XXX on discrimination against non-citizens, Sixty-fifth session (2005), ibidem, pp. 44-49 (Spanish text)

# # #

About ALRC: The Asian Legal Resource Centre is an independent regional non-governmental organisation holding general consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. It is the sister organisation of the Asian Human Rights Commission. The Hong Kong-based group seeks to strengthen and encourage positive action on legal and human rights issues at local and national levels throughout Asia.

Trailing George Clooney

2009-02-19T14:40:00.000+07:00

by: Nicholas D. Kristof

I was going to begin this column with a 13-year-old Chadian boy crippled by a bullet in his left knee, but my hunch is that you might be more interested in hearing about another person on the river bank beside the boy: George Clooney.

Mr. Clooney flew in with me to the little town of Dogdoré, along the border with Darfur, Sudan, to see how the region is faring six years after the Darfur genocide began. Mr. Clooney figured that since cameras follow him everywhere, he might as well redirect some of that spotlight to people who need it more.

It didn’t work perfectly: No paparazzi showed up. But, hey, it has kept you reading at least this far into yet another hand-wringing column about Darfur, hasn’t it?

So I’ll tell you what. You read my columns about Darfur from this trip, and I’ll give you the scoop on every one of Mr. Clooney’s wild romances and motorcycle accidents in this remote nook of Africa. You’ll read it here way before The National Enquirer has it, but only if you wade through paragraphs of genocide.

The Darfur conflict has now lasted longer than World War II, but this year could be a turning point — provided that President Obama shows leadership and that the world backs up the International Criminal Court’s expected arrest warrant for Sudan’s president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir.

The stakes are evident in this little market town of Dogdoré, whose normal population of just a few thousand has swelled to 28,000 desperate, fearful people driven from smaller villages. They don’t think it’s safe here, but they find some reassurance in numbers — and leaving town isn’t an option, either, because flying out from the dirt airstrip is the only way to avoid rampant banditry on the roads.

Aid workers were pulled from Dogdoré in the fall because of violence in the area, leaving people on their own. Aid workers have just returned, but the entire town remains on edge.

One of the first persons we met was Qatri Ibrahim, a young woman who fled her village when the Sudanese janjaweed militia attacked and shot her 5-year-old and 8-year-old sons. “I’m afraid,” she said grimly. “But there are other people here, so I stay.”

In Darfur and eastern Chad, you can randomly approach any group of people and find heartbreaking stories. Mr. Clooney was clowning around with a group of boys bathing in the river — taking their photo and showing it to them digitally — and that’s when we met the 13-year-old boy with the bullet in his knee.

He’s Suleiman Ahsan, and he was wearing a pair of blue shorts — the only clothes he has. He also has a machete scar on his forehead; both it and the bullet date from a janjaweed attack on his village two years ago that killed his father.

Last year, Suleiman joined a militia and became a child soldier to avenge his father. “Recruiters come to the camps looking for boys like me to fight,” Suleiman told us. “Boys of 10 or 12 are old enough.”

Suleiman said that he learned to shoot but found the soldier’s life too grueling, so he deserted. Now he’s back to struggling to find food.

The International Criminal Court’s arrest warrant for President Bashir — widely expected in the coming weeks — has the area particularly on edge, for fear that Mr. Bashir could retaliate by using a proxy force to invade Chad.

The fact that Sudan’s state-sponsored slaughter of civilians goes on, year after year, in and out of Darfur, is a monument to the fecklessness of the international community. A spasm of that same fecklessness intruded on this trip with Mr. Clooney, who is traveling unofficially but is a United Nations goodwill ambassador.

Apparently concerned that Mr. Clooney might say something strongly critical of Mr. Bashir — perhaps come down hard on genocide? — the United Nations called me on Wednesday to say that effective immediately it was pulling Mr. Clooney’s security escort as he traveled these roads along the border. Now that did seem petty and mean-spirited. A Frenchman working for Save the Children was murdered on such roads last year, and the U.N. requires a military escort for its own vehicles here.

If the U.N. is too craven to protect its own goodwill ambassadors — because they might criticize genocide — it’s not surprising that it and the international community fail to protect hundreds of thousands of voiceless Darfuris.

Oh, and now for the juicy truth about all of Mr. Clooney’s wild romances and motorcycle accidents. Darn — out of space. Wait for my next column from this trip on Sunday ...

When ICE CUBE meets SODA CAN, pt. 1.

2009-02-19T11:28:00.002+07:00

Ice cube: You told me that I’m cold. It’s not what I want. I tell you what I want. Dance!
Ice cube: I am running amidst the gust of wind, through the gale, and crying in the hold of rain.
Ice cube: Do you think I want that? Hell no! This is my fate, the nature told to me.
Ice cube: And I’m still here pacing with my bare feet and playing with the devil. Can I still be…extreme?
Soda can: Do you know that my heart’s lantern is laughing at me?
Soda can: Two, four, and even more than ten times she’s laughing at me.
Soda can: I don’t even know what makes her so ticklish.
Soda can: I know that she knows that I don’t know on her knowledge-ness.
Soda can: And it brought me to you.
Soda can: Something that comb me with millions of queries.
Ice cube: Your laugh, Soda can, is not something that I would like to know.
Ice cube: It’s used for me to know whether you recognize and ultimately understand on what happened to me, however.
Soda can: Can you tell me each and every single thing that happened to you?
Soda can: Fate, the nature told to you? I don’t believe that. I just don’t buy that.
Soda can: Prove it to me that you are really able to make me understand and finally understand you.
Soda can: To understand that what happened to you will make me…
Soda can: Believe.
Ice cube: Later, the time shall come when I liquefy myself in my own mouth.
Ice cube: Just wait until the last gnaw.
Ice cube: Just wait until everything ends with the melted ice.
Ice cube: When my heart is dissolved together with the rising sun.
Soda can: I want to hold you.
Soda can: Before you liquefy yourself in your mouth.
Soda can: I want you, melted in my body.
Soda can: In my Soda can.
Soda can: In my Soda can.
Soda can: I don’t want you to be an ice cube which liquefy and dissolve with no meaning and purpose.
Ice cube: What kind of soda are you anyhow?
Ice cube: What do you have for me as an ice cube?
Soda can: I may not the finest soda.
Soda can: But what I know is that I need you because I will become into an unadorned entity if frostiness does not embrace me.
Soda can: And you may pass away in just second counts of your life in the process of melt,
Soda can: If you do not melt within me.
Soda can: You know what? I always look at your refrigerator,
Soda can: Always look at the light inside your refrigerator,
Soda can: And I always…amazed.
Soda can: And you always denied the existence of such light within yourself.
Soda can: I was also bemused to know the fact that some time ago you have conveyed your coldness to a piece of meat inside your refrigerator.
Soda can: Do you know the word jealous?
Soda can: I was jealous when you picked the meat instead of me.
Ice cube: Jealous?
Ice cube: Jealousy kills.
Ice cube: Kills?
Ice cube: Kills!
Ice cube: Jealous!!
Ice cube: l.o.v.e.
Ice cube: Spell that word.
Ice cube: s.o.d.a
Ice cube: Try to spell that.
Ice cube: f.e.e.l.
Ice cube: Try to spell that.
Ice cube: j.e.a.l.o.u.s.y.
Ice cube: Why don’t you ask that?
Ice cube: w.h.y.
Soda can: Why should I always the first one to answer all of your questions?
Soda can: Why don’t you be the one to start explaining everything?
Soda can: Is it because you’re cold?
Soda can: so that you can do anything like that?
Soda can: Make me the Soda can feel…jealous.
Soda can: You think you can do anything including dissolve with another ice cube and turned out into a bigger one?
Soda can: And reigns upon your refrigerator?
Soda can: You are not even greater than the cold wind, you know.
Soda can: It just that you are...
Soda can: Corporeal.
Ice cube: I am not a devil.
Ice cube: I am an ice cube, solid, fragile, frosty, and sub-zero.
Soda can: Ah, none of any persona in this idyllic sphere
Soda can: In this nature, quoting yours
Soda can: That can claim herself as a God
Soda can: And thus, none of any persona in this world as well can claim as a devil
Soda can: Either, not a devil.
Soda can: Even if you are a devil, however, I still can enjoy your addictive coldness.
Ice cube: Spell that one.
Ice cube: a.d.d.i.c.t.i.v.e.
Ice cube: Spell.
Ice cube: i.c.e. c.u.b.e.

--
Between Kuala Lumpur and Jakarta
2Gemini
26-27 December 2008
When ICE CUBE meets SODA CAN (Part one)

[ALRC Statement] INDONESIA: Crack down on freedoms of expression and assembly in West Papua

2009-02-19T11:25:00.000+07:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 19, 2009
ALRC-CWS-10-05-2009

Language(s): English only

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Tenth session

A written statement submitted by the Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC), a non-governmental organisation with general consultative status

INDONESIA: Crack down on freedoms of expression and assembly in West Papua

The Asian Legal Resource Centre is gravely concerned about the increased number of arrests and detentions on political grounds in the Papuan provinces of Indonesia. In recent months, several incidents were reported in which indigenous Papuan¡¦s engaging in peaceful political protests were arrested and charged with subversion and secession.

Following a peaceful protest on October 16, 2008 Mr. Buktar Tabuni a co-organizer of the protest assembly was charged under articles 106, 110, 160, 212 and 216 of the Indonesian Penal Code and arrested on December 3rd, 2008. The arrest took place despite Mr. Tabuni conforming with the requirements of Law No. 9/1998 in Indonesia regarding the exercising of protest actions in public.

Mr. Tabuni was later transferred to the Abepura prison where he was allegedly subjected to torture and ill-treatment along with other political prisoners. The treatment allegedly resulted in physical injuries and included the deprivation of food and water for several days.

Following Mr. Tabuni¡¦s arrest, other activists gathered lawfully in the Theys Eluay Memorial Park in Jayapura, Papua, demanding the release of political prisoner Tabuni and the right to exercise the freedoms of expression and assembly. On December 17, 2008, Mr. Seblom Sambom, one of the participants in the gathering, was also arrested and faces charges under article 216 for participating in the protest on October 16. Punishment may be up to 20 years imprisonment.

On October 17, 2008, one day after the October Protest, Mr. Yosias Syet was found dead in his home. Mr. Syet was a known activist in Papua and had helped in the preparation of the lawful protest on October 16, 2008. There is reason to believe that his murder is related to the exercising of his right to freedom of expression and assembly and that the security forces in Papua are involved in his murder.

Since Indonesia took over sovereignty of the western half of the Papuan island after a questionable UN supervised referendum, many indigenous people have experienced a deterioration of their livelihood due to mining activities, exploitation of natural resources, transmigration of non-Papuans into the region and a heavy military presence. Protests by indigenous Papuans and attempts to exercise the right to self-determination as ensured in the UN handover of the province have been answered with armed violence, including massacres, in the past.

Even with the new autonomy law for West Papua, the peaceful expression of political views is met with arrests and torture. The climate for human rights defenders remains hostile and activists are vulnerable to political prosecution and arrests.

The Asian Legal Resource Centre urges the government of Indonesia to suspend any arrests and prosecutions resulting from persons exercising their right to the freedoms of expression of political views and assembly. It also urges the authorities to make changes in the Penal Code of Indonesia, which provides for the punishment of such activities, which runs contrary to Indonesia¡¦s obligations under international law and standards. The ALRC further demands the impartial investigation of all allegations of torture. All political prisoners and prisoners of conscience must be released.

# # #

About ALRC: The Asian Legal Resource Centre is an independent regional non-governmental organisation holding general consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. It is the sister organisation of the Asian Human Rights Commission. The Hong Kong-based group seeks to strengthen and encourage positive action on legal and human rights issues at local and national levels throughout Asia.

Praise Song For The Day

2009-01-21T13:25:00.001+07:00

by: Elizabeth Alexander

Each day we go about our business,
walking past each other, catching each other's
eyes or not, about to speak or speaking.

All about us is noise. All about us is
noise and bramble, thorn and din, each
one of our ancestors on our tongues.

Someone is stitching up a hem, darning
a hole in a uniform, patching a tire,
repairing the things in need of repair.

Someone is trying to make music somewhere,
with a pair of wooden spoons on an oil drum,
with cello, boom box, harmonica, voice.

A woman and her son wait for the bus.
A farmer considers the changing sky.
A teacher says, Take out your pencils. Begin.

We encounter each other in words, words
spiny or smooth, whispered or declaimed,
words to consider, reconsider.

We cross dirt roads and highways that mark
the will of some one and then others, who said
I need to see what's on the other side.
I know there's something better down the road.
We need to find a place where we are safe.

We walk into that which we cannot yet see.
Say it plain: that many have died for this day.

Sing the names of the dead who brought us here,
who laid the train tracks, raised the bridges,
picked the cotton and the lettuce, built
brick by brick the glittering edifices
they would then keep clean and work inside of.

Praise song for struggle, praise song for the day.
Praise song for every hand-lettered sign,
the figuring-it-out at kitchen tables.

Some live by love thy neighbor as thyself,
others by first do no harm or take no more
than you need. What if the mightiest word is love?

Love beyond marital, filial, national,
love that casts a widening pool of light,
love with no need to pre-empt grievance.

In today's sharp sparkle, this winter air,
any thing can be made, any sentence begun.
On the brink, on the brim, on the cusp,
praise song for walking forward in that light.

What's Your Name's Hidden Meaning?

2009-01-06T11:55:00.002+07:00

I was browsing around some webs and found out this interesting-for-fun web. If you want to know what's your name's hidden meaning, just type your name in the displayed box, and tadaa..

As for me, the result can be seen below:

You Are Carefree and Passionate

You are wild, crazy, and a huge rebel. You're always up to something.
You have a ton of energy, and most people can't handle you. You're very intense.
You definitely are a handful, and you're likely to get in trouble. But your kind of trouble is a lot of fun.

You tend to be pretty tightly wound. It's easy to get you excited... which can be a good or bad thing.
You have a lot of enthusiasm, but it fades rather quickly. You don't stick with any one thing for very long.
You have the drive to accomplish a lot in a short amount of time. Your biggest problem is making sure you finish the projects you start.

You are very open. You communicate well, and you connect with other people easily.
You are a naturally creative person. Ideas just flow from your mind.
A true chameleon, you are many things at different points in your life. You are very adaptable.

You are a seeker of knowledge, and you have learned many things in your life.
You are also a keeper of knowledge - meaning you don't spill secrets or spread gossip.
People sometimes think you're snobby or aloof, but you're just too deep in thought to pay attention to them.

You are a free spirit, and you resent anyone who tries to fence you in.
You are unpredictable, adventurous, and always a little surprising.
You may miss out by not settling down, but you're too busy having fun to care.

You are deeply philosophical and thoughtful. You tend to analyze every aspect of your life.
You are intuitive, brilliant, and quite introverted. You value your time alone.
Often times, you are grumpy with other people. You don't appreciate them trying to interfere in your affairs.

You are a very lucky person. Things just always seem to go your way.
And because you're so lucky, you don't really have a lot of worries. You just hope for the best in life.
You're sometimes a little guilty of being greedy. Spread your luck around a little to people who need it.

You are very intuitive and wise. You understand the world better than most people.
You also have a very active imagination. You often get carried away with your thoughts.
You are prone to a little paranoia and jealousy. You sometimes go overboard in interpreting signals.

You are usually the best at everything ... you strive for perfection.
You are confident, authoritative, and aggressive.
You have the classic "Type A" personality.

You are very charming... dangerously so. You have the potential to break a lot of hearts.
You know how what you want, how to get it, and that you will get it.
You have the power to rule the world. Let's hope you're a benevolent dictator!

Tick tock ... tick: Extra second added to 2008

2009-01-05T17:42:00.001+07:00

By Jim Wolf

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Those eager to put 2008 behind them will have to hold their good-byes for just a moment this New Year's Eve.

The world's official timekeepers have added a "leap second" to the last day of the year on Wednesday, to help match clocks to the Earth's slowing spin on its axis, which takes place at ever-changing rates affected by tides and other factors.

The U.S. Naval Observatory, keeper of the Pentagon's master clock, said it would add the extra second on Wednesday in coordination with the world's atomic clocks at 23 hours, 59 minutes and 59 seconds Coordinated Universal Time, or UTC.

That corresponds to 6:59:59 p.m. EST (23:59:59 GMT), when an extra second will tick by -- the 24th to be added to UTC since 1972, when the practice began.

UTC is the time scale kept by highly precise atomic clocks around the world, accurate to about a billionth of a second per day, the Naval Observatory says. For those with a need for precision timing, it has replaced Greenwich Mean Time, or GMT.

The decision to add or remove a second is the responsibility of the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service, based on its monitoring of the Earth's rotation.

The goal is to make sure clocks vary from the Earth's rotational time by no more than 0.9 seconds before an adjustment. That keeps UTC in sync with the position of the sun above the Earth.

Mechanisms such as the Internet-based Network Time Protocol and the satellite-based Global Positioning System depend on precision timing.

The first leap second was introduced into UTC on June 30, 1972. The last was added on December 31, 2005.

They have been added at intervals ranging from six months to seven years, Daniel Gambis, head of the IERS Earth Orientation Center at the Observatoire de Paris, wrote in an explanatory piece this month (http://hpiers.obspm.fr/eop-pc/).

Among the reasons for Earth's slowing whirl on its axis are the braking action of tides, snow or the lack of it at the polar ice caps, solar wind, space dust and magnetic storms, according to the U.S. Commerce Department's National Institute of Standards and Technology, another timekeeper.

By contrast, a leap day, February 29, occurs once every four years because a complete turn around the sun -- our year with all its seasons -- takes about 365 days and six hours.

In 1970, an international agreement established two time scales: one based on the Earth's rotation and another on highly accurate atomic clocks.

The U.S. Naval Observatory's master clock is based on a system that now includes 50 atomic clocks, 36 based on the element cesium and 14 known as hydrogen masers.

With the Earth's rotation gradually slowing, the periodic insertion of a leap second into the atomic time scale is needed to keep the two systems within a second of each other.

(Reporting by Jim Wolf; Editing by Peter Cooney)

source: Reuters

07

2009-01-05T17:31:00.001+07:00

omnipresent (adj.)
definition: present everywhere at the same time

insidious (adj.)
definition:
1. intended to entrap or beguile: an insidious plan.
2. stealthily treacherous or deceitful: an insidious enemy.
3. operating or proceeding in an inconspicuous or seemingly harmless way but actually with grave effect: an insidious disease.

palatable (adj.)
definition:
1. acceptable or agreeable to the palate or taste; savory: palatable food.
2. acceptable or agreeable to the mind or feelings: palatable ideas.

grim (adj.)
definition:
1. stern and admitting of no appeasement or compromise: grim determination; grim necessity.
2. of a sinister or ghastly character; repellent: a grim joke.
3. having a harsh, surly, forbidding, or morbid air: a grim man but a just one; a grim countenance.
4. fierce, savage, or cruel: War is a grim business.

ubiqituous (adj.)
definition: existing or being everywhere, esp. at the same time; omnipresent: ubiquitous fog; ubiquitous little ants.

dismantle (verb - used with object), -tled, -tling.
1. to deprive or strip of apparatus, furniture, equipment, defenses, etc.: to dismantle a ship; to dismantle a fortress.
2. to disassemble or pull down; take apart: They dismantled the machine and shipped it in pieces.
3. to divest of dress, covering, etc.: The wind dismantled the trees of their leaves.

Ten Things I Love The Most in 2008 (pt.2)

2008-12-28T15:04:00.002+07:00

5. met with GREAT people.

4. had a NICE! birthday.

3. three years (and more than two months, per this post) with her.

2. living in an EXTRAORDINARY family.

1. seeing you. yes you! you who is reading this post.

Ten Things I Love The Most in 2008 (pt.1)

2008-12-27T18:46:00.002+07:00

Usually people make resolution in every year-end and all kind of flashback notes on what happened throughout the year. However, I am going to make a list of ten things that I love the most in this year, 2008. The reason is quite simple, to be honest, which is, I don't have enough time to write down any note about what happened in the 2008. So the easiest and practical way to sum all of it is to make the list of it, in addition that I may not be available online from today until January 3, 2009.

To make it more...interesting, I will make this top ten into two part. And here is the first one.

10. went home from Hong Kong and went out to Phnom Penh

9. played guitar again after a while

8. betrayed by friend(s)

7. finished my internship at the AHRC

6. founded and worked @ LBH Masyarakat

War on drugs in RI: Demonizing the most vulnerable

2008-12-12T11:20:00.002+07:00

by: Martin Lundqvist and Ricky Gunawan
The Jakarta Post, December 12, 2008

When arriving at the international terminal of Soekarno-Hatta Airport, Jakarta, the first tangible impression is the huge neon sign reading "Welcome to Indonesia -- Death Penalty for Drug Traffickers!" This sign is indicative of the Indonesian government's policy on drugs, which has resulted in the adoption of a "war on drugs" law, as well as in stigmatizing and discriminating against the domestic drug user community.

According to Law No. 22/1997 on Narcotics anyone handling narcotics is a criminal. This means that the drug dealer, the drug trafficker and the drug user are liable for criminal prosecution. There is no doubt that the drug trafficker should be prosecuted and punished, but the drug user? The government claims to have adopted a "war on drugs" -- a war which has resulted in criminalizing and stigmatizing some of the most vulnerable people in society -- the drug addicts.

This law has been accompanied by several government-initiated advertising campaigns, the basic tenet of which is to portray the drug addict as the antithesis of "goodness". S/he is portrayed as a sinful person who will end up in hell, contrasting with the "good citizen" who will go to heaven in the afterlife. The drug user is additionally depicted as inhuman and is virtually demonized in these campaigns.

As a natural consequence of this law and the advertisement campaigns, discrimination against drug users is a common feature in Indonesian public life -- most notably seen in the relationship between the police and the drug user. It seems many police have a quota of arrests to meet every month -- arrests which are disproportionately aimed at drug users.

Additionally, they are often arrested and then asked for money in order to be released. Given that the average salary for the police is only around Rp 3 million (US$241.35) per month, this is an easy way to increase their income. In their interactions with drug users the police often use torture, threats and illegal detention as a means to gain confessions of alleged crimes or for payment of bribes.

Torture practices are especially experienced by female drug users. They are frequently subjected to sexual harassment from the police. It is common knowledge amongst the women that in order for them to be released they must provide sexual services to the police. In their daily language this is referred to as: tukar body (exchange body). In practice then, their options are restricted to paying money, providing sex services, or staying detained.

The drug user is an ideal victim for abuse of power, since very few of them are likely to file complaints about police misconduct. This is partially so because many of them have internalized the values of the "war on drugs" campaigns, and feel they somehow deserve to be tortured.

They also have a widespread fear of the police -- a fear which is highly rational given the normal (violent) pattern of interactions between the police and the drug user. Therefore, the police enjoy almost full impunity when it comes to violating the human rights of drug users.

Sadly, very few legal aid and human rights organizations advocate against torture when the victim is a drug user. They are worried that this might negatively affect their "good image" as human rights defenders. This is regrettable, but also quite understandable, when considering the perception most Indonesians have of drug users, which is condemning, to say the least. However, defending human rights should be about defending every human being's rights -- regardless of their sex, race, gender, religion or social status.

As mentioned, large sectors of the Indonesian public hold strongly disapproving attitudes toward the drug user, attitudes which (to a large extent) derive from the government's demonizing campaigns. Drug users are considered to be sinful and should therefore be excluded from the environment of the "good citizens" -- including education and health institutions. The consequence of this is that many schools have a strict admissions policy where prospective students have to pass a urine test in order to prove that they are "clean".

When it comes to healthcare, drug users are often treated in a demeaning manner by doctors and health care personnel. For example, they are frequently asked questions such as: "why do you want to get sick? You know drugs make you sick, still you use it". The drug user has to endure moral condemnation which should have no place in a professional medical institution.

Finally, it is important to note that drug addiction is indeed a major societal problem which needs to be combated. However, this need not include criminalizing and stigmatizing a large group of citizens. Many international examples show that it is possible to be "hard on drugs" while also respecting the needs and human rights of its citizens.

Heavy drug addiction is a health hazard, and the addict should be given proper medical care to help combat his addiction, rather than to be prosecuted and put in jail. Pursuant to Indonesian Law No. 11/2005, the government must recognize the right of everyone to enjoy the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, and thus must maximize available resources to achieve full realization of this right.

This law is derived from the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), which Indonesia has signed and ratified. Indonesian Law No. 22/1997 unfortunately proves that the government is more concerned with its "war on drugs" than with the health and human rights of some of its most exposed citizens.

--
Martin Lundqvist is currently serving as an intern at the Asian Human Rights Commission in Hong Kong, where he is primarily assisting in the group's work for human rights in Indonesia. He has a bachelor's degree in peace and conflict studies from Malmoe University in Sweden.

Ricky Gunawan is the Programme Director of the Community Legal Aid Institute.

[Human Rights Day] INDONESIA: Killings continue after 10 years of reformation

2008-12-10T20:43:00.001+07:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AHRC-STM-312-2008
December 10, 2008

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission on the Occasion of the International Human Rights Day 2008 and the 60th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

INDONESIA: Killings continue after 10 years of reformation

How proud can Indonesia be of its reform process? While the country has established a national human rights commission (Komnas HAM) and has also undergone wide-reaching institutional reforms since the end of Suharto's rule in 1998, the work of human rights activists remains difficult. In crisis regions such as Papua, human rights work is a gamble with life. On October 17, 2008, Yosias Syet, a rights activist in Papua, was found dead. Wounds on his body indicate that he was murdered (please see AHRC's Urgent Appeal AHRC-UAC-261-2008 for more information).

On December 10, 1948 – 60 years ago – the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted, 10 years ago Indonesia returned to a democratic path, and on February 23, 2006 Indonesia was one of the last countries to accede to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. What has been achieved throughout all of this? What human rights standards of the 60 year old UDHR have been achieved in Indonesia?

None of the reforms so far were able to prevent extra-judicial killings such as the murder of Yosias Syet or the conviction and imprisonment sentence of eight staff of Aceh's Legal Aid Institute on August 14, 2008 for distributing pamphlets in public about alleged land appropriations with government involvement (please see AHRC-UAC-197-2008 for more information on this case).

In the case of police torture in Aceh last year, the victims were severely beaten, sexually abused and forced to urinate on each other. This outrageous case of humiliation and torture was brought to the court and Judge Sugeng Budiyanto gave the perpetrators a record light punishment of paying 1000 Indonesian Rupias as compensation to the victims, the equivalent of 10 US cents, and without any imprisonment at all. None of the reforms have prevented the judge from giving such an unbelievably leniant verdict nor would they prevent other police officers in the country from repeating such human rights violations (please see AHRC-UAU-060-2008 for more information on this case).

Have all reforms been worth nothing in Indonesia? Have 60 years of UDHR had no positive impact? Denying positive results would not be fair, given the efforts of civil society in improving the institutional framework. The national human rights commission, the Corruption Eradication Commission or the new law on witness and victims' protection have started to transform Indonesia towards a new tradition of accountability, which can be measured by the extent to which impunity has been eradicated. But despite visible efforts, impunity for human rights abuses remains prevalent as the above cases illustrate.

Victims of past massacres including the student disappearances of 97/98 or victims of the Trisakti and Semanggi, continue to wait for remedies while the perpetrators remain free and unpunished. Not even the tragedy of the 1965 massacre – which occurred more than 40 years ago – has been properly touched by the institutions of justice. As long as impunity of the past overshadows the Indonesia of today, human rights abuses will not be prevented in the future.

The accountability of police personnel and officers in other institutions has certainly increased over the last years. This is mostly due to the very active involvement of civil society in the institutional reform process. However, in the heart of the justice system – the institutions of the criminal justice system such as the Attorney General's Office or the judiciary – most staff and officers are not subjected to any disciplinary measures when they neglect their official duty.

Not prosecuting a case will not result in any problems for the Prosecutor. The Prosecutorial Commission may investigate problems and suggest reforms within the institutions, but it has not yet been equipped with the power necessary for issuing disciplinary measures against ignorant Prosecutors.

The situation is similar to that of the Judicial Commission. While it receives complaints against judges, investigates them and suggests corrective and disciplinary actions against them, the Supreme Court continues to ignore such suggestions for duty enforcing measures that would improve the quality of work and professionalism in the judiciary. Instead, the office of the judge remains immune.

Indonesia, more than many other countries in the Asian region, has made efforts of reformation. Much has been achieved, but paradoxically, there is also not much to applaud given the ongoing human rights violations such torture, extra-judicial killings, arrests of rights activists and the freedom that multinational mining and plantation corporations enjoy within this weak legal framework. More than four years ago, human rights activist Munir Said Thalib was killed, but the designers of his assassinations have not all been brought to justice to this day. This shows that impunity is not only a problem involving cases of the past but also continues for cases of the present. Accountability starts where impunity ends, and this goal remains only a distant dream at the present time.

The AHRC is publishing its 2008 annual human rights report on Indonesia. A pre-publication version of the report can be downloaded at here. .

# # #

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.

Menciptakan Martabat dan Keadilan untuk Semua: 60 Tahun Deklarasi Universal Hak Asasi Manusia di Indonesia

2008-12-10T14:01:00.000+07:00

10 Desember enam puluh tahun yang lalu, Deklarasi Universal Hak Asasi Manusia (DUHAM) disahkan oleh Majelis Umum Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa (PBB). Deklarasi ini dilahirkan dari pemikiran yang visioner dari sejumlah tokoh pejuang kemanusiaan. Pemikiran ini dilandasi dengan mimpi akan terciptanya masa depan peradaban kemanusiaan yang lebih baik, mengingat pada saat itu peradaban manusia di dunia ini berada di tengah tragedi kemanusiaan yang keji (perang dunia). DUHAM membawa satu pesan harapan bahwa manusia haruslah memanusiakan sesama manusia.

DUHAM mengakui sebuah prinsip utama bahwa pengakuan atas martabat alamiah dan hak-hak yang sama yang tidak dapat dicabut dari seluruh umat manusia adalah fondasi kemerdekaan, keadilan dan perdamaian di dunia. DUHAM memberikan satu pijakan dasar dari seluruh hak asasi yang terkandung, bukan hanya tercatat, dalam Deklarasi tersebut yakni: Semua manusia dilahirkan merdeka dan mempunyai martabat dan hak-hak yang sama. Mereka dikaruniai akal dan hati nurani dan hendaknya bergaul satu sama lain dalam semangat persaudaraan.

Berangkat dari pijakan dasar tersebut kemudian lahirlah sejumlah hak asasi manusia yang tertuang dalam Deklarasi tersebut. DUHAM tidak berdiam diri menjadi satu norma yang hanya menjadi standar umum untuk keberhasilan bagi semua bangsa dan semua negara, tetapi lebih dari itu, ia menjelma menjadi beragam kovenan internasional, konvensi, dan segala bentuk aturan hukum internasional. Deretan hak asasi manusia yang termaktub dalam Deklarasi pun menggema ke berbagai Konstitusi negara-negara di dunia, termasuk Indonesia. Indonesia menuangkan sejumlah hak asasi manusia di dalam Konstitusinya, termasuk juga meratifikasi sejumlah kovenan internasional dan konvensi HAM. Tetapi apakah semua aturan ini, yang merupakan bentuk nyata pengakuan terhadap martabat dan keadilan bagi semua manusia, memberikan kontribusi yang positif bagi pemajuan hak asasi manusia di dunia? Lebih khusus lagi di Indonesia?

Sepanjang 60 tahun usia Deklarasi, Indonesia telah menjadi saksi bagaimana manusia Indonesia memangsa manusia Indonesia lainnya. Pelanggaran HAM demi pelanggaran HAM terus terjadi hingga kini. Mulai dari pembantaian 1965 hingga kasus Lumpur Lapindo, tragedi Tanjung Priok hingga tragedi Trisakti-Semanggi I-II, pembunuhan ekstra-yudisial, penyiksaan, penangkapan dan penahanan yang sewenang-wenang, penghilangan paksa, hukuman mati, penggunaan kekerasan untuk menjawab kebebasan beragama, penggusuran paksa hingga pengingkaran hak atas kesehatan dan hak atas pendidikan bagi masyarakat yang kurang mampu, dan masih banyak lagi. Semua pelanggaran hak asasi manusia yang terjadi tersebut masih belum terjawab dan menyisakan iklim impunitas yang kental. Sepanjang 60 tahun ini, belum ada kontribusi positif bagi pemajuan hak asasi manusia di Indonesia.

Tepat dengan 60 tahun peringatan DUHAM, Indonesia memasuki masa kampanye menjelang pemilu 2009. Kampanye bukan lagi merupakan ajang seorang kandidat untuk memperjuangkan gagasan dan cita-cita, tapi menjadi ajang untuk mempersolek diri di hadapan konstituen. Berbagai hal dijadikan sebagai kosmetik untuk mempercantik diri. Bahkan, salah satunya adalah Hak Asasi Manusia.

Sepanjang tahun 2008 hak asasi manusia menjadi seperti barang dagangan, komoditas politik bagi para aktor pemerintah, termasuk anggota Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat. Kehadiran Panitia Khusus Orang Hilang di DPR, sepertinya lebih menjadi arena kampanye politik para anggota Dewan ketimbang menjawab esensi permasalahan pelanggaran HAM yang terjadi. Di samping itu, alih-alih melindungi perempuan dan anak, DPR justru mengesahkan Undang-Undang Pornografi yang justru jatuhnya malah mengkriminalisasi perempuan, dan mengkhianati kebhinekaan Indonesia.

Peran yang harusnya diemban oleh para anggota DPR dan Pemerintah, sebagai legislator di Indonesia ternyata justru diabaikan. Hingga tahun ini Indonesia masih belum memiliki satu aturan hukum pun mengenai penghapusan penyiksaan yang dilakukan oleh aparat-aparat negara dalam proses penegakan hukum. Hal ini membuat para korban penyiksaan tidak pernah mendapatkan pemulihan hak, dan para pelaku lepas tak terhukum. Protokol Opsional Konvensi Menentang Penyiksaan yang dijadwalkan akan diratifikasi pada tahun ini ternyata masih belum terealisasi, menciptakan peluang pencegahan penyiksaan semakin kecil.

Sederet permasalahan hak asasi manusia tersebut terancam tidak akan pernah menyentuh akar persoalan dan tidak akan diselesaikan secara tuntas dalam waktu dekat ini, mengingat 2009 akan menjadi tahun politik. Tahun dimana para wakil rakyat justru berlomba-lomba untuk mencitrakan dirinya seolah-olah mereka berpihak pada rakyat kecil dan berpihak pada kemanusiaan, padahal ini semua dilakukan demi mendapat kursi kekuasaan.

Sejalan dengan tema peringatan 60 tahun Deklarasi Universal Hak Asasi Manusia tahun ini yaitu “Martabat dan Keadilan Untuk Semua”, dan menyambut Pemilu 2009, Lembaga Bantuan Hukum (LBH) Masyarakat mendesak kalangan partai politik maupun pelaku politik lainnya untuk mendepankan kemanusiaan dalam menjalankan kekuasaan, demi mencapai keadilan untuk semua. DUHAM telah mencatat bahwa tindakan mengabaikan dan memandang rendah hak-hak manusia mengakibatkan perbuatan-perbuatan bengis yang menimbulkan rasa kemarahan hati nurani umat manusia. Tentu, kita semua tidak menghendaki adanya kebengisan dan kemarahan hati nurani manusia terjadi di Indonesia. Rakyat Indonesia pernah mengalami masa-masa kelam kemanusiaan. Dan, saatnya sekarang untuk memulihkan kekelaman yang pernah terjadi dan mencegah kebengisan baru terjadi di masa yang akan datang.

LBH Masyarakat memandang bahwa mengadili para pelaku kejahatan kemanusiaan dan menyediakan pemulihan hak bagi para korban adalah kunci untuk melenyapkan impunitas di Indonesia. Pengadilan dan pertanggungjawaban dari para pelaku akan membuat setiap fakta dan kejadian akan terungkap secara gamblang dan transparan, serta menjadi pelajaran bagi kita semua untuk menghindari kekejaman serupa di masa mendatang.

LBH Masyarakat lebih jauh lagi menilai bahwa partisipasi masyarakat dalam setiap kebijakan publik adalah faktor penting untuk menghindari adanya pelaksanaan kebijakan publik yang menimbulkan kerugian terhadap kemanusiaan. Jika korban penggusuran dapat diajak berdialog dan difasilitasi untuk mendapatkan solusi pasca penggusuran, tentu tidak akan terjadi penggusuran paksa yang menimbulkan jatuhnya korban. Jika suara masyarakat diperhatikan dalam proses legislasi dan para wakil rakyat tidak elitis, niscaya produk legislatif yang dihasilkan akan berpihak pada kemanusiaan.

Jakarta, 10 Desember 2008
Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat

Ricky Gunawan
Direktur Program

Dhoho Ali Sastro
Direktur Pemberdayaan Hukum Masyarakat dan Penanganan Kasus

Andri G. Wibisana
Direktur Penelitian dan Pengembangan

More impact on mankind than any other document

2008-12-10T11:31:00.000+07:00

9 December 2008

“December 10 marks the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a single short document of 30 articles that has probably had more impact on mankind than any other document in modern history.

Immediately after the end of World War II, the world’s politicians, diplomats, journalists, activists, thinkers, and – above all – its general population wanted to prevent such a war happening again, which meant tackling its causes as well as its aftermath. They were determined to ensure that there would never be another Holocaust, and that everyone – especially the poor, the hungry, the displaced and the marginalized – would in future have systems to support them, and international legal frameworks to protect them.

Many of the world’s most impressive legal treaties and institutions, including the United Nations itself, date back to this fertile period in the late 1940s, but the Universal Declaration has a truly special place.

For the first time all human rights – civil, cultural, economic, political and social – were recognized as belonging inherently to all people, rather than being gifts magnanimously bestowed upon them, or denied to them, by design, fate or the whims of ruling regimes.

Its visionary, but also thoroughly fundamental, approach is best illustrated by its own words: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights… Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person… All are equal before the law.” It then lays out a list of specific rights, ranging from the rights not to be tortured, enslaved or arbitrarily detained, via the rights to freedom of opinion, expression and religion to a range of key social, economic and cultural rights, such as education, health, and the right to equal pay for equal work.

Everyone, says the Declaration, is entitled to these rights “without distinction of any kind, such as race colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion…”

Today, the principles laid down in the Universal Declaration are echoed in the Constitutions and laws of more than 90 countries. Dedicated international, regional and national mechanisms, including the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Human Rights Council with its independent experts, have been established to monitor, promote, protect and further develop human rights.

All across the world, a growing number of journalists, NGOs and other civil society organizations exert ever greater and more effective vigilance over their governments’ implementation of human rights. The advent of the Internet means that those who wish to abuse their citizens behind closed doors find it much harder to do so, and those who wish to expose such abuses can do so more easily.

Nevertheless, for many people, the Universal Declaration remains an unfulfilled promise, as States’ political will to fulfil their obligations lags lamentably behind their pledges.

There is a particular risk that, as the current financial crisis unfolds, the world’s poorest and most marginalized individuals and communities could face an even more dire situation than they do at present. Poverty is both a cause and a result of human rights violations, and we will need to be extremely vigilant over the coming months to ensure that development programmes and social safety nets are maintained or enhanced, so the effects of the crisis do not become calamitous.

Despite all the current fears and uncertainties, I am encouraged by the enormous attention that the year-long commemoration of the 60th anniversary has brought to the issue of human rights. All across the world, voluntary organizations, institutions, teachers, students, lawyers, politicians and media have focused on the Universal Declaration and its continuing relevance in today’s world. But we cannot stop here. We are still, 60 years on, a very long way from achieving the goals laid down in the Universal Declaration. No country in the world can sit back complacently and say “We’re there.”

Tens of millions of people around the world are still unaware that they have rights that they can demand, and that their governments are accountable to them, and to a wide-ranging body of rights-based national and international law. Despite all our efforts over the past 60 years, this anniversary will pass many people by, and it is essential that we keep up the momentum, thereby enabling more and more people to stand up and claim their rights.

For this reason, I warmly welcome the fact that next year has been designated the International Year of Human Rights Learning. And I would like to encourage ministries, institutions, teachers, parents and others in a position of responsibility all across the planet to take this opportunity to ensure that the next generation is given the maximum opportunity to claim what was promised to them in that extraordinary document known as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”

"It is my right", The Universal Declaration on Human Rights – Sixty years of inspiration and empowerment for human rights

2008-12-10T11:29:00.000+07:00

08 December 2008

The Special Procedures Mandate Holders of the United Nations Human Rights Council issue the following statement on International Human Rights Day, 10 December:

GENEVA -- Sixty years ago today, on 10 December 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In so doing, a promise of rights was proclaimed to all men, women and children, of every race, colour, and religion.

The Universal Declaration emerged from a period of unprecedented global crisis and human tragedy, to bring an inspirational message of hope, and vision of a new humanity to a deeply damaged world. It set in train an unstoppable process towards the goal of human rights for all that has, in the 60 years that have elapsed, seen both progress and setback. Despite the countless challenges that remain, the message is an enduring one. The Universal Declaration has truly changed our world for the better.

Where its principles have been adopted as fundamental tenets and laws, the Declaration comes to life in peaceful societies, enriched by their diversity, and resolute to achieve equality. Yet in some States or regions where conflict or oppression have taken their dreadful toll, the flame of hope that the Universal Declaration provides has burned only dimly.

The depths of cruelty that one person, group or nation inflicts upon another continue to be witnessed in every region. Racism, discrimination and exclusion continue to demand our greatest vigilance and our concerted action. But the flame has never gone out. The Universal Declaration has been a beacon of hope and guidance even where despair exists. It has been espoused and embraced by brave women and men who in the face of adversity are the true keepers of the Declaration, courageous human rights defenders everywhere.

The rights that the Declaration has proclaimed us all to have cannot be taken away. They remain inherently ours as human beings even though they may be violated. They are not abstract principles. They are not just words on a page. Within those words exists a life saved and a prisoner released, a family housed, a child educated, a voice allowed to speak out freely or against injustice, a victim who gains remedy, a woman who grows up equal in her opportunities to a man.

The Declaration has allowed the most vulnerable among us to claim with conviction "it is my right". Today, more than ever before, the message of rights reaches to every corner of our world. The Universal Declaration continues to empower people to make that claim.

We, independent experts from every region of the world, are entrusted with helping to promote the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration. This remarkable document inspired the comprehensive array of human rights standards that underpins our work, and forms an essential bedrock of international and domestic law. On these solid foundations, our activities go far beyond highlighting violations of rights. We work in partnership with States, civil society and others to identify the many positive practices and experiences from all regions that help to protect and promote rights and that can provide a model for others. We seek opportunities to propose assistance and develop solutions alongside States that work within and across borders. All regions provide challenges, and equally all provide us with the lessons and guidance and the rich cultural resources needed to find those solutions and to make rights reality.

Today the interests of States, and the impacts of actions by States, are ever more inter-connected. New challenges include ensuring global access to food, and those presented by climate change and financial crisis have potentially massive human rights and development implications. If we are to confront them effectively we must do so collectively.

Sixty years ago the drafters of the Universal Declaration, from all regions, envisioned a future of unparalleled cooperation and friendship between peoples and States in the pursuit of universally applied human rights, international development, peace and security. In this new era of complex global challenges, the international community must renew its commitment to strive for common understanding, and to find shared processes and systems of cooperation.

There remains no better single articulation of all human rights belonging to all people than the Universal Declaration. As relevant today as it has ever been, it should have a place in every school in every country, in every public office and in every courtroom. It should be in the hands of those whose rights are violated and of those who have the responsibility to protect.

On this anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights we call upon all to intensify efforts to realize its promise of dignity, justice and equality for all. We pledge ourselves to this task.

ENDS

ASIA: 60th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

2008-12-10T11:23:00.002+07:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRESS RELEASE
AHRC-PRL-041-2008

ASIA: 60th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

(Hong Kong, December 8, 2008) "There is no getting away from the fact that despite 60 years being passed after the UDHR, the actual enjoyment of human rights in most countries of Asia is even much less than what it was, 60 years ago. There is more talk about human rights but the systems in the region are mostly non rule of law systems. In the promotion of human rights in the region therefore, institutional reform should be the primary focus in human rights work” ” said Basil Fernando, director of AHRC on issuing a statement in regard to the 60th Anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

AHRC has stated that the primary obstacles for the protection of human rights are the defects of the systems of administration of justice. These defects are due to the lack of political will on the part of these states to invest adequate funds for proper administration of justice and very often due to deliberate attempts to suppress these institutions in order to place the executive above the law and outside accountability.

AHRC in its statements distinguishes rule of law countries with non rule of law countries. While there are many limitations on rights even in countries where systems of rule of law are well established, even the possibility of protection of rights does not exist, in countries where the systems of administration of justice themselves are fundamentally flawed. In rule of law countries like the United States and Europe in recent times, there have been serious problems manifested by such issues as the Guantanamo Bay detention centre maintained by the United States, new laws suspending civil liberties and anti-terrorism laws such as the Patriotic Act of the United States and similar laws in many European countries. Also many practices still persist in these countries, against the right of women and other rights relating to sexuality and other freedoms, and restrictions on civil rights imposed on migrants and minorities.

Most alarming is the attempt by the United States to reduce the absolute prohibition against torture and thereby to challenge one of the most well established principles in human rights. It is for the human rights community in these countries and the international community to utilize the space available within their political and legal institutions and to fight back against these serious inroads into human rights.

However, what is faced in non rule of law countries is something much worse. Even the possibility of fighting for these rights is prevented by the absence of institutions, or fundamental flaws in the existing institutions. The most prominent of such flaws is the predominant place acquired by the police, thereby crippling other institutions of the administration of justice. In many countries there is hardly anything that maybe called policing according to the rule of law. The police themselves become the main violators of rights and often arrest, detention and torture become means of extortion and undue enrichment by the police. The criminals often find their closest allies within the policing system. Organized crime is often a combination of mafia elements with sections of the local police. The police engage in arbitrary deprivation of life under many pretexts.

Encounter killings and self-defence killings are terms given to police killings of arrested persons. Besides this, the police also a play role in causing disappearances, kidnappings and attacks on journalists, human rights activists and political opponents of the ruling regime. Many of the authoritarian regimes in the region have developed many forms of political manipulations of the police. Within that set-up, the proper receiving of complaints and investigations into complaints cannot take place. The result is that people who suffer even grave abuses do not come forward to make complaints and various forms of fear psychosis prevail in societies.

The prosecutors can hardly do anything when the policing system itself engages in violating rights. Often, the prosecution systems like the department of the Attorney General in different countries come under the executive control of the existing political regimes. The judiciary itself is subjected to executive control and corruption. In many places, the legal profession is not allowed to play a significant role in protecting the rights of the people. Often, part of the legal profession itself is brought under serious corrupt practices when some lawyers merely become mediators carrying bribes to the police or others. Very large sectors of the legal profession are demoralized and frustrated, according to AHRC.

Mr. Fernando said that “what we have pointed to is a very serious problem. After 60 years of the UDHR, we cannot claim that the human rights situation in the region has improved. In many countries, both in civil and political rights as well as in economic, social and cultural rights, there is a very significant deterioration. We many talk about human rights more than before. The people may be demanding human rights more than before.

However in actual fact, violations of human rights have become far greater. Various forms of arbitrary deprivation of rights, torture, denial of fair trial, is wide spread in many places. There is more unemployment and despite greater education among women, the actual enjoyments of rights have not become any easier for larger sections of the population who are poor. Various forms of domestic violence and killing of women, depriving their personal liberties is so common. Anti-terrorism is often used to bring laws which suspend the rights of the entire population. Life often for many remains a nightmare.

On the occasion of the celebration of the 60th Anniversary of the UDHR, these grim realities need to be reflected. And the governments and the people have to reckon with this serious deprivation of rights. Local and international communities need to develop their energies to fight for improvement of the institutions of protection of rights which means improvement of the institutions of the administration of justice.

The full statement AHRC may be found here

# # #

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.

The Scientist

2008-11-26T20:58:00.002+07:00

I know this kind an old-school, though it's not that oooold. But anyhow, The Scientist, from Coldplay, is such a great song, from such a super-band, with a superb lyric.
--

Come up to meet you, tell you I'm sorry
You don't know how lovely you are

I had to find you
Tell you I need you
Tell you I've set you apart

Tell me your secrets
And ask me your questions
Oh, let's go back to the start

Running in circles
Coming up tails
Heads on the science apart

Nobody said it was easy
It's such a shame for us to part
Nobody said it was easy
No one ever said it would be this hard

Oh take me back to the start

I was just guessing
At numbers and figures
Pulling the puzzles apart

Questions of science
Science and progress
Do not speak as loud as my heart

Oh tell me you love me
Come back and haunt me
Oh and I rush to the start

Running in circles
Chasing our tails
Coming back as we are

Nobody said it was easy
Oh, it's such a shame for us to part
Nobody said it was easy
No one ever said it would be so hard

I’m going back to the start

Oh ooh ooh ooh ooh
Ah ooh ooh ooh ooh
Oh ooh ooh ooh ooh
Oh ooh ooh ooh ooh

--

These Hard Times

2008-11-23T09:12:00.001+07:00

by: Matchbox 20

Morning falls like rain into the city life
There goes another night
Lose my breath in waves
Knowing that ever crash is bleeding the hourglass
And taking the strife, from all our lives

Everyone keeps talking
They promise you everything
But they don't mean anything

We may loose our focus
There's just too many words
We're never meant to learn
And we don't feel so alive

So goodbye, these days are gone
And we can't keep holding on
When all we need is some relief
Through these hard times
Through these hard times

Move your hands in circles
Keeping me hypnotized
The power behind your eyes
Move around your bedroom cursing the naked sky
You should be here tonight
But you stay alone and cry

Say goodbye, these days are gone
And we can't keep holding on
When all we need is some relief
Through these hard times
(whoa) There's something missing
(Oh whoa) You'll never feel it but you
(Oh whoa) You're gonna feel it when it's gone
When it's gone

Say goodbye, these days are gone
And we can't keep holding on
When all we need is some relief
Through these hard times
(hey) these Hard times
(oh no now) Hard times
Hard times

Say goodbye, these days are gone
Say goodbye, these days are gone
These days are gone

Laws against torture needed

2008-11-22T15:25:00.001+07:00

by: Ricky Gunawan

On Jan. 22, 2007, Hartoyo was at home with his partner, Bobby (not his real name), when two men forcibly entered his house and proceeded to vandalize his property before assaulting the two men. Hartoyo and Bobby were then dragged outside to a place where a crowd of around 15 people had gathered. They were subjected to beatings and verbal abuse. Hartoyo was ordered by the attackers to immediately vacate the boarding house. The attackers then informed the local police authorities.

The two victims were taken by four police officers to the Banda Raya Police Station where they were made to strip down to their underwear and were viciously beaten and verbally abused by the officers. The police officers later sexually abused Hartoyo and then forced his partner to perform oral sex on him. The two were then dragged to the police station courtyard where officers sprayed them with ice-cold water.

The police also forced Bobby to urinate on Hartoyo's head. Hartoyo and his partner were then taken to a police lockup, where they were held until morning.

This ruthless, inhuman and barbaric torture has been a cavernous trauma for Hartoyo. Furthermore, this abysmal event scars Indonesia's face of humanity.

More than a year later, in October 2008, the case was finally tried by the Banda Aceh District Court. However, as the court regarded the torture merely as a minor offense, there was only one judge hearing the case.

During the trial, the judge did not examine the acts of torture but rather focused on Hartoyo's sexual orientation. The judge advised him to turn away from sin, giving the impression that it was permissible for the perpetrators to beat and assault the victims because of their different sexual orientation.

In about 30 minutes, the judge had made his decision: The four perpetrators were sentenced to three months' imprisonment with six months of probation and a fine of Rp 1,000.

Given that the case was tried as a minor offense, the verdict was final and binding -- leaving no hope for the victim to appeal.

Hartoyo's case is only one example of how the Indonesian legal apparatus treats this kind of torture. The court obviously treats the "common enemies of all mankind and all nations" nicely and inadequately by ruling they only committed a minor offense.

From this case, we can also draw the conclusion that torture creates double standards within the state institutions, especially the police and judiciary. How is it possible that such severe violence took place in this very modern day and the perpetrators received a very light punishment?

This case demonstrates how the absence of laws on torture resulted in no justice for the victims of torture. The absence of laws on torture denies victims and their families any avenue for justice and redress. The right to redress and compensation for grievances wreaked by the State is a fundamental principle of the Convention against Torture, to which Indonesia is a party. Indonesia, which does not provide a legal remedy for such unspeakable acts, is also violating its international obligation imposed under the Convention.

Reports from many national and international human rights groups show there have never been investigations into cases of torture and other ill-treatment, and where victims have been reluctant to submit a complaint to the relevant authorities. Even if the perpetrators were convicted, they were not convicted under the laws on torture. Definitely, there is a problem in dealing with torture in Indonesia.

The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture has recommended that for a country such as Indonesia, there is a crucial need for an independent national authority, such as a national commission or ombudsman with investigatory and/or prosecutorial powers, which should be immediately established to receive and to investigate complaints on torture cases.

Complaints about torture should be dealt with without further delay and should also be investigated by an independent authority with no connection to that which is investigating or prosecuting the case against the alleged victim. Wherever a person has a plausible complaint of having been tortured by the police or military officers, it too entails the notion of an effective remedy.

Without establishing a proper, impartial and effective accountability mechanism to investigate torture cases as well as enacting domestic laws on torture, there will be more cases like Hartoyo's in the near future. Indonesia's tortured commitment, apparently, is dragging the country into a tortured nation.

--
The writer is the Program Director of the Community Legal Aid Institute. He can be reached at rgunawan@lbhmasyarakat.org

Cigarette Condoms

2008-11-20T18:28:00.001+07:00

A blonde, a brunette and a red head were smoking cigarettes one afternoon. The blonde had Camels, red head had Marlboros, and the brunette had Kools.

It began to pour down raining, so the red head and brunette both pull out a condom and put it on their cigs. The blonde says “what are you doing?” - and they say “we’re saving it for later!”

Impressed, and in a hurry, the blonde goes to the nearest store and asks for a condom. The clerk says “What size? small, medium, or large?” She said “I don't know… one to fit a camel?”

A Wife’s Special Birthday Present

2008-11-20T18:26:00.000+07:00

A wife decides to take her husband to a strip club for his birthday. They arrive at the club and the doorman says, “Hey, John! How ya doin’?” His wife is puzzled and asks if he’s been to this club before. “Oh, no,” says John. “He’s on my bowling team.”

When they are seated, a waitress asks John if he’d like his usual and brings over a Budweiser. His wife is becoming increasingly uncomfortable and says,”How did she know that you drink Budweiser?” “She’s in the Ladies’ Bowling League, honey. We share lanes with them.”

A stripper then comes over to their table, throws her arms around John, and says “Hi Johnny. Want your usual table dance, big boy?” John’s wife, now furious, grabs her purse and storms out of the club.

John follows and spots her getting into a cab. Before she can slam the door, he jumps in beside her. He tries desperately to explain how the stripper must have mistaken him for someone else, but his wife is having none of it. She is screaming at him at the top of her lungs, calling him every name in the book.

The cabby turns his head and says, “Looks like you picked up a real b*tch tonight, John.”

HUKUMAN MATI BUKAN SOLUSI

2008-11-13T13:02:00.000+07:00

HUKUMAN MATI BUKAN SOLUSI
Pernyataan sikap LBH Masyarakat atas Eksekusi Amrozi dkk

Lembaga Bantuan Hukum (LBH) Masyarakat mengutuk segala bentuk kekerasan dan kekejaman termasuk tindakan pengeboman di Kuta Bali 2002 lalu. Namun demikian, LBH Masyarakat menyayangkan putusan pemerintah Indonesia yang tetap melaksanakan eksekusi mati terhadap tiga orang terpidana Bom Bali I, Amrozi, Imam Samudera dan Ali Ghufron karena justru pemerintah telah mempertontonkan suatu tindakan kekerasan yang dibalas oleh kekerasan pula.

LBH Masyarakat menentang keras penggunaan hukuman mati sebagai bentuk pemidanaan dan jawaban atas penyelesaian kasus-kasus hukum termasuk juga dalam hal tindak pidana terorisme. Kami memandang bahwa Pertama, hukuman mati adalah bentuk pelanggaran terhadap hak untuk hidup setiap manusia yang merupakan hak yang tidak dapat dikurangi dalam keadaan apa pun juga.

Kedua, hukuman mati merupakan suatu bentuk penghukuman yang kejam, tidak manusiawi dan merendahkan martabat manusia. Hal tersebut tak lebih dari pembunuhan yang dilegalisasi yang dilakukan oleh negara atas nama keadilan.

Ketiga, setiap kejahatan berat harus dihukum berat. Namun hukuman terberat tidak boleh sampai merenggut hidup seseorang. Hukuman seumur hidup lebih layak sebagai hukuman terberat yang lebih banyak memberikan kesempatan bagi banyak pihak untuk memperbaiki keadaan.

Keempat, data dan fakta menunjukkan bahwa hukuman mati tidak banyak memberikan kontribusi dalam mengurangi angka kejahatan, sebaliknya, hal tersebut menunjukkan bahwa bukan seberapa kejam hukumanlah yang dapat menimbulkan efek jera; melainkan adanya kepastian bahwa setiap orang yang melakukan tindak pidana pasti dihukum setelah sebelumnya melalui proses peradilan yang adil dan transparan.

Secara khusus dalam kasus ini, penggunaan hukuman mati justru menimbulkan inspirasi bagi beberapa kelompok untuk menempatkan Amrozi cs sebagai “pahlawan” dan seolah-olah memberikan legitimasi akan perbuatan Amrozi cs. Kenyataan menujukkan bahwa Amrozi cs tidak takut hukuman mati. Dan sebaliknya, pasca pelaksanaan eksekusi tersebut, justru muncul gelombang dukungan dari kalangan tertentu yang mendukung “perjuangan” Amrozi cs tersebut.

Penolakan kami terhadap penggunaan hukuman mati terhadap Amrozi cs bukan berarti kami mengesampingkan rasa kehilangan para korban yang ditinggalkan. Namun LBH Masyarakat lebih mendorong keadilan restoratif yakni memulihkan keadaan korban dan bukan melestarikan keadilan retributif yang didasarkan pada balas dendam. Ketika negara mempromosikan hukuman mati sebagai alasan keadilan berarti negara mendorong agar bangsa ini selalu mempergunakan alasan dendam untuk memperoleh keadilan.

Keadilan bukanlah berarti mengambil apa yang telah diambil oleh pelaku kejahatan. Keadilan bukan bicara mengenai kita melakukan hal yang sama dengan apa yang si pelaku telah lakukan terhadap kita. Selama ini kita muak dengan segala tindakan kejam dan meminta pemerintah untuk membalas tindakan kejam tersebut dengan menerapkan hukuman mati. Tanpa kita sadari, penerapan hukuman mati ternyata hanya memperpanjang rantai kekerasan.

Jakarta, 10 November 2008
Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat

Taufik Basari, S.H., S.Hum, LL.M
Ketua Dewan Pengurus

Ricky Gunawan, S.H.
Direktur Program

...

2008-11-10T09:35:00.001+07:00

oleh: Sekar Wulan Sari
--

.....
ada hening yang hinggap di bulu matanya
matanya mengerjap seperti kerling bintang

ceritanya ada seseorang yang sedang bimbang, berusaha menerjang, segala rasa yang sedang ada dalam dirinya

ceritanya, ada seseorang yang menginginkan seseorang yang dikiranya tak akan pernah menjadi miliknya

ceritanya, ada seseorang yang ia pikir ia tertarik kepada seseorang tersebut

ceritanya, ada seseorang yang kala malam mulai turun, adalah saat yg tepat bagi dirinya utk memikirkan seseorang tersebut

ceritanya, ada seseorang, yang kini hingga entah kapan nanti, memutuskan untuk menyimpan rasanya, sedalam dan serapat ia mampu

...
Ia pikir
Ketika pagi hadir
Ketika siang mampir
Ketika sore mulai berada di pinggir
Dan malam mulai melipir
Ia bisa menepiskan bayangnya dari benaknya

tapi

ternyata
rasa adalah sesuatu hal yg sulit ia enyahkan
semakin ia menerjang
semakin ia di rajang

....

The other side of development in Papua

2008-11-06T12:35:00.000+07:00

By Martin Lundqvist

Hong Kong, China — “Witch hunting” has historically been, and still is, a common phenomenon in Papua among the indigenous people. Although different local communities have different interpretations of the practice, the basic tenets are the same: people are blamed for the things that go wrong in life.

It is a cosmology that refuses to accept the haphazardness of death, disease and misfortune. When someone dies at an early age, for example, this is perceived as the work of a witch for which punishment is soon to be meted out.

Information recently received from a local NGO tells of the threatened position of nine women in a village on Bird’s Head Peninsula in West Papua. Local religious leaders and the local community believed these women to be witches responsible for disease, death and general misfortune in the local community. For this, the women have been punished.

The nine women were declared “sinful” and “devils” by the religious leaders and were then segregated from their husbands and children and forcibly moved to isolated areas in the jungle surrounding the village. These areas are not fit for living, and the women who were deported there are in pressing need of the most basic necessities, such as food and healthcare. They are naturally also shocked, and possibly traumatized, from the degrading and violent treatment to which they have been subjected by the local religious leaders.

Papua is a region which is normally considered underdeveloped. Many Papuans live in remote locations where they are deprived of access to the services of the Indonesian state, including education, healthcare and a “modern” justice system.” The police rarely visit the remote villages; if they do it is normally to arrest, torture or threaten someone allegedly belonging to the independence movement OPM, which is also known as the Free Papua Movement.

On July 19, for example, six Papuans were brutally arrested and charged with the crime of subversion for conducting a peaceful pro-independence demonstration, hoisting the symbolically charged Morning Star flag. This incident is not an isolated occurrence but rather forms part of a pattern of political subjugation of the Papuan indigenous population by the Indonesian military, the police and the military police.

When it comes to healthcare, the remoteness of the Papuan villages is sometimes used to justify inaction by the government. In a recent cholera outbreak in Dogyai District of Papua, Indonesian authorities blamed the outbreak on “the long distance between local medical units, or puskesmas, and the village, where local people usually take a four-hour walk to reach the puskemas.” Statements like this make it seem the government is not responsible for the health of these people, that the remoteness of their villages somehow justifies their neglect.

The Indonesian government has a duty to recognize the right of everyone to enjoy the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, according to domestic law No. 11/2005. This law seems to have been bypassed in Papua, where about half the population lives below the poverty line, compared to Jakarta, where approximately 3.4 percent of the population is poor.

At the same time, the government of Indonesia is directing much attention to Papua through the many “development” projects it has initiated there since the mid-1960s. Normally, development would entail an improved standard of living for the people of the region; but in Papua, development has come to have another meaning. Here the government-sanctioned “development” schemes have brought with them large-scale forced evictions, arrests, assaults and killings of indigenous people, as well as environmental disaster, in order to “make room for” transnational mining companies, among which U.S.-based Freeport is the largest.

The Indonesian government has granted these companies access to lands which have traditionally been owned by the indigenous people of the region, who have been forcibly removed from the so-called sacrifice zones – as the Freeport vernacular labels them – and who benefit nothing from the operation of these companies.

The Indonesian government owns 10 percent of Freeport, and Freeport is Indonesia’s largest corporate taxpayer. Needless to say, the stakes are high, and such petty matters as the basic human rights of the indigenous people and the destruction of the environment cannot stand in the way of this Indonesian “model of development.”

Development is often said to have two faces: one of exploitation and one of economic progress. It is also frequently said that these two sides are interdependent. The significance of this connection becomes abundantly clear in Papua, where the indigenous people suffer in order for the large mining corporations to make profits.

Given the present and historical circumstances of the indigenous people of Papua, it is not without hesitation that one calls for the Indonesian government to intervene in cases of “witch hunting.” On one hand, there is a very real problem with development in these areas: people are actually dying from the lack of it. On the other hand, seeing how “development” projects initiated by the government in the region historically have hit, and keep hitting, the indigenous people, asking for “more development” seems instinctively wrong.

Papuans have no need for, as a colleague put it, “the government to march in there to open up a bunch of McDonald’s.” There is, however, an urgent need for the Indonesian government to redefine its conception of development in Papua in a manner that benefits all citizens, including the so-called tribal people of Papua.

--

(Martin Lundqvist is currently serving as an intern at the Asian Human Rights Commission in Hong Kong, where he is primarily assisting in the group's work for human rights in Indonesia. He has a bachelor's degree in peace and conflict studies from Malmoe University in Sweden.)

Obama's Victory Speech #2

2008-11-05T20:59:00.004+07:00

This word cloud displays words in proportion to their frequency.

Obama's Victory Speech

2008-11-05T20:56:00.001+07:00

CHANGE HAS COME

If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible; who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time; who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer.

It's the answer told by lines that stretched around schools and churches in numbers this nation has never seen; by people who waited three hours and four hours, many for the very first time in their lives, because they believed that this time must be different; that their voices could be that difference.

It's the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled - Americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of Red States and Blue States: we are, and always will be, the United States of America.

It's the answer that led those who have been told for so long by so many to be cynical, and fearful, and doubtful of what we can achieve to put their hands on the arc of history and bend it once more toward the hope of a better day.

It's been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what we did on this day, in this election, at this defining moment, change has come to America.

PARTNERS IN THE JOURNEY

A little bit earlier this evening I received an extraordinarily gracious call from Senator McCain. He fought long and hard in this campaign, and he's fought even longer and harder for the country he loves. He has endured sacrifices for America that most of us cannot begin to imagine. We are better off for the service rendered by this brave and selfless leader.

I congratulate him, I congratulate Governor Palin, for all they have achieved, and I look forward to working with them to renew this nation's promise in the months ahead.

I want to thank my partner in this journey, a man who campaigned from his heart and spoke for the men and women he grew up with on the streets of Scranton and rode with on that train home to Delaware, the vice-president-elect of the United States, Joe Biden.

And I would not be standing here tonight without the unyielding support of my best friend for the last 16 years, the rock of our family, the love of my life, the nation's next first lady, Michelle Obama. Sasha and Malia, I love you both more than you can imagine, and you have earned the new puppy that's coming with us to the White House.

And while she's no longer with us, I know my grandmother is watching, along with the family that made me who I am. I miss them tonight, and know that my debt to them is beyond measure. To my sister Maya, my sister Auma, all my other brothers and sisters - thank you so much for all the support you have given me. I am grateful to them.

To my campaign manager David Plouffe, the unsung hero of this campaign, who built the best political campaign in the history of the United States of America. My chief strategist David Axelrod, who has been a partner with me every step of the way, and to the best campaign team ever assembled in the history of politics - you made this happen, and I am forever grateful for what you've sacrificed to get it done.

VICTORY FOR THE PEOPLE

But above all, I will never forget who this victory truly belongs to - it belongs to you.

I was never the likeliest candidate for this office. We didn't start with much money or many endorsements. Our campaign was not hatched in the halls of Washington - it began in the backyards of Des Moines and the living rooms of Concord and the front porches of Charleston.

It was built by working men and women who dug into what little savings they had to give $5 and $10 and $20 to the cause.

It grew strength from the young people who rejected the myth of their generation's apathy; who left their homes and their families for jobs that offered little pay and less sleep; it grew strength from the not-so-young people who braved the bitter cold and scorching heat to knock on the doors of perfect strangers; from the millions of Americans who volunteered, and organised, and proved that more than two centuries later, a government of the people, by the people and for the people has not perished from the Earth.

This is your victory.

THE TASK AHEAD

I know you didn't do this just to win an election and I know you didn't do it for me. You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime - two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century.

Even as we stand here tonight, we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan to risk their lives for us.

There are mothers and fathers who will lie awake after their children fall asleep and wonder how they'll make the mortgage, or pay their doctor's bills, or save enough for their child's college education. There is new energy to harness and new jobs to be created; new schools to build and threats to meet and alliances to repair.

REMAKING THE NATION
The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even in one term, but America - I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you - we as a people will get there.

There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as president, and we know that government can't solve every problem. But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree.

And above all, I will ask you to join in the work of remaking this nation the only way it's been done in America for 221 years - block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand.

ONE NATION, ONE PEOPLE

What began 21 months ago in the depths of winter cannot end on this autumn night. This victory alone is not the change we seek - it is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were. It cannot happen without you, without a new spirit of service, a new spirit of sacrifice.

So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism; of service and responsibility where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves, but each other. Let us remember that if this financial crisis taught us anything, it's that we cannot have a thriving Wall Street while Main Street suffers - in this country, we rise or fall as one nation; as one people.

Let us resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long. Let us remember that it was a man from this state who first carried the banner of the Republican Party to the White House - a party founded on the values of self-reliance, individual liberty, and national unity.

Those are values that we all share, and while the Democratic Party has won a great victory tonight, we do so with a measure of humility and determination to heal the divides that have held back our progress. As Lincoln said to a nation far more divided than ours: "We are not enemies, but friends… though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection."

And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn - I may not have won your vote tonight, but I hear your voices, I need your help, and I will be your president too.

AMERICA IN THE WORLD

And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of the world - our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand.

To those who would tear the world down - we will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security - we support you.

And to all those who have wondered if America's beacon still burns as bright - tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope.

For that is the true genius of America - that America can change. Our union can be perfected. And what we have already achieved gives us hope for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

A HISTORY OF STRUGGLE

This election had many firsts and many stories that will be told for generations. But one that's on my mind tonight is about a woman who cast her ballot in Atlanta. She's a lot like the millions of others who stood in line to make their voice heard in this election except for one thing - Ann Nixon Cooper is 106 years old.

She was born just a generation past slavery; a time when there were no cars on the road or planes in the sky; when someone like her couldn't vote for two reasons - because she was a woman and because of the colour of her skin.

And tonight, I think about all that she's seen throughout her century in America - the heartache and the hope; the struggle and the progress; the times we were told that we can't, and the people who pressed on with that American creed: Yes, we can.

At a time when women's voices were silenced and their hopes dismissed, she lived to see them stand up and speak out and reach for the ballot. Yes, we can.

When there was despair in the dust bowl and depression across the land, she saw a nation conquer fear itself with a New Deal, new jobs and a new sense of common purpose. Yes, we can.

When the bombs fell on our harbour and tyranny threatened the world, she was there to witness a generation rise to greatness and a democracy was saved. Yes, we can.

She was there for the buses in Montgomery, the hoses in Birmingham, a bridge in Selma, and a preacher from Atlanta who told a people that "we shall overcome". Yes, we can.

A man touched down on the Moon, a wall came down in Berlin, a world was connected by our own science and imagination. And this year, in this election, she touched her finger to a screen, and cast her vote, because after 106 years in America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours, she knows how America can change. Yes, we can.

THIS IS OUR MOMENT

America, we have come so far. We have seen so much. But there is so much more to do. So tonight, let us ask ourselves - if our children should live to see the next century; if my daughters should be so lucky to live as long as Ann Nixon Cooper, what change will they see? What progress will we have made?

This is our chance to answer that call. This is our moment.

This is our time - to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids; to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the American dream and reaffirm that fundamental truth - that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope, and where we are met with cynicism and doubt, and those who tell us that we can't, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people: yes, we can.

Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.

--
source: bbc.com

In search of a better future

2008-10-30T17:55:00.000+07:00

source: Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
--

Thousands of Somali refugees have fled their homes to escape violence only to find themselves stranded for years in overcrowded camps in Dadaab, northern Kenya, waiting for peace which continues to elude Somalia.

“Today I have seen children who have been born, raised and grown up in this camp. It’s unacceptable from a human rights point of view,” Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights Kyung-wha Kang told journalists during her visit to Dadaab refugee camp on 23 October.

She talked to children in the camp, many of them have spent their entire lives there, and urged them not to give up.

“Somalia is not a lost cause; it is a long term cause, and one that will require stamina, creativity and a concerted effort by the international community, civil society, and above all, Somali political leaders,” Kang later said.

She also listened to the heartbreaking stories of new victims of the Somali conflict, who have been coming to the camp at a rate of some 5000 per month.

Three months ago, a human rights assessment mission on Somalia by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) interviewed newly arrived refugees in Dadaab.

A 34-year-old mid-wife spoke about her six-year-old son, who was killed in crossfire in Mogadishu while returning home from school at midday. She fled with her seven other children as well as two orphaned children, and gave birth to her latest child on her way to the camp. A 50-year-old school teacher lived in constant fear whether his three oldest children, aged 7, 9, and 13, would come home safely from school.

Shamsul Bari, Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in Somalia, also recorded the plight of the Somali refugees in his September 2008 report to the Human Rights Council.

“They walked long distances, hitched rides on the back of trucks, paid for bus rides with scant money they could gather by different means or borrow from people, to reach safety in refugee camps in Kenya,” the Independent Expert said.

“There were two families with large number of children whose fathers were killed in bombing or other attacks. A common factor was that they could not deal any more with the violence and fighting that raged around them most of the time. Some had to leave because their houses were razed to the ground by indiscriminate bombing…. In short, all were afflicted with utter hopelessness,” he said.

The Deputy High Commissioner said the determination of Somali human rights defenders, humanitarian workers and members of civil society gave her hope for peace in Somalia.

“But any lasting peace in Somalia must be based on accountability and justice for the serious violations of human rights committed by all sides throughout the Somali conflict,” said the Deputy High Commissioner.

“The Djibouti peace process should serve as a safeguard against amnesties for gross human rights violators, not a mechanism to let warlords off the hook. Broad participation of Somali civil society in the peace process, in particular women, who have borne the brunt of abuses, should help to ensure this,” she added.

According to the United Nations refugee office (UNHCR), Dadaab camp has more than twice as many people as it should have. One of the world's oldest, biggest and most congested refugee camps, Dadaab is now home to more than 215,000 people – a 25 percent increase since the beginning of this year.

Did You Know

2008-10-28T18:49:00.000+07:00

Do you know the names of the three wise monkeys? They are: Mizaru (See no evil), Mikazaru (Hear no evil), and Mazaru (Speak no evil).

There are no letters assigned to the numbers 1 and 0 on a phone keypad. These numbers remain unassigned because they are so-called "flag" numbers, kept for special purposes such as emergency or operator services.

The names of all the continents end with the letter they start with.

Eskimos use refrigerators to keep food from freezing.

The word malaria comes from the words mal and aria, which means bad air. This derives from the old days when it was thought that all diseases are caused by bad, or dirty air.

Rebranding the U.S. With Obama

2008-10-24T10:03:00.000+07:00

by: Nicholas D. Kristof

--
The other day I had a conversation with a Beijing friend and I mentioned that Barack Obama was leading in the presidential race:

She: Obama? But he’s the black man, isn’t he?

Me: Yes, exactly.

She: But surely a black man couldn’t become president of the United States?

Me: It looks as if he’ll be elected.

She: But president? That’s such an important job! In America, I thought blacks were janitors and laborers.

Me: No, blacks have all kinds of jobs.

She: What do white people think about that, about getting a black president? Are they upset? Are they angry?

Me: No, of course not! If Obama is elected, it’ll be because white people voted for him.

[Long pause.]

She: Really? Unbelievable! What an amazing country!

We’re beginning to get a sense of how Barack Obama’s political success could change global perceptions of the United States, redefining the American “brand” to be less about Guantánamo and more about equality. This change in perceptions would help rebuild American political capital in the way that the Marshall Plan did in the 1950s or that John Kennedy’s presidency did in the early 1960s.

In his endorsement of Mr. Obama, Colin Powell noted that “the new president is going to have to fix the reputation that we’ve left with the rest of the world.” That’s not because we crave admiration, but because cooperation is essential to address 21st-century challenges; you can’t fire cruise missiles at the global financial crisis.

In his endorsement, Mr. Powell added that an Obama election “will also not only electrify our country, I think it’ll electrify the world.” You can already see that. A 22-nation survey by the BBC found that voters abroad preferred Mr. Obama to Mr. McCain in every single country — by four to one over all. Nearly half of those in the BBC poll said that the election of Mr. Obama, an African-American, would “fundamentally change” their perceptions of the United States.

Europe is particularly intoxicated by the possibility of restoring amity with America in an Obama presidency. As The Economist put it: “Across the Continent, Bush hatred has been replaced by Obama-mania.”

Steven Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes, which conducted the BBC poll, said that at a recent international conference he attended in Malaysia, many Muslims voiced astonishment at Mr. Obama’s rise because it was so much at odds with their assumptions about the United States. Remember that the one thing countless millions of people around the world “know” about the United States is that it is controlled by a cabal of white bankers and Jews who use police with fire hoses to repress blacks. To them, Mr. Obama’s rise triggers severe cognitive dissonance.

“It’s an anomaly, so contrary to their expectation that it makes them receptive to a new paradigm for the U.S.,” Mr. Kull said.

Europeans like to mock the vapidity of American politics, but they also acknowledge that it would be difficult to imagine a brown or black person leading France or Germany.

As for Africa, Mr. Obama’s Kenyan father was of the Luo tribe, a minority that has long suffered brutal discrimination in both Kenya and in Uganda (where it is known as the Acholi). The bitter joke in East Africa is that a Luo has more of a chance of becoming president in the United States than in Kenya.

Yet before we get too far with the self-congratulations, it’s worth remembering something else.

In the western industrialized world, full of university graduates and marinated in principles of egalitarianism, the idea of electing a member of a racial minority to the highest office seems an astonishing breakthrough. But Jamaica’s 95 percent black population elected a white man as its prime minister in 1980, and kept him in office throughout that decade.

Likewise, the African nation of Mauritius has elected a white prime minister of French origin. And don’t forget that India is overwhelmingly Hindu but now has a Sikh prime minister and a white Christian as president of its ruling party, and until last year it had a Muslim in the largely ceremonial position of president.

Look, Mr. Obama’s skin color is a bad reason to vote for him or against him. Substance should always trump symbolism.

Yet if this election goes as the polls suggest, we may find a path to restore America’s global influence — and thus to achieve some of our international objectives — in part because the world is concluding that Americans can, after all, see beyond a person’s epidermis. My hunch is that that is right, and that we’re every bit as open-minded about racial minorities as Jamaicans already were a quarter-century ago.
--

Barack Obama for President

2008-10-24T09:59:00.001+07:00

Editorial, The New York Times, October 23, 2008

--
Hyperbole is the currency of presidential campaigns, but this year the nation’s future truly hangs in the balance.

The United States is battered and drifting after eight years of President Bush’s failed leadership. He is saddling his successor with two wars, a scarred global image and a government systematically stripped of its ability to protect and help its citizens — whether they are fleeing a hurricane’s floodwaters, searching for affordable health care or struggling to hold on to their homes, jobs, savings and pensions in the midst of a financial crisis that was foretold and preventable.

As tough as the times are, the selection of a new president is easy. After nearly two years of a grueling and ugly campaign, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois has proved that he is the right choice to be the 44th president of the United States.

•

Mr. Obama has met challenge after challenge, growing as a leader and putting real flesh on his early promises of hope and change. He has shown a cool head and sound judgment. We believe he has the will and the ability to forge the broad political consensus that is essential to finding solutions to this nation’s problems.

In the same time, Senator John McCain of Arizona has retreated farther and farther to the fringe of American politics, running a campaign on partisan division, class warfare and even hints of racism. His policies and worldview are mired in the past. His choice of a running mate so evidently unfit for the office was a final act of opportunism and bad judgment that eclipsed the accomplishments of 26 years in Congress.

Given the particularly ugly nature of Mr. McCain’s campaign, the urge to choose on the basis of raw emotion is strong. But there is a greater value in looking closely at the facts of life in America today and at the prescriptions the candidates offer. The differences are profound.

Mr. McCain offers more of the Republican every-man-for-himself ideology, now lying in shards on Wall Street and in Americans’ bank accounts. Mr. Obama has another vision of government’s role and responsibilities.

In his convention speech in Denver, Mr. Obama said, “Government cannot solve all our problems, but what it should do is that which we cannot do for ourselves: protect us from harm and provide every child a decent education; keep our water clean and our toys safe; invest in new schools and new roads and new science and technology.”

Since the financial crisis, he has correctly identified the abject failure of government regulation that has brought the markets to the brink of collapse.

The Economy

The American financial system is the victim of decades of Republican deregulatory and anti-tax policies. Those ideas have been proved wrong at an unfathomable price, but Mr. McCain — a self-proclaimed “foot soldier in the Reagan revolution” — is still a believer.

Mr. Obama sees that far-reaching reforms will be needed to protect Americans and American business.

Mr. McCain talks about reform a lot, but his vision is pinched. His answer to any economic question is to eliminate pork-barrel spending — about $18 billion in a $3 trillion budget — cut taxes and wait for unfettered markets to solve the problem.

Mr. Obama is clear that the nation’s tax structure must be changed to make it fairer. That means the well-off Americans who have benefited disproportionately from Mr. Bush’s tax cuts will have to pay some more. Working Americans, who have seen their standard of living fall and their children’s options narrow, will benefit. Mr. Obama wants to raise the minimum wage and tie it to inflation, restore a climate in which workers are able to organize unions if they wish and expand educational opportunities.

Mr. McCain, who once opposed President Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy as fiscally irresponsible, now wants to make them permanent. And while he talks about keeping taxes low for everyone, his proposed cuts would overwhelmingly benefit the top 1 percent of Americans while digging the country into a deeper fiscal hole.

National Security

The American military — its people and equipment — is dangerously overstretched. Mr. Bush has neglected the necessary war in Afghanistan, which now threatens to spiral into defeat. The unnecessary and staggeringly costly war in Iraq must be ended as quickly and responsibly as possible.

While Iraq’s leaders insist on a swift drawdown of American troops and a deadline for the end of the occupation, Mr. McCain is still taking about some ill-defined “victory.” As a result, he has offered no real plan for extracting American troops and limiting any further damage to Iraq and its neighbors.

Mr. Obama was an early and thoughtful opponent of the war in Iraq, and he has presented a military and diplomatic plan for withdrawing American forces. Mr. Obama also has correctly warned that until the Pentagon starts pulling troops out of Iraq, there will not be enough troops to defeat the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

Mr. McCain, like Mr. Bush, has only belatedly focused on Afghanistan’s dangerous unraveling and the threat that neighboring Pakistan may quickly follow.

Mr. Obama would have a learning curve on foreign affairs, but he has already showed sounder judgment than his opponent on these critical issues. His choice of Senator Joseph Biden — who has deep foreign-policy expertise — as his running mate is another sign of that sound judgment. Mr. McCain’s long interest in foreign policy and the many dangers this country now faces make his choice of Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska more irresponsible.

Both presidential candidates talk about strengthening alliances in Europe and Asia, including NATO, and strongly support Israel. Both candidates talk about repairing America’s image in the world. But it seems clear to us that Mr. Obama is far more likely to do that — and not just because the first black president would present a new American face to the world.

Mr. Obama wants to reform the United Nations, while Mr. McCain wants to create a new entity, the League of Democracies — a move that would incite even fiercer anti-American furies around the world.

Unfortunately, Mr. McCain, like Mr. Bush, sees the world as divided into friends (like Georgia) and adversaries (like Russia). He proposed kicking Russia out of the Group of 8 industrialized nations even before the invasion of Georgia. We have no sympathy for Moscow’s bullying, but we also have no desire to replay the cold war. The United States must find a way to constrain the Russians’ worst impulses, while preserving the ability to work with them on arms control and other vital initiatives.

Both candidates talk tough on terrorism, and neither has ruled out military action to end Iran’s nuclear weapons program. But Mr. Obama has called for a serious effort to try to wean Tehran from its nuclear ambitions with more credible diplomatic overtures and tougher sanctions. Mr. McCain’s willingness to joke about bombing Iran was frightening.

The Constitution and the Rule of Law

Under Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the justice system and the separation of powers have come under relentless attack. Mr. Bush chose to exploit the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001, the moment in which he looked like the president of a unified nation, to try to place himself above the law.

Mr. Bush has arrogated the power to imprison men without charges and browbeat Congress into granting an unfettered authority to spy on Americans. He has created untold numbers of “black” programs, including secret prisons and outsourced torture. The president has issued hundreds, if not thousands, of secret orders. We fear it will take years of forensic research to discover how many basic rights have been violated.

Both candidates have renounced torture and are committed to closing the prison camp in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

But Mr. Obama has gone beyond that, promising to identify and correct Mr. Bush’s attacks on the democratic system. Mr. McCain has been silent on the subject.

Mr. McCain improved protections for detainees. But then he helped the White House push through the appalling Military Commissions Act of 2006, which denied detainees the right to a hearing in a real court and put Washington in conflict with the Geneva Conventions, greatly increasing the risk to American troops.

The next president will have the chance to appoint one or more justices to a Supreme Court that is on the brink of being dominated by a radical right wing. Mr. Obama may appoint less liberal judges than some of his followers might like, but Mr. McCain is certain to pick rigid ideologues. He has said he would never appoint a judge who believes in women’s reproductive rights.

The Candidates

It will be an enormous challenge just to get the nation back to where it was before Mr. Bush, to begin to mend its image in the world and to restore its self-confidence and its self-respect. Doing all of that, and leading America forward, will require strength of will, character and intellect, sober judgment and a cool, steady hand.

Mr. Obama has those qualities in abundance. Watching him being tested in the campaign has long since erased the reservations that led us to endorse Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic primaries. He has drawn in legions of new voters with powerful messages of hope and possibility and calls for shared sacrifice and social responsibility.

Mr. McCain, whom we chose as the best Republican nominee in the primaries, has spent the last coins of his reputation for principle and sound judgment to placate the limitless demands and narrow vision of the far-right wing. His righteous fury at being driven out of the 2000 primaries on a racist tide aimed at his adopted daughter has been replaced by a zealous embrace of those same win-at-all-costs tactics and tacticians.

He surrendered his standing as an independent thinker in his rush to embrace Mr. Bush’s misbegotten tax policies and to abandon his leadership position on climate change and immigration reform.

Mr. McCain could have seized the high ground on energy and the environment. Earlier in his career, he offered the first plausible bill to control America’s emissions of greenhouse gases. Now his positions are a caricature of that record: think Ms. Palin leading chants of “drill, baby, drill.”

Mr. Obama has endorsed some offshore drilling, but as part of a comprehensive strategy including big investments in new, clean technologies.

•

Mr. Obama has withstood some of the toughest campaign attacks ever mounted against a candidate. He’s been called un-American and accused of hiding a secret Islamic faith. The Republicans have linked him to domestic terrorists and questioned his wife’s love of her country. Ms. Palin has also questioned millions of Americans’ patriotism, calling Republican-leaning states “pro-America.”

This politics of fear, division and character assassination helped Mr. Bush drive Mr. McCain from the 2000 Republican primaries and defeat Senator John Kerry in 2004. It has been the dominant theme of his failed presidency.

The nation’s problems are simply too grave to be reduced to slashing “robo-calls” and negative ads. This country needs sensible leadership, compassionate leadership, honest leadership and strong leadership. Barack Obama has shown that he has all of those qualities.
--

Dead Mouse

2008-10-22T11:41:00.003+07:00

I am pretty sure all of you must have seen a dead mouse lying in a road. Crashed by a motorcycle, car or even a big giant truck. Bloodshed around its dead body, with its tiny brain and lungs and hearts (wuuekk)..scattered. The simple analysis of its dead must be very simple, that poor mouse wanted to cross the road, running from one hole to another in the other side of the road.

I don't know, I am just wondering. Do they, those mouse, have the same language to communicate each other? I mean, if one mouse is dead by accident. The other mouse should tell other mouse how danger the road is. The chief of the tribe should prohibit walking alone, especially at night. Or perhaps, why don't they wear goggle mask at night and shocking colorful clothes so that the driver can see them crossing the road?

It's so absurd.

Give him an orange

2008-10-17T13:14:00.000+07:00

One day in Contract Law class, Professor Jepson asked one of his better students, "Now if you were to give someone an orange, how would you go about it?"

The student replied, "Here's an orange."

The professor was livid. "No! No! Think like a lawyer!" The student then recited, "Okay, I'd tell him, 'I hereby give and convey to you all and singular, my estate and interests, rights, claim, title, calim and advantages of and in, said orange, together with all its rind, juice, pulp, and seeds, and all rights and advantages with full power to bite, cut, freeze and otherwise eat, the same, or give the same away with and without the pulp, juice, rind and seeds, anything herein before or hereinafter or in any deed, or deeds, instruments of whatever nature or kind whatsoever to the contrary in anywise notwithstanding..."

Madu

2008-10-14T21:40:00.001+07:00

A good poem from a good friend of mine.

--
Madu.

Pintu bersekat beling itu terbuka, dan menyemburlah lendir berjenis kelamin perempuan itu. Jalinan huruf yang muncrat dari pintu itu luar biasa bau. Satu kata saja yang aku muntahkan dari lubang hidungku. Keji!

Telapak kakiku berjingkat-jingkat menapak diatas tanah kering retak nan tandus. Pintu itu dan huruf-hurufnya masih mencucurkan ludah berbau burung merpati yang habis bersenggama. Anyir! Tubuhku meliuk diantara ranting berderak yang rapuh. Betisku mengejang, pinggulku bergetar. Aku pikir aku orgasme, ternyata aku sekarat.

Sebuah tambur besar di tengah padang pasir.

Tidak ada pemain. Hanya ada angklung bambu yang berbunyi karena ada angin yang menerpanya lembut. Rambutku bergoyang ke kanan dan ke kiri mengikuti laju tubuhku. Tanpa telapak tangan aku menggapai bintang dan memberikan kepadanya. Sebagai simbol apa yang disebut rasa. Kecupan bibirnya membuat jiwaku hening. Kain yang tersulam diatas kulitku mendadak luruh. Keperempuananku bangkit dan aku terangsang. Kukunya bersenandung diatas payudaraku. Suram cahaya matahari, simbah peluh dan diiringi debur tambur besar ditengah padang pasir kami bercinta. Intim. Aku yakin ini cinta.

Diatas gulungan ombak mata kami bertemu, sementara ujung kainku tersangkut sampan yang membawa kami ke tengah, tubuhnya merengkuh aku masuk kedalam jiwanya yang senyap. Aku bisa dengan kental mengendus bau laki-laki jatuh cinta. Aku sanggup pertaruhkan segalanya jika saja kelaki-lakiannya tidak bercabang.

Bibirnya merajuk dalam mulutku, sekali lagi hatiku yang pecah kemarin sore lunglai. Rasa ini adalah rasa singkat, fana bukan miliknya, tapi milik diriku. Bukan dia, tapi dia yang lain.

Mencintanya seperti menghamba. Bercinta dengannya seperti bercinta dengan gurita. Liar dan lezat. Aku mengeja huruf-huruf dirinya satu persatu diatas pasir busuk.

Zahir.

Zahir.

Zahir?

Aku dengar ada tempo yang kian melambat.

Aku rasakan ada yang jatuh dan bersimbah darah

Ternyata sebuah janin setengah jadi

Wajahku tenggelam dalam lilin meleleh di dekapan kelopak matanya.

Aroma bunga kuburan memberikan aku kesadaran. Aku terbangun diatas nisan kosong tanpa judul. Aku menyapu rumput berembun yang tumbuh diatas tanah dengan tungkai kakiku yang telanjang. Bulan berdiri tegak di pelupuk mataku yang besar dan menatapnya jalang. Bilamana ini hanya satu detik mimpi yang terkait begitu mesra pada merpati yang sedang bercinta? Lengah kah aku menyingkat satu detik malam bersamanya untuk aku tukar dengan keperempuananku?

Layaknya lidahku yang sudah mengucap tadi

Mencintanya seperti menghamba

Peliknya aku bukan seonggok ngengat bodoh yang didambakannya

Aku kupu-kupu sore berwarna biru

Yang sedang mencari pasangan kalbu

untuk tidak hanya sekedar disentuh dan dicumbu

tetapi untuk berbagi segala menit dalam hitungan waktu

Meski itu untuk jiwa bertubuh seribu

Aku pastikan aku sanggup mempersembahkan madu

Ruang depan, Lebak Bulus 2

Jakarta, Jumat, 12 September 2008

Tamat Pk. 23.08 WIB

Oleh: Sekar Wulan Sari

No anti-torture laws 10 years on

2008-10-11T15:37:00.001+07:00

by: Ricky Gunawan.

On Sept. 28, 1998, Indonesia ratified Convention against Torture. It was expected that this ratification would be a milestone in the struggle against torture. It was meant to impede rampant and continuous torture practices committed by Indonesian police officers and military forces at the time.

Despite the ratification, however, there is no corresponding domestic law criminalizing torture.

For some, torture is the same as maltreatment. According to international human rights law, however, torture is categorized as the highest of crimes. The jus cogens nature of torture justifies states taking universal jurisdiction over torture wherever committed.

International human rights law provides that offenses jus cogens may be punished by any state because the offenders are "common enemies of all mankind and all nations have an equal interest in their apprehension and prosecution". Those who commit torture are classed as acting against humanity (hostis humanis generis). Meanwhile, maltreatment is simply an ordinary crime.

Torture has an enormous impact on the lives of victims, victims' families, perpetrators and their families, those aware of such practices in civil society, and enforcement agencies. Torture is not just about breaking the victims, both physically and mentally.

It will haunt the victims for the rest of their lives. Torture is always deliberate and the victims are always unwary. The inflicted pain is acute and chronic. Central to the practice of torture is the intention of cruelty and destruction.

Torture is acknowledged as an ultimate denial of the inherent dignity of every individual. It focuses the power of the state apparatus against a single, defenseless individual, who is often locked in a small, murky room. Torture aims to isolate, hurt and humiliate the victim by using one of the most basic human nature, the aversion of pain or suffering, to overpower dignity. Moreover, it aims to strip the individual of the very qualities on which human rights are based.

The consequences of torture are multidimensional and interrelated. No part of the victim's life is untouched. Although the effects of the physical pain suffered diminish after months or years, lasting physical impairments resulting from torture, such as amputation, hearing loss, blindness, muscle impairment, inability to bear children, sexual dysfunction, scars and poorly healed fractures, are permanent mementos of the trauma endured.

In addition to the physical wounds, torture victims suffer from psychological symptoms such as feelings of anxiety, guilt, shame and powerlessness in relation to the problems of everyday life. They can also suffer from poor sleep and recurrent nightmares.

Torture stigmatizes and ostracizes the victims. The families, spouses and children of the victims also bear the brunt, left to lead secluded and demoralized lives.

The aftermath of torture does not solely affect the victims and their families. It affects the perpetrators as well. Torturers and their families also suffer from comparable psychological effects, though they enshroud them using a facade of pride and superiority.

The torturer will be living a normal life even though they have just committed a serious crime. In fact, in terms of family relationships, torturers are living a double life: They are nice fathers at home, while also cruel, ruthless and cold-blooded people.

Despite the unspeakable aftermath of the crime as well as a plethora of reports and declarations issued by the international community, torture persists in more than half of the countries in the world, including Indonesia. Torture remains a problem of great magnitude in the world.

Societies allowing the practice of torture to take place are more likely to develop a culture of violence, generating further atrocities. Deterring such actions and establishing measurable systems to effectively prevent torture may come only from respect of human dignity and social sanity, without which, torture remains an abhorrent violation of human rights and human dignity.

The question left is, will the Indonesian government put its overly repeated commitments to pass proper laws on torture into reality or not? Ten years is, of course, more than enough for the Indonesian government to thoroughly understand the gravity of torture. Recognition of the grave nature, however, devoid of a single law to criminalize it will never bring such evil practices to an end.

--
The writer is the program director of Community Legal Aid Institute, Jakarta. He can be reached at rgunawan@lbhmasyarakat.org.

Amazing Facts about Animals

2008-10-06T17:31:00.001+07:00

Did you know that...

An annoyed camel will spit at a person.

The world's smallest dog is the Chihuahua, which means "tiny dog in the sky."

The pig is rated the fourth most intelligent animal but are mentioned only twice in the Bible

Sheep are mentioned 45 times and goats 88 times in the Bible. Dogs are mentioned 14 times and lions 89 times, but domestic cats are not mentioned.

A giraffe can clean its ears with its 50cm (20 in) tongue.

The slowest fish is the Sea Horse, which moves along at about 0.016 km/h (0.01 mph).

The heart of a blue whale is the size of a small car.

The tongue of a blue whale is as long as an elephant.

Sharks are immune to all known diseases.

Animals also are either right-handed or left-handed. Polar bears are left-handed - and so is Kermit the Frog.

Laskar Pelangi

2008-09-29T16:07:00.001+07:00

I was supposed to watch this movie on Thursday, October 2, with my friends. However, given the fact that last Sunday, September 28, me and my friends, Maesy and Setiawan, cancelled our one-day-trip to Bogor for the reason that there was a minor accident at the Manggarai Train Station, we decided then to watch this impressive movie on Sunday.

Laskar Pelangi is a movie taken from an Indonesian bestseller novel with the same title, written by Andrea Hirata. It’s inspired by a true story. This marvelous movie is produced by Mira Lesmana, and directed by Riri Riza, both of whom I admire so much and regard them as the super-genius of the Indonesian movie industry. Their movies are largely acknowledged as a high-quality movie in terms of plot, cinematography, and filled with great casts too.

This movie is full of emotion. I am positive to say that you will laugh a lot and also you will cry when you are watching this movie. It is also filled with lots of good messages, unique culture, as well as beautiful landscape of Belitong.

Despite the fact that the plot is not that strong as I expected, as I am also aware that it is impossible to move the detailed plot from the book into a two hours movie; this is a very inspiring movie. As a person who strongly believes in the importance of education, I would give Laskar Pelangi five stars.

No new tricks for Indonesia

2008-09-25T11:38:00.000+07:00

By Alexandra Da Roza
Guest Commentary

Hong Kong, China — “You can’t teach an old dog new tricks,” the most cliché of maxims, is in this case grimly appropriate. The recent withdrawal of statements from two key witnesses in Indonesia’s most high-profile human rights case seems to reflect the nation’s old vices under former President Suharto.

For many, the retraction of the testimonies from Zondhy Anwar and Arifin Rahman – both former employees of Muchdi Purwopranjano at the National Intelligence Agency (BIN) – is a reminder that the institution remains separate from the state’s rule of law. Implicating the former deputy head for the murder of prominent human rights activist, Munir Said Thalib, has proved difficult. Both witnesses withdrew their previous statements in a recent court session: one claimed to have been under pressure during the police investigation, and the other denied having ever made his.

These inconsistencies are a stark reminder of the country’s widespread culture of impunity – perhaps the largest obstacle confronting Munir’s murder case.

This was not always the case, however. The arrest of Muchdi in June 2007 had afforded hope for an end to national impunity, but the little headway achieved since has now been made clear: four years since Munir died of arsenic poisoning on a Garuda Indonesian Airways flight on Sept. 7, 2004, and the alleged involvement of high-ranking government officials in the conspiracy has yet to be clarified.

The existence of an impartial, independent, and adequately functioning legal system within Indonesia’s so-called “free” democracy is thus questionable. The investigation’s obstacles relate mainly to the inability to properly investigate BIN, and if approving the withdrawal of key testimonies about the agency is anything to go by, then the Indonesian legal system appears ineffective in controlling the executive branch of its government.

One cannot help but wonder who exactly BIN is answerable to. The days under Suharto have passed, as has the bizarre dual function, or “dwi fungsi,” of military officials serving in civilian Cabinets. Yet a transparent system of checks and balances, normally characteristic of democratic governments, has yet to emerge in Indonesia.

In theory, the purpose of an intelligence agency is to provide the government with information related to national security and defense. It should aid the government in its policy-making process, but not actually influence the nature of the policies themselves. History shows that the agency’s influence on policy did once exist in Indonesia, through the dwi fungsi function, since military officials were closely related to the intelligence agency. But restructuring movements since should have demolished such defects in the system.

BIN’s authority in conducting independent activities, practiced with what appears to be a high degree of autonomy, is something the Indonesian state should consider a defect. After all, Indonesia’s 1945 Constitution, together with more recent updates enshrining fundamental human rights, is based on the rule of law. It is precisely this element, however, that is missing from the country’s most well-known human rights case.

Where, one might ask, is the justice in a murder case that has struggled to progress through the country’s judicial process for over four years? Where, one might also ask, is the justice in allowing the victim’s murderers to walk free by failing to conduct a complete trial?

If even the most significant of cases is facing difficulties moving forward within the Indonesian judicial process, it is doubtful that lesser-known cases involving human rights defenders or extrajudicial killings have been more successful. The fact that the nation is founded upon a concept that is barely visible in the country is laughable.

The course of the investigation into Munir’s murder has brought with it a mixture of hope and disappointment. Recent developments in Muchdi’s ongoing trial have reflected this erratic process. Ultimately, however, the seriousness of the disappointments – the institutional flaws that have been exposed in the process, including impunity and the absence of an independent judicial system – lead one to doubt the possibility of real and imminent change. After all, the country has undergone ten years of its national reformation program, its “reformasi,” and still no changes other than very superficial ones have been made.

Munir’s case is a telling indicator of the level of the state’s commitment to promoting and protecting human rights. The road ahead for current cases, as well as future ones, that are banking on legal and institutional processes made easier by the success of Munir, is still unknown. The difficulty of breaking old habits seems to suggest that we might have a while to wait for positive developments to come.

--

(Alexandra Da Roza recently earned a master’s degree in economics and international relations from the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. She is curently serving as a volunteer at the Asian Human Rights Commission in Hong Kong, assisting with the group's work for human rights in Indonesia.)