Home / News / Urgent Appeals / UPDATE (Indonesia): Attorney General fails to investigate the gross violations of human rights committed at Trisakti and Semanggi

UPDATE (Indonesia): Attorney General fails to investigate the gross violations of human rights committed at Trisakti and Semanggi

July 6, 2005

UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAM

Update on Urgent Appeal

6 July 2005

[RE: UA-23-2002: Sign petition for attorney general to bring justice to May 1998 riot victims]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
UP-81-2005: INDONESIA: Attorney General fails to investigate the gross violations of human rights committed at Trisakti and Semanggi

INDONESIA: Failure of Attorney General; Trisakti and Semanggi shootings; demand for an ad hoc human rights court
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received updated information from sources in Indonesia regarding the killings of demonstrators at Trisakti and Semanggi, Jakarta in 1998/99 (See Further: UA-23-2002).

For years, Indonesian human rights NGOs, the victims and their families have been struggling for the establishment of an ad hoc human rights court, which under Indonesian law is the only way to obtain legal remedy for gross human rights violations committed before the enactment of the Law on the permanent human rights court in 2000. The establishment of an ad hoc human rights court requires a parliamentary recommendation and a presidential decree.

The National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) conducted an inquiry into these cases and submitted its report to the Attorney General in 2002, concluding that they constitute gross violations for which elements in the Indonesian police and military are responsible.

However, the Attorney General has continuously refused to follow up on the inquiry and conduct an investigation into the killings in preparation for the possible establishment of an ad hoc human rights court. Besides petty technical reasons, the Attorney General justified his inaction on the grounds of a recommendation by the Indonesian parliament, which stated that the killings at Trisakti and Semanggi did not constitute gross violations of human rights. Last week, this recommendation was revoked.

The AHRC urges the Attorney General to follow up on the Komnas HAM report and conduct an independent investigation. Moreover, the AHRC urges the Indonesian parliament to confirm the revocation of the Third Commission’s recommendation and to recommend the establishment of an ad hoc human rights court for the killings of Trisakti and Semanggi.

Urgent Appeals Desk
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

On 12 May 1998, nine days before the resignation of dictator Suharto, students held a demonstration at Trisakti University, calling on Suharto to resign and demanding democratic reform. When the police opened fire on the protesters, four students from Trisakti University, namely Elang Mulia Lesmana, Hafidin Royan, Heri Hartanto and Hendriawan Sie were killed. Including protesters from other universities, a total of 681 victims were injured during these days of protest. In late 1998, a military court declared six police officers guilty of the shootings, and in 2002 nine members of the Bomb Squad/Regiment II of the Police Mobile Brigades were sentenced by the military court.

At Semanggi, the first incident, commonly referred to as Semanggi I, occurred between 8 and 14 November 1998, when 18 students were killed and 109 persons injured during a demonstration demanding the new president to deal with the economic crisis. Four of those killed were Teddy Mardani, Sigit Prasetya, Engkus Kusnadi and BR Norma Irmawan.

In a second incident at Semanggi in September 1999, known as Semanggi II, 11 people were killed during protests against a planned declaration of emergency, one of whom was Yap Yun Hap. Additionally, 217 people were injured.

In 2003, a military court trial was opened to prosecute those responsible for the killings at Semanggi II. However, two years later, the trial has not come to any verdict.

The military courts have failed to prosecute those higher-ranking military officials ultimately responsible for the killings, and have alternatively only dealt with petty perpetrators. Disappointed with the results of the military trials, the victims of the incidents of Trisakti, Semanggi I and Semanggi II, their families, and human rights organizations kept demanding the establishment of an ad hoc human rights court. The Indonesian Act No. 26/2000 Concerning Human Rights Courts establishes four permanent human rights courts which are authorised to handle gross violations of human rights. To try gross violations of human rights that were committed before its enactment, the law provides the possibility of establishing an ad hoc human rights court. This requires a parliamentary recommendation to the president, who then is authorised to establish an ad hoc human rights court per decree. The victims demand the establishment of such a court which should prosecute those responsible for the killings, including especially the higher-ranking officials in the Indonesian military and police who did not directly carry out the shootings, but hold command responsibility or were otherwise involved.

On 16 June 2001, the Indonesian National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) formed a commission to investigate the killings at Trisakti, Semanggi I and Semanggi II known under the Indonesian acronym KPP HAM TSS. On 27 July 2002, this commission submitted a report to the Attorney General which named 56 suspected perpetrators and concluded that the killings constitute gross violations of human rights.

The Attorney General, who is responsible to investigate gross violations of human rights in preparation for prosecution before a human rights court, refused to follow up on the report. Besides citing petty legal technicalities, the Attorney General justified his refusal to follow up on the Commission’s report by referring to a recommendation of a temporary Special Parliamentary Committee on Trisakti and Semanggi, which on 27 July 2001 had stated that the killings did not constitute gross violations of human rights.

However, last week, on 30 June 2005, this recommendation was revoked by the Third Parliamentary Commission on Law and Human Rights. It is now necessary that the Indonesian parliament confirms this revocation in its plenary meeting, the debate on which will probably take place in August. Subsequently, on the basis of Komnas HAM’s conclusion, the parliament must recommend the establishment of an ad hoc human rights court for the gross violations of human rights committed at Trisakti, Semanggi I and Semanggi II, which can then be established per presidential decree. Meanwhile, the Attorney General must finally follow up on the Komnas HAM report and conduct an impartial investigation into the case in order to be prepared for and create pressure to establish an ad hoc human rights court.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please send two separate letters. The first letter should be sent to the Attorney General, urging him to conduct an investigation into the killings of Trisakti, Semanggi I and II. The second letter should be sent to the chairman of the Indonesian parliament, urging the parliament to confirm the Third Parliamentary Commission’s revocation of the recommendation of the Special Parliamentary Committee on Trisakti and Semanggi, and to recommend the establishment of an ad hoc human rights court for this case. Also, please send copies of the letters to other relevant authorities in Indonesia, as well as to UN organs and foreign governments.

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

1. Sample letter to the Chairman of the Indonesian parliament:

Dear Mr. Agung Laksono,

Re: Attorney General fails to investigate the gross violations of human rights committed at Trisakti and Semanggi; Parliament must recommend the establishment of an ad hoc-human rights court.

I am writing to you on behalf of the victims of the gross human rights violation that occurred at Trisakti and Semanggi in the years of 1998/99. I am grieved to learn that after seven years of struggle, the victims and their families have received no justice at all, and that the Indonesian People’s Representative Assembly is responsible for this injustice.

According to the information I have received, about 33 persons were shot and many more injured by Indonesian police and military officers during demonstrations at Trisakti university on May 12, at Semanggi between November 12 and 14, and at Semanggi in September 1999. Those killed at Trisakti were Elang Mulia Lesmana, Hafidin Royan, Heri Hartanto and Hendriawan Sie. Among the 18 persons killed at Semanggi between November 12 and 14 were Teddy Mardani, Sigit Prasetya, Engkus Kusnadi and BR Norma Irmawan. Among the 11 people killed in September 1999 was Yap Yun Hap. The military trials that handled the killings of Trisakti and Semanggi II disappointed the victims and their supporters, as they only dealt with petty perpetrators, but not with those responsible on a higher command level. Hence, the victims of Trisakti, Semanggi I and Semanggi II (TSS) kept demanding the establishment of an ad hoc human rights court for their case, which is the only way for them to achieve justice.

After conducting an inquiry into the killings between June 2001 and July 2002, the National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) concluded that the shootings of TSS constitute gross violations of human rights for which the Indonesian police and military hold responsibility. However, the Attorney General refused to follow up on the inquiry, justifying his inaction on the basis of the recommendation by the Special Parliamentary Committee on Trisakti and Semanggi which had state that the shootings did not constitute gross violations of human rights. I appreciate that this recommendation has been revoked by the Third Parliamentary Commission on Law and Human Rights on 30 June 2005.

I urge you to ensure that the revocation is confirmed by the plenary assembly of the People’s Representative Assembly. Moreover, I call on you to do your utmost to bring justice to the victims of TSS by ensuring that the People’s Representative Assembly recommends the establishment of an ad hoc human rights court for the killings of Trisakti and Semanggi, as stipulated in Law No. 26/2000.

I look for your immediate intervention into this matter.

Yours sincerely,

-----------------------------------------
PLEASE SEND A LETTER TO:

Agung Laksono, H.G.
Chairman
People’s Representative Assembly
Jl. Jend. Gatot Subroto
Jakarta 10270
INDONESIA
Telp. + 62 (0)21 5715 925/ (0)21-8191327
Fax. +62 (0)21 5715 373; 021-8191327 (Home)
E-mail: humas-dpr@dpr.go.id
--------------------------------------------

2. Sample letter to the Attorney General:

Dear Mr. Abdul Rahman Saleh,

Re: Attorney General fails to investigate the gross violations of human rights committed at Trisakti and Semanggi; Parliament must recommend the establishment of an ad hoc-human rights court.

It has come to my attention that the perpetrators of the gross violations against human rights that were committed at Trisakti and Semanggi 1998/99 are enjoying impunity without any fear of being prosecuted thanks to your deliberate inaction.

According to the information I have received, about 33 persons were shot and many more injured by Indonesian police and military officers during demonstrations at Trisakti university on May 12, at Semanggi between November 12 and 14, and at Semanggi in September 1999. Those killed at Trisakti were Elang Mulia Lesmana, Hafidin Royan, Heri Hartanto and Hendriawan Sie. Among the 18 persons killed at Semanggi between November 12 and 14 were Teddy Mardani, Sigit Prasetya, Engkus Kusnadi and BR Norma Irmawan. Among the 11 people killed in September 1999 was Yap Yun Hap. The military trials that handled the killings of Trisakti and Semanggi II disappointed the victims and their supporters, as they only dealt with petty perpetrators, but not with those responsible on a higher command level. Hence, the victims of Trisakti, Semanggi I and Semanggi II (TSS) kept demanding the establishment of an ad hoc human rights court for their case, which is the only way for them to achieve justice.

After conducting an inquiry into the killings between June 2001 and August 2002, the National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) concluded that the shootings of TSS constitute gross violations of human rights for which the Indonesian police and military hold responsibility. The report was submitted to you on 27 July 2002. However, you refused to follow up on the inquiry, justifying your inaction on the basis of the recommendation by the Special Parliamentary Committee on Trisakti and Semanggi which in June 2001 had stated that the shootings did not constitute gross violations of human rights. On 30 June 2005, this recommendation was revoked by the Third Parliamentary Commission on Law and Human Rights.

It is time that you follow up on the Komnas HAM inquiry and conduct an impartial investigation into the gross violations of human rights committed at TSS. I urge you to investigate the killings and verify that they constitute gross violations of human rights so that a momentum is created leading to the establishment of an ad hoc human rights court. It is unacceptable that the perpetrators of these atrocities have enjoyed impunity for seven years, and I urge you to begin your investigation now, as a first step to bring justice to the victims.

I look for your immediate intervention into this matter.

Yours sincerely,


-------------------------
SEND A LETTER TO:

Mr. Abdul Rahman Saleh
Attorney General of Indonesia
Attorney General's Office
Jakarta
INDONESIA
Fax: +62 21 720 8557

PLEASE SEND COPIES OF BOTH LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
President
Republic of Indonesia
Presidential Palace
Jakarta Istana Negara
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 384 5627 ext. 1003
Fax: +62 21 345 7782

2. 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

3. Mr. Abdul Hakim Garuda Nusantara
Chairperson
KOMNAS HAM [National Human Rights Commission of Indonesia]
Jl. Latuharhary No. 4B Menteng
Jakarta Pusat 10310
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 3925230 
Fax: +62 21 3151042/3925227
E-mail: info@komnasham.or.id

4. Mr. Philip Alston
Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions
Att: Lydie Ventre
Room 3-016
c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9155
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (general)
E-mail: lventre@ohchr.org

5. Mr. Ambeyi Ligabo
Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
Att: Ms. Julie De Riviero
Room: 3-042
C/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9177
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (general)
E-Mail: jderiviero@ohchr.org 

6. Dr. Bernard Rudolf Bot
Minister of Foreign Affairs
PO Box 20061
2500 EB The Hague
THE NETHERLANDS
Tel: +31 70 3486486
Fax: + 31 70 3484848
E-mail: dpz@minbuza.nl

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Update
Document ID :
UP-81-2005
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.