UNHCR | Refworld | Whither human rights in Indonesia?

 Title: Whither human rights in Indonesia?

Victims of alleged human rights violations in Indonesia, a country where human rights courts set up in 2000 have yet to convict a single case, are facing an uphill battle to bring perpetrators to justice.

Data from local NGO Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras) estimates more than one million people suffered rights abuses between 1965 and 1998 that took place largely under President Suharto’s military rule, which ended in 1998 with his forced resignation.

“We have an unusual situation in this country. You have all these human rights violations but as things stand, no-one has been found guilty in a human rights court,” said Haris Azhar, co-ordinator of Kontras.

In 2000 the Indonesian parliament created human rights courts to hear and rule on cases concerning gross violations of human rights. Over 12 years, 12 cases have come before the country’s four human rights courts, with no resulting convictions. 

State brutality in Papua

In recent years activists have reported human rights abuses in the country’s remote Papuan region, where a separatist conflict has simmered for decades.

The resource-rich region (3,000km east of Jakarta and including the provinces of Papua and West Papua) has the lowest level of human development of Indonesia’s 33 provinces.

Penihas Lokbere from Jayapura, the capital of Papua Province, said he is one of 105 people arrested by the police in 2000 in the university town of Abepura, about 10km from Jayapura.

According to Human Rights Watch, a group of unidentified people attacked a police post in Abepura, killing two policemen and a security guard.

“The police wanted to retaliate,” said Lokbere. “They came to our dormitory while we were sleeping and arrested us. They didn’t ask any questions.”

Along with his fellow students, Lokbere was imprisoned for three days, where he said he was tortured, handcuffed and beaten with a metal crook. Until now, no one has been convicted.

A 2012 joint report of the International Centre for Transitional Justice (ITCJ) and the Jayapura-based Institute of Human Rights Studies and Advocacy (ELSHAM), recorded nearly 750 rights violations against Papuans from 1960-2012, including arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and killings.

Paul Mambrasar, a representative of ELSHAM said the actual number of violations may be much higher. “Many of the victims are not ready to speak about what happened. The provinces of Papua are militarized and people are worried if they give information, they will be terrorized by the military or the police.”

The Papua region has had decades-long separatist tension related to the stalled implementation of a special autonomy arrangement (granted in 2001); communities’ lack access to natural resource wealth such as gold, copper and timber; and there have been security crackdowns on political demonstrations.

Josef Roy Benedict, Amnesty International’s Indonesia campaigner based in London, said ongoing human rights violations in the region are in part due to a culture of impunity there.

“Police officers tend to be punished only for disciplinary offences, often in closed-door proceedings, while offences by the military are dealt with through the military court system, which lacks independence and impartiality,” said Benedict.  

More UNnews: UNHCR | Refworld | Whither human rights in Indonesia?

Indonesia ‘Wasted’ Chance to Push Human Rights in Asean Nations

Indonesia has failed to use its influence to urge other Southeast Asian countries to improve their own commitments to upholding human rights, a leading watchdog says.

Haris Azhar, coordinator of the Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras), said in a statement on Sunday that despite chairing the rights commission of the 10-nation Association of Southeast Asian Nations from 2009 to 2012, Jakarta has been reluctant to use its influence to petition for greater protection of rights.

Most notably, he said, Indonesia has failed to take a “productive stance” on abuses against the minority Rohingya community in Myanmar.

He said this silence went against the Indonesian Foreign Ministry’s own ambitions of contributing to the democratization process in Myanmar.

“Indonesia’s position as the chair of the Asean Human Rights Commission has not yet been put to use in strengthening commitments of other members [and] pushing for progress on human rights,” Haris said.

“Indonesia’s strength in Asean and its domestic democracy have also not been used to contribute to meaningful change for human rights in Asean.”

He added that the Indonesian delegation to the rights commission has the potential to lobby for greater awareness and respect for human rights across the region, lauding the team as professional, transparent and competent.

“To date, the governments of Indonesia and Thailand are the only ones who allow open public participation in nominating candidates to the Asean rights commission,” he said.

“We need to maintain this system of open participation and even boost its quality so that Indonesia can serve as an example for the other countries in Asean. Ultimately, we hope all other countries in the region will practice the openness now shown by Indonesia.”

Indonesia’s representative to the rights commission, Rafendi Djamin, was appointed in 2009 and is an activist from the Human Rights Working Group.

With the inaugural batch of commissioners set to end their three-year-terms on Oct. 23, the governments of the 10 Asean member states are preparing to select new representatives.

Haris highlighted greater transparency as something new commissioners should be committed to spearheading. He also stressed the need for more efforts to nudge other countries toward a greater commitment to upholding human rights.

Source : The Jakarta Globe

 

Human Rights mechanisms: Solutions or problems?

There were two meetings recently concerning two regional human rights mechanisms, which are important for Indonesia’s foreign policy. The first meeting was the 8th ASEAN Inter-governmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) on the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration (AHRD) in Brunei Darussalam on Aug. 24-26, 2012. The second was the 2nd Independent and Permanent Human Rights Commission (IPHRC) of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in Ankara, Turkey on Aug. 27-31, 2012.

Among other things, the OIC meeting was to adopt draft rules and procedure addressing human rights problems OIC and non-OIC countries such as Syria, Mali and the Rohingya Muslim problems in Myanmar.

AICHR was established on Oct. 23, 2009 in Thailand, based on Article 14 of the Charter. It members comprise 10 representatives from 10 ASEAN member countries.

Although the main objective of the commission is to promote human rights and fundamental freedoms for the peoples of ASEAN, member states opt for the “promotion first, protection later” formula for AICHR. It was designed without the power of investigation, monitoring, enforcement and interpretation of its Terms of Reference (TOR). The Commission is not equipped with a communication mechanism that allows members to reach out to people who endure human rights abuses on a daily basis.

Likewise, the statutes do not give the Commission a mandate to investigate human rights violations in member states. Rather is an advisory organ. Article 14 of the statutes say that the Commission is further restricted in the sense that it can only offer advice to “approving member states”.

While ASEAN member states appoint their representatives to AICHR for a period of three years, IPHRC employs a competitive selection process for its commissioners. Member states from three geographical areas (Africa, Asia and Middle East) can nominate candidates prior to the Council of Foreign Ministers (CFM), which elect the experts to work for three years, renewable once.

The formation of the two commissions is considered a landmark of institutional reform within the organizations known for their conservative perception of human rights. The commissions have raised the profile of ASEAN and OIC in the international community.

The current draft of the AHRD has included almost all rights guaranteed in the Universal Human Rights Declaration. But a number of sensitive issues remain, such as the rights of migrant workers, LGBTIQ, indigenous people and minorities and sexual rights.

Its “general principles” specifies that the implementation of rights must consider the regional and national context, bearing in mind different political, economic, legal, social, cultural and religious backgrounds.

Furthermore, the section also states that the exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms shall be subject to such limitations as determined by law and to meet the just requirements of national security, public order, public health, public safety, public morality, as well as the general welfare of the peoples in a democratic society. Having said this, ASEAN has different standpoint on the limitations.

Besides, its closing paragraph says that the declaration may not be interpreted as encouraging any state, group or person to undermine the purposes and principles of ASEAN, which refers to the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of ASEAN member states.

These unresolved issues in AHRD, scheduled to be signed during the 21st ASEAN Summit in Phnom Penh in November this year, have rendered human rights meaningless.

Article 15 of the Charter states that IPHRC “shall promote the civil, political, social and economic rights enshrined in the organization’s covenants and declarations and in universally agreed human rights instruments, in conformity with Islamic values”.

Moreover, the 1990 Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam claims that Sharia is the only supreme source of reference (Article 25). Article 24 declares, “All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Sharia”. Article 22 stipulates, “Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to principles of Sharia.” Article 12 affirms, “every man shall have the right, within the framework of Sharia, to free movement”, which leads to the understanding that women can only travel with their muhrims (brother or husbands).

Its preamble asserts that fundamental rights and universal freedoms are “binding divine commandments, which contained in the Revealed Books of God and were sent through the Last of His Prophet”. This point submits to the Koran and the Prophet Muhammad.

While regional human rights mechanisms can be more sensitive to the problems and needs of the region and its people or ummah, it should uphold and respect international standards.

The establishment of AICHR and IPHRC can provide a unique opportunity for ASEAN and OIC to genuinely reform their view of human rights. To increase legitimacy and credibility which the two commissions are lacking, the two bodies should raise their bar on human rights high.

AHRD should set up common values and principles of achievement on human rights for all peoples and nations in Southeast Asia. Cairo Declaration should be revised to empower individuals, rather than states. These standards should not confuse the universal human rights norms.

ASEAN and OIC need to promote human rights. Both, in fact, have potential to contribute to the protection of human rights. More importantly, the commissions will show their relevance to the lives of people in the region in dealing with 21st century challenges.

AICHR and IPHRC should be part of the solution, rather than problems. They can play a role in transforming their member states from being the target of international scrutiny for alleged human rights abuses to be the promoter of fundamental freedoms around the world.

 The Jakarta Post News

---

The writer is senior advisor on ASEAN and Human Rights at Human Rights Working Group (HRWG) in Jakarta. The opinions expressed are her own.

UNHCR: Aid access challenges for Indonesia's West Papua region

By, IRIN - Published: United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (http://www.unhcr.org/)

Aid agencies in Indonesia's Papua region say their work is coming under increased government scrutiny due to Jakarta's concern over a secessionist movement on the island.

"So many international aid groups working in Papua have been pushed out by the government," Andreas Harsono, a researcher for Human Rights Watch (HRW) who has been covering Indonesia for years, told IRIN, citing a string of NGOs and charity groups, as well as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), that have had to leave.

"They can maintain a presence if they work with the government, but if they give aid directly to Papuans or Papuan organizations, aid groups will be heavily scrutinized by the government and suspected of aiding the independence movement."

The resource-rich Papua region (2,000km east of Jakarta and comprising the provinces of Papua and West Papua) has the lowest levels of human development of Indonesia's 33 provinces, with about 34 percent of Papuans living on less than US$1 per day, according to government statistics. The region has a land area nearly twice that of the UK but a population of only 3.5 million.

"There are multiple issues facing West Papua and Papua today," said Dini Sari Djalal, head of communications at the World Bank's Jakarta office. "Among the most vital are poverty, maternal mortality and HIV/AIDS. The two provinces rank worst in these indicators in all of Indonesia."

At the same time, the region is prone to a host of natural disasters, one of the most recent being a 6.1 magnitude quake on 8 September recorded off the coast of Nabire, Papua.

"In the West Papuan cities of Manokwari and Sorong, earthquakes are recorded on a fairly regular basis as is flooding," said Phillip Charlesworth, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies head of delegation for Indonesia.

But it is Papua's decades-long simmering separatist movement that has often dominated international media attention.

Although the government granted the region Special Autonomy status in 2001, activists continue to voice their discontent, calling for greater autonomy to help improve the region's socioeconomic problems.

Native Papuans are benefiting neither from the land and forests exploited by outside timber and palm oil companies, nor the region's immense mineral wealth, including gold, copper and other metals, they say.

This summer, the International Crisis Group reported at least 15 violent incidents in the provincial capital Jayapura in May and June, and others in the central highlands.

Since the former Dutch colony was annexed in 1969, a small armed group known as the Free Papua Organization (OPM) has been fighting for Papuan independence.

Human rights groups estimate some 100,000 Papuans have died in the conflict since the 1960s, while local media regularly report on clashes between the OPM and security forces.

Economic marginalization, coupled with an ongoing influx of labour migrants from elsewhere in Indonesia continues to fuel tension, particularly over the issue of jobs.

In many of the region's cities and towns, non-native Papuans are now in a majority, and tensions between the two groups are not uncommon, as are reports of the government's often heavy-handed response towards the indigenous population.

"We continue to receive credible reports that Indonesian security forces are committing unlawful killings, and torture [in the Papua region]. They're using excessive force when carrying out arrests or during public policing, and are criminalizing peaceful political activism," said Josef Roy Benedict, Amnesty International's Indonesia campaigner, based in London.

These actions violate the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Indonesia is a state party of the former and has ratified the latter convention, Benedict added.

Some aid groups not welcome

"We'd welcome the help of more international organizations, but there's a need for the government to open up the space for them to see the reality here," said Julianus Septer Manufandu, executive secretary of the Papua NGO Forum, a network of 118 local NGOs assisting Papuans in human rights, land disputes, natural resources and emergency response.

Currently, five UN agencies are working in the region.

The Indonesian Red Cross (PMI) is also on the ground, assisting with blood donations, cataract operations and disaster management.

"We're neutral, so we give victims of the [low-level] conflict humanitarian assistance and the government has no problem with that," said PMI Secretary-General Budi Atmadi Adiputro.

However, others have been less successful.

"One reason why our MoU [memorandum of understanding] was not renewed was because we supported local partners who were involved in human rights work," said Ernest Schoffelen, a programme officer with the Catholic Organization for Relief and Development (Cordaid), a Dutch development agency working in the area of health, peace-building, inter-religious dialogue and human rights in the region for over 50 years.

"Papuans were very welcoming of the aid we provided," Schoffelen said. "The resistance to our presence came more from central government. They didn't want us to be there."

Tortuous NGO registration process

"Everything goes through the Indonesian Foreign Ministry and BIN [the Indonesian State Intelligence Agency]," said one international aid worker who asked not be named, adding it could take 1-3 years for an international NGO to be registered. "All INGOs [international NGOs] proposing to work in Indonesia must appear before an interdepartmental panel, in which the specific ministry or department under which the INGO would work argues the case for the INGO to be allowed."

Those involved in peace-building activities face an even tougher time, he added.

"The level of scrutiny on the part of BIN is extremely high," the aid worker said. "For groups working in peace-building advocacy or legal affairs - which are considered political activities rather than technical development - there's virtually no chance."

ICRC first opened an office in Jayapura (Papuan capital) in 1989. The office was closed in 2009 following an instruction from the Indonesian government, also addressed to a number of other organizations.

Prior to 2009, ICRC delivered water access and sustainable living environment programmes; international humanitarian law (IHL) dissemination work with the military, police and journalists; and detention visits to ensure the humane treatment of prisoners.

The government reportedly raised objections to the ICRC's presence in Papua for not reporting prison visits to the authorities.

Today the ICRC's presence in the two provinces is limited to ad hoc missions from the head office in Jakarta.

"We still play a supporting role to the work of the Indonesian Red Cross there, and we organize punctual activities, such as IHL dissemination sessions for the Air Force in Biak [a small island to the north]," said Patrick Megevand, the ICRC's Jakarta Regional Delegation communication coordinator.

"We hope to go back there on a more sustainable basis. For now, everything depends upon the renewal of an agreement with the government, which we've been negotiating since the closure of the office in 2009."

Security, political considerations

Others cite security concerns and restrictions on freedom of movement, particularly in the interior.

"The work we did there was valuable and there is a need for an international presence," one former aid worker with an INGO that closed down its Papua operation in 2011 claimed, adding however: "Our international staff received threats, and then national staff started to receive threats from the government."

Oxfam's country director Richard Mawer, said security was not affecting their work on the ground there, but added that all INGOs were finding it increasingly difficult to be given approval to work there, and now required special permission to implement any new initiatives.

Government response

The Indonesian government, meanwhile, says it is just operating standard procedures.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Michael Tene told IRIN there were no special requirements for INGOs to work in Papua, noting that there were already at least 14 working in the region on health, economic development and natural disaster issues. He added that all must abide by a set of general requirements, which included not engaging in profit-orientated activities or fundraising.

For international NGOs wanting to work in the area of human rights in Papua and West Papua, Tene said:

"Human rights is an important issue in Papua and all of Indonesia, but INGOs must not engage in political activities and must convince the government they do not intend to do this. Their work has to benefit the people [of Papua and West Papua]."