Home / News / Urgent Appeals / INDONESIA: Atheist in Padang sentenced to two and a half years imprisonment

INDONESIA: Atheist in Padang sentenced to two and a half years imprisonment

June 15, 2012

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Update: AHRC-UAU-021-2012

15 June 2012

[RE: AHRC-UAC-063-2012: INDONESIA: An atheist on trial for religious defamation in Padang, West Sumatra]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
INDONESIA: Atheist in Padang sentenced to two and a half years imprisonment

ISSUES: Freedom of opinion, freedom of expression, freedom of religion
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received updated information regarding the verdict delivered by Muaro Sijunjung District Court in the case of Alexander Aan who resides in Padang and was charged with religious blasphemy, atheism propagation and dissemination of religious hostility. On 14 June 2012, the Court found Alexander Aan guilty of the latter charge as prohibited under the Electronic Information and Transaction Law (ITE Law).

UPDATED INFORMATION:
In the Urgent Appeal Case (for further details, please refer to AHRC-UAC-063-2012), the AHRC reported that Alexander Aan was charged under Article 28 (2) of the ITE Law for posting materials that provoked religious hatred on Facebook. The materials labeled as such by the law enforcement officials were a comic entitled ‘The Prophet Muhammad was attracted to his own daughter-in-law’ and a note entitled ‘The Prophet Muhammad had been sleeping with his wife’s maid.’ Alexander Aan was also charged with Article 156a (a) of the Indonesian Penal Code (KUHP) on dissemination of atheism and Article 156a (b) of the KUHP on religious blasphemy.

According to his lawyers from LBH Padang, the Muaro Sijunjung District Court who was examining Alexander Aan case delivered its oral judgment on Thursday, 14 June 2012. The court found Alexander Aan guilty of disseminating information that provokes religious hatred or hostility on the internet as prohibited by the ITE Law and sentenced him to 2 and a half years imprisonment. It also ordered Alexander Aan to pay a fine of Rp 100 million which can be substituted with 3 months imprisonment.

The written judgment in this case is yet to be delivered and both Alexander Aan as well as the prosecutors are planning to lodge an appeal to the West Sumatra High Court.

The AHRC is concerned with the overly vague criminal provisions under the ITE Law as well as the broad interpretation of the court. Whereas recognizing that freedom of expression might be limited when the exercise of it amounts to dissemination of religious hatred or hostility, the AHRC is of the view that Alexander Aan’s posts on Facebook did not amount to any of those. His posts are manifestation of his belief that his arrest, detention and sentence violate his rights to freedoms of expression and religion as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as well as the 1945 Constitution.

The AHRC submitted an amicus curiae brief to Muaro Sijunjung District Court as an attempt to provide the judges with human rights perspective relevant to this case. It further points out that religious blasphemy is a concept which is not in accordance with human rights thus it should not be used to restrict freedom of expression. The full version of the amicus brief submitted by the AHRC to the court is available here (in English and Bahasa Indonesia).

Indonesia was heavily criticized for its lack commitment in protecting religious minority groups during the UN Universal Periodic Review session last month. It later accepted the recommendations given by New Zealand and Norway to revise and repeal laws as well as policies discriminatory towards religious minority groups yet there have been no measures taken to date to follow up such expressed commitment.

The AHRC is urging the Indonesian government to take the following measures:

 

  • Revoke Article 156a of the KUHP and Law No. 1/PNPS/1965 which criminalise religious blasphemy and the dissemination of atheism;
  • Revise or interpret Article 28 paragraph (2) of the ITE Law in accordance with its obligations concerning freedom of expression;
  • Halt all prosecutions against individuals and members of religious minority groups under such provisions.


Your sincerely,


Thank you.

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

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Update
Document ID :
AHRC-UAU-021-2012
Countries :
Issues :
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.