Home / News / Urgent Appeals / INDONESIA: Woman severely injured by brutal assault while in detention by police in East Denpasar

INDONESIA: Woman severely injured by brutal assault while in detention by police in East Denpasar

January 23, 2007

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

23 January 2007
------------------------------------------------------
UA-020-2007: INDONESIA: Woman severely injured by brutal assault while in detention by police in East Denpasar

INDONESIA: torture; police assault; police negligence; impunity
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information about the alleged police assault of a 57-year-old woman in East Denpasar, Indonesia after she was arrested on 3 January 2007 by the police, on suspicion of counterfeiting money, the charge of which she denies. The victim was severely assaulted by police officers and has lodged a complaint about the violent assault to the Provost Unit on Profession and Security of Police (Provost PROPAM) through her husband. However no appropriate action has been taken by the authorities for the alleged assault. The victim is still in police custody after 20 days and her safety and security is a matter of grave concern.

CASE DETAILS:

According to the information we have received, Mrs. Ni Ketut Suratni (57), was arrested by East Denpasar Police Sector in Bali on 3 January 2007 when she was shopping in market, suspected of counterfeiting money valued at Rp.50,000 (USD 6) that she paid at the market. She denied her involvement in the crime but she was taken to the East Denpasar Police Sector in Bali as they were suspicious about her connection with the counterfeiting network. Despite the lapse of almost three weeks her charge is still under scrutiny by police.

During the evening of January 3, when the victim’s son Mr. Gede Ananta went to the police station to see her, he found that her right cheek was badly swollen and that she appeared to have been struck about the face many times. The victim’s son asked his mother about the injury and she replied that she had been severely hit and kicked by two police officers, Bripka I Made Wiguna (Police ID: 68010139) and Brigadier Erwin Suprayoga (Police ID: 76100156) during the interrogation.
 
On January 11, Mr. I Wayan Gangsar, the victim's husband, reported the case to Propam Polda Bali (Provost Unit on Profession and Security of Police of Police Province Bali), the special unit of the police agency to investigate police misconduct. On the night of January 11, the victim was examined by public medical doctors at the police hospital for a “visum et repertum”, a medical report for injury case that was then issued by public medical doctors. However, the medical report did not clearly identify the injuries on the victim as having been caused by beating.

The victim's lawyers then submitted a request for another medical examination for “visum et repertum” by independent doctors as the previous medical report had been issued by doctors from the police hospital. The second examination for the report has not been conducted yet.

The victim is still under detention in the above mentioned police station and no official investigation has taken place into the alleged assault of the victim by police officers despite the fact that the complaint was made to the Propam Polda, Bali on January 11.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

To our regret, the brutal violation of rights of ordinary citizens in Indonesia including arbitrary arrest, detention and torture is widely practiced in Indonesia as in the case of Mrs. Ni Ketut Suratni.

There are no laws which effectively prohibit the torture as a crime and prosecute perpetrators under Indonesian laws. Torture is a criminal offence under the Government Regulation No.27 of 1983 on the Implementation of the Law of Criminal procedure whereas the existing penal code does not prescribe torture as criminal offence.

The AHRC has reported cases of the poor quality of judicial proceedings as well as execution of torture perpetrators in Indonesia (see further UA-215-2006 and  UA-312-2006).

The AHRC condemns the alleged brutal police assault of the victim in custody as a clear violation of the principles in the Convention against Torture (CAT), of which Indonesia is party.

The lengthy detention period that is prescribed under the Criminal Procedure Code No.8 of 1981 (KUHAP) is another concern of the AHRC for this case. According to the KUHAP, after 24 hour hours of detention after the arrest is exhausted, initial detention order of 20 days can be issued by the police and it can be extended by a prosecutor for another 40 days for further investigation (section 21 and 24 of the KUHAP). It means a person arrested can be detained for 61 days in total without any judicial review about the legality of his/her detention. Under the said Criminal Procedure Code, there is no requirement that a person who is arrested or detained be brought promptly before a judge or other judicial officer. The AHRC is concerning about such lengthy detention period before presenting a person before a prosecutor or judge under the Criminal Procedure Code of Indonesia could cause risks of further human rights violation such as torture or ill-treatment and disappearances.

Furthermore, such a long pre-trial detention also violates the rights of victim to challenge the legality of the detention, while the victim is denying her involvement into the suspected crime in this case. In absence of such a procedure, persons arrested are detained for significant periods of time without being afforded a review of the legality of his/her detention under the under the current legislation in Indonesia.

Those rights are provided under article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to which the Indonesian government is party, and we condemn that the Indonesian government’s irresponsible attitude constitutes violation of principles provided by the ICCPR.

We therefore call for the immediate release of the victim from police custody and a thorough investigation into the facts of police assault, especially the two police officers who have been identified their name by the victim. Also we demand that the medical report would be resubmitted by independent doctors who are not from police hospitals so that the medical report would not be manipulated by the authorities thereby concealing the fact of police assault during detention.


SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the authorities listed below, asking their immediate action to investigate the alleged assault of the victim by two police officers. Please also demand immediate release of victim from police custody, and to provide all necessary assistance to the victim and her family to pursue legal remedies. 

Sample letter:

Dear_________,

INDONESIA: Woman severely injured by brutal assault in detention by police in East Denpasar

Name of the victim: Mrs. Ni Ketut Suratni (57), the resident of Jln. Sulatri No. 29 Kesiman Petilan Village, East Denpasar, Bali
Name of alleged perpetrators:
1. Chief Brigadier I MADE WIGUNA, Police ID: 68010139
2. Brigadier ERWIN SUPRAYOGA, Police ID: 76100156
Place of the incident: East Denpasar Police Sector in Bali
Period of detention: From 3 January 2007 to date

I am writing to you to express my grave concern about an alleged police assault of Mrs. Ni Ketut Suratni (57) after she was arrested by East Denpasar Police Sector in Bali on 3 January 2007.

According to the information I have received, the victim was arrested after being suspected of counterfeiting money of valued Rp. 50,000, acrime of which she denies her involvement. In the evening of the same day she was arrested the victim’s son went to the police station to see her and he found that she had wounds, especially on her right cheek. The victim’s son had asked his mother about the wounds and she stated that she had been assaulted by the two police officers, Bripka I Made Wiguna (Police ID: 68010139) and Brigadier Erwin Suprayoga (Police ID: 76100156). Also these police officers kicked the victim’s back several times.

On January 11, Mr. I Wayan Gangsar, the husband of the victim reported the case to Propam Polda Bali (Provost Unit on Profession and Security of Police in Police Province Bali), special unit of the police agency to investigate police misconducts. On the night of January 11, the victim was examined by medial doctors from the police hospital for a “visum et repertum”, a medical report for injury case issued by public medical doctors. According to the information I have received, the medical report did not clearly state the suspicion of police assault that caused severe injury to the victim. 

Later on the lawyers of the victim had submitted a request of another medical examination for “visum et repertum” by independent doctors who are not from police hospital as the previous medical report was issued by doctors from police hospital. And the second examination for the report has not been conducted yet.

The victim has still been under detention in the above mentioned police station, and there were no official investigation taken into the alleged assault of the victim by police officers after complaint was made to the Propam Polda Bali.

As far as I have learned, there are no laws that effectively prohibit the torture as a crime and prosecute perpetrators under Indonesian laws. Torture is a criminal offence under the Government Regulation No.27 of 1983 on the Implementation of the Law of Criminal procedure however the existing penal code does not prescribe torture as criminal offence.

I am concerned that toleration of such grave human rights violations by public authorities would further encourage impunities among the law-enforcement authorities and officials including the police officers of Indonesia. The audacious character of such practice gravely degrade human dignity and furthermore violate the international human rights laws such as Convention Against Torture (CAT) and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to which the government of Indonesia is party to the both treaties.

I have also learned that a lengthy detention period presenting a person before a prosecutor or judge is prescribed in under the Criminal Procedure Code No.8 of 1981 (KUHAP). According to the KUHAP, after 24 hour hours of detention after the arrest is exhausted, initial detention order of 20 days can be issued by the police and it can be extended by a prosecutor for another 40 days for further investigation (section 21 and 24 of the KUHAP). It means a person arrested can be detained for 61 days in total without any judicial review about the legality of his/her detention.

I am gravely concerned that such lengthy detention period which is prescribed by the Criminal Procedure Code of Indonesia could cause risks of further human rights violation to the victim of this case such as torture or ill-treatment. I also have an opinion that that such a long pre-trial detention without judicial review also violates the rights of victim to challenge the legality of the detention. In absence of such a procedure, persons arrested are detained for significant periods of time without being afforded a review of the legality of his/her detention under the under the current legislation in Indonesia.

The right to access challenge the legality of detention and the right to be promptly brought before a judge or other judicial power are provided under Article 9 of the ICCPR to which the Indonesia is a state party. I condemn that the Indonesian government is irresponsible to their obligation as a party state to the ICCPR for failing to fulfil the principles provided under Article 9 of the ICCPR.

I therefore urge your immediate action for a thorough investigation into the fact of the police assault on the victim if the case, especially the two police officers who have been identified the names by the victim. The victim should be brought before the court immediately and the legality of her detention should be reviewed by the court. I also request you to take action to release the victim if there is no sufficient evident to link her with the alleged money falsification activities.  I also request you to ensure that the police authority arrange another medical examination by the independent doctors as requested by the victim’s lawyers. 

Furthermore I request the Government of Indonesia to introduce a law criminalising torture at any occasion in accordance with the Convention against Torture (CAT) in order to prevent torture cases in the future.  Finally I also urge you to take all necessary actions for the victim and her family to be provided all necessary assistance including adequate compensation.
I look forward your prompt intervention in this case.

Yours sincerely,


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

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTER TO:

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

2. Gen. Sutanto
Chief of National Police
Jl. Trunojoyo No. 3
Jakarta Selatan
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 721 8012
Fax: +62 21 720 7277

3. Mr. Susilo Bambang Yudoyono
President
Republic of Indonesia
Presidential Palace
Jl. Medan Merdeka Utara
Jakarta Pusat 10010
INDONESIA
Tel: + 62 21 3845627 ext 1003
Fax: + 62 21 231 41 38, 345 2685, 345 7782

4. Mr. Agung Laksono
Chief of the Indonesian House of Representative
Gedung DPR/MPR RI
Jl. Gatot Subroto No. 6
Jakarta
INDONESIA
Tel: + 62 21 5715509; 5715344; 5715621
Fax: + 62 21 5714469, 5734389

5. Mr. Hamid Awaluddin
Minister of Justice and Human Rights
Uahi Utoyo Usman S.H.
Menteri Kehkiman
JI. H.R. Rosuna Said Kav. 6-7
Kuningan, Jakarta Selatan
INDONESIA
Fax: +62 21 525 3095

6. Mr. Abdul Hakim Garuda Nusantara
Chairperson
KOMNAS HAM
Jl. Latuharhary No. 4B Menteng
Jakarta Pusat 10310
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 3925230
Fax: +62 21 3151042/3925227 

7. Prof. Manfred Nowak
Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture
Attn: Safir Syed
c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9230
Fax: +41 22 917 9016 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR TORTURE)


Thank you.

Urgent Appeal Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ahrchk@ahrchk.org)


Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-020-2007
Countries :
Issues :
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.