Home / News / Urgent Appeals / INDONESIA: A human rights defender is accused of criminal defamation for seeking to investigate Munir's murder

INDONESIA: A human rights defender is accused of criminal defamation for seeking to investigate Munir's murder

September 11, 2009

Indonesian Bahasa


ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION -- URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-118-2009

11 September 2009
------------------------------------------------------
INDONESIA: A human rights defender is accused of criminal defamation for seeking to investigate Munir’s murder

ISSUES: Human rights defenders; misuse of power; impunity
------------------------------------------------------
Dear friends,

nullThe Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that a leading rights activist and partner of the AHRC has been accused of criminal defamation by the former deputy chief of Indonesia’s State Intelligence Agency, after he testified against the latter for his involvement in the murder of Munir Said Thalib. Munir is considered the country’s most prominent and respected human rights defender and was poisoned in 2004. The incident once again emphasises the unresolved status of the case and reveals the persecution facing the few still trying to get justice five years on. The AHRC is alarmed by the increasing frequency with which the laws of the country are being manipulatively deployed to obstruct the work of human rights defenders.

CASE DETAILS:

Mr. Usman Hamid is the Executive Director of the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS). It was founded by civil society activist Munir Said Thalib who was notoriously poisoned on a plane in 2004 after vocal criticism of the Indonesian government and military (see: AHRC-STM-186; UP-129-2007; UA-164-2004). After Munir’s death Mr. Hamid became head of KontraS and with his colleagues has relentlessly pushed for investigations into the murder.

On September 3 Mr. Hamid received a summons letter from the police referring to a complaint filed on 9 January 2009 by the lawyer of Mr. Muchdi Purwopranjono (known as Muchdi PR), former deputy chief of State Intelligence Agency (BIN). The summons accused Mr. Hamid of criminal defamation.

Mr. Hamid was a witness in Mr. Muchdi PR’s trial (which began in August 2008 at the South Jakarta District Court) for his alleged instigation of the assassination. Mr. Muchdi PR filed a complaint against Mr. Hamid and several other activists immediately after his aquittal on 31 December. It accused them of yelling 'murderer, murderer' in the court after the judge announced the verdict, and the Indonesian National Police have recommended Mr. Hamid as a suspect, using Articles 310 and 314 of the Penal Code.

nullOn 9 September Mr. Hamid reported to the Jakarta Regional Police. He asked for clarification of the accusation and asked to give his statement for the police investigation report (BAP) at a later time, since he had an appointment with the Secretary General of the National Defense Council on the same day. His request was granted and the investigation is currently pending.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

After Mr. Muchdi PR’s acquittal Munir's legal representatives and supporters appealed to the Supreme Court. A second trial took place earlier this year with Mr. Hamid again testifying as a witness, but what followed was widely considered a flawed trial that neglecte vital evidence. Mr. Muchdi PR was acquitted.
It was a disheartening setback for civil society activists and reveals the extent of the judicial protection enjoyed by those in senior military position in the country. The ensuing accusations against Mr. Hamid have challenged his reputation as a human rights activist and are hampering his work on the case.

The defamation law (found below) is a colonial legacy, and the government’s reluctance to revise it has allowed its continual abuse by officials who wish to restrict freedom of expression. In this case it appears to be a particularly calculated attempt to turn the table against the accusers and silence witnesses, and must be challenged at all costs. The articles are as follows:

This is not an isolated incident in Indonesia. In two other recent cases reported by the AHRC, eight activists in Aceh were charged with inciting hatred against the government because they were giving out pamphlets (see: UAC-197-2008), while another was charged with treason for organising a peaceful demonstration (UAC-262-2008). The AHRC is alarmed by the increasing frequency with which the laws of the country are being manipulatively deployed to obstruct the work of human rights defenders, draining vital resources and distracting activists from important projects. These legal offensives also create an atmosphere of fear and deter others from speaking out against injustices.

As a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights the government of Indonesia is obliged to respect the freedom of expression of its citizens, and to make additional efforts to protect the rights of those who fight for justice. The AHRC demands that the government immediately intervene to ensure that a prompt and impartial investigation is made into the accusations made against Mr. Hamid, and to guarantee that he will not be charged for simply speaking the truth. The AHRC also urges the government to start a thorough review of the defamation law to prevent further abuse by irresponsible officials.

Last but not least, the government is strongly advised to persist in pursuing its investigation into Munir’s murder. The instigators of the crime remain at large five years after the incident; a matter which should be a deep source of shame.

The Supreme Court should review its acquittal of Mr. Muchdi PR in a trial that many considered unjust. Bringing the perpetrators to justice will be a huge step forward in Indonesia’s human rights movement, and show that civil society activists of Indonesia are valued.

--------------

Article 310: 'The person who intentionally harms someone’s honor or reputation by charging him with a certain fact, with the obvious intent to give publicity thereof, shall, being guilty of slander, be punished by a maximum imprisonment of nine months or a maximum fine of three hundred rupiahs. If this takes only place by means of writings or portraits disseminated, openly demonstrated or put up, the principal shall, being guilty of libel, be punished by a maximum imprisonment of one year and four months of a maximum fine of three hundred rupiahs. Neither slander nor libel shall exist as far as the principal obviously has acted in the general interest of for a necessary defense'.

Article 314: 'If the defamed person has been declared guilty of the charged fact by judicial verdict which has become final punishment by reason of calumny shall be excluded. If the defamed person has been acquitted of the charged fact, by judicial verdict which has not become final, said verdict shall be considered as perfect proof of the untruth of the fact.If against the defamed person by reason of the fact charged to him, a criminal prosecution has been initiated the prosecution by reason of calumny shall be suspended until the verdict of the charged fact become final.'

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write to the following authorities calling for immediate intervention into the investigation regarding accusations of criminal defamation made against Mr. Usman Hamid. Please also call for review of the defamation law by the Indonesian government and for the protection of human rights defenders in Indonesia.

Please be informed that the AHRC is writing a letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, requesting their intervention in this case.

-------------------------------------------

Dear __________,

INDONESIA: A human rights defender is accused of criminal defamation for seeking to investigate Munir’s murder

Name of victim: Mr. Usman Hamid, Executive Director of the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS)

Name of perpetrator: Mr. Muchdi Purwopranjono, former deputy chief of State Intelligence Agency (BIN)

I'm writing to express my deep concern at the accusation of criminal defamation against a leading rights activist by the former deputy chief of Indonesia’s State Intelligence Agency, after the activist testified against the latter for his involvement in the murder of Munir Said Thalib. I am alarmed by the increasing frequency with which the laws of the country are being manipulatively deployed to obstruct the work of human rights defenders.

According to the information I have received, on September 3 Mr. Hamid received a summons letter from the police referring to a complaint filed on 9 January 2009 by the lawyer of Mr. Muchdi Purwopranjono, former deputy chief of State Intelligence Agency (BIN). The summons accused Mr. Hamid of criminal defamation.
Mr. Hamid was a witness in Mr. Muchdi Purwopranjono’s trial for his alleged involvement in instigating the assassination of human rights defender Munir Said Thalib five years ago. After being acquitted, Mr. Purwopranjono filed a complaint against Mr. Hamid and several other activists accusing them of yelling 'Murderer, murderer' in the court after the judge announced his acquittal. Based on this complaint the Indonesian National Police have recommended Mr. Hamid as a suspect, using Articles 310 and 314 of the Penal Code.

The defamation law (found below) is a colonial legacy, and the government’s reluctance to revise it has allowed its continual abuse by officials who wish to restrict freedom of expression. In this case it appears to be a particularly calculated attempt to turn the table against the accusers and silence witnesses, and must be challenged at all costs.

I understand that this is not an isolated incident in Indonesia. In two other recent cases reported by the Asian Human Rights Commission, eight activists in Aceh were charged with inciting hatred against the government because they were giving out pamphlets, while another was charged with treason for organising a peaceful demonstration. Such cases drain vital resources and distract activists from important projects, and they are used to obstruct their work. These legal offensives also create an atmosphere of fear and deter others from speaking out against injustices.

As a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights the government of Indonesia is obliged to respect the freedom of expression of its citizens, and to make additional efforts to protect the rights of those who fight for justice.

I demand that the government immediately intervene to ensure that a prompt and impartial investigation is made into the accusations made against Mr. Hamid, and to guarantee that he will not be charged for simply speaking the truth. I also urge the government to start a thorough review of the defamation law to prevent further abuse by irresponsible officials.

Last but not least, I call for the government's persistence in pursuing its investigation into Munir’s murder. The instigators of the crime remain at large five years after the incident; a matter which should be a deep source of shame. The Supreme Court should review its acquittal of Mr. Muchdi PR in a trial that many considered unjust. Bringing the perpetrators to justice will be a huge step forward in Indonesia’s human rights movement, and show that civil society activists of Indonesia are valued.

Yours sincerely,

------------------

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Irjen Pol Wahyono
Jakarta Regional Police
Kepolisian Daerah Khusus Ibu Kota Jakarta Raya
Polda Metro Jaya
Jalan Sudirman Kavling 55
Jakarta Selatan
INDONESIA
Tel:  +62 21 5234262 
Fax: +62 21 5234051

2. Mr. Andi Matalatta
Minister of Justice and Human Rights
JI. H.R. Rosuna Said Kav. 6-7
Kuningan, Jakarta Selatan
INDONESIA
Fax: +62 21 525 3095

3. Mr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
President of Republic of Indonesia
Presidential Palace,
Jl. Medan Merdeka Utara Jakarta Pusat 10010
INDONESIA
Tel:  +62 21 384 5627 , ext. 1003
Fax: +62 21 231 4138, 345 2685, 345 7782

4. Mr. Hendarman Supandji
Attorney General
Kejaksaan Agung RI
Jl. Sultan Hasanuddin No. 1
Jakarta Selatan
INDONESIA
Tel:  + 62 21 7221337 , 7397602
Fax: + 62 21 7250213

5. Mr. Ifdhal Kasim
Chief of Indonesian Commission on Human Rights (KOMNAS HAM)
Jln. Latuharhary No. 4B, Menteng,
Jakarta Pusat 10310
INDONESIA
Tel:  +62 21 3925230  ext. 225/221
Fax: +62 21 3925227
Email: info@komnasham.go.id

------------------------------
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)

Related content
Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-118-2009
Countries :
Campaigns :
Issues :
Related content
INDONESIA: Seorang Pembela Hak Asasi Manusia dituduh melakukan pencemaran nama baik dalam penyelidikan kasus pembunuhan Munir
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.