INDONESIA: A finding report on the allegation of brutality of the authorities in the peaceful public protest on 22 August, 2024

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from the Advocacy Team for Democracy (TAUD) regarding finding report on the allegation of brutality during peaceful public protest in front of the office of the House of Representative (DPR RI). 

On Thursday, August 29, 2024. the TAUD announced findings in the handling of the peaceful public protest on the “emergency warning” which took place on August 22, 2024 in front of the DPR RI Building by the joint security forces, as well as legal aid workers who were arrested and taken to the Jakarta Metropolitan Police Office (Polda Metro Jaya).

The findings were based on the results of complaints received via the hotline, the monitoring of the peaceful public protest, and the legal aid workers who were arrested. 

The findings are as follows:

Regarding the violence that occurred around the Indonesian Parliament Building:

1. There are at least 21 protesters, especially those accompanied by the TAUD who suffered physical and psychological injuries due to the violence;
2. There is unnecessary or excessive use of force, in the form of blunt weapons or tear gas, by the security forces against the protesters;
3. The perpetrators of the violence are personnel of the Indonesian Military and the Police (with or without official uniforms);
4. The arrest of protesters randomly, without further identification of which individuals were actually the perpetrators of the riots;
5. Those who were arbitrarily arrested received physical and verbal violence, either being beaten, kicked, and via other actions.

Regarding legal assistance for protesters who were arrested and taken to the Jakarta Metropolitan Police (Polda Metro Jaya):

1. The TAUD provides legal assistance for 29 protesters who were arrested and taken to the Jakarta Metropolitan Police Office, one of whom is still a child. The arrests were not accompanied by a complete investigation administration (without an arrest warrant, search and confiscation permit from the local court chairperson);
2. There are 11 protesters who were accompanied by the TAUD who were named as suspects. In total, 19 protesters were announced by the Jakarta Metropolitan Police Office;
3. There are a total of 19 items of goods belonging to the 11 protesters that were forcibly confiscated by the security forces and to date have not been returned even though they are worth tens of millions of Rupiah;
4. There is one protester‘s cellphone that was confiscated and examined digitally, forensically.

Based on the data and facts above, the TAUD firmly stated that the demonstration was a form of implementing the rights to assemble, expression, and opinions which are guaranteed by the Indonesia Constitution and should be respected and protected by the State. Ironically, the peaceful public protest of expressing opinions by the community was responded to with brutal violence by the security forces on behalf of maintaining public security and order or enforcing the law. 

Furthermore, the TAUD has the following views:

First, we understand the complexity of the situation faced by the officers in the field. However, any use of force by the security forces must adhere to internationally recognised general principles as outlined in the United Nations General Assembly Resolution No. 34/169 as outlined in the Code of Conduct of Law Enforcement (CCLEO). In Indonesia, there are also several provisions that have adopted the internationally recognised principles of the use of force. In particular, the provisions of Law No. 9 of 1998 concerning the Expression of Opinions in Public and in particular the internal provisions of the National Police such as the Regulation of the Chief of Police No. 6/2006 concerning Guidelines for Crowd Control, the Regulation of the Chief of Police No. 1/2009 concerning the Use of Force in Police Actions and the Regulation of the Chief of Police No. 8/2009 concerning the Implementation of Human Rights Principles and Standards in the Implementation of Police Duties.

Based on the provisions above, in a state of chaos, the security forces are required to prioritise the dispersal of the crowd without using force. If the use of force is necessary, it must be proportional to the violence and the threat of violence directed at the security forces. This must also be tested based on four principles, namely legality, reasonableness, necessity, proportionality, prevention and accountability.

Based on our monitoring, this demonstration was responded to brutally using the excessive use of force and was carried out blindly. There were no adequate persuasive efforts and effective steps to avoid the use of force. Therefore, the five principles in the use of force mentioned above were violated such as when firing tear gas indiscriminately without warning and without direction.

Secondly, the excessive use of force by the security forces in handling the demonstration clearly correlates directly with the physical and psychological injuries experienced by the demonstrators due to the violence carried out systematically by the security forces.

This clearly fulfils the formulation of the elements of inhumane actions, as well as degrading human dignity as referred to in the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment which has been ratified by Indonesia through Law No. 5/1998 concerning the Ratification of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, namely actions that cause severe physical or psychological pain and suffering, and are carried out intentionally and are intended to punish the victim for an action that has been carried out or is suspected of having been carried out, and are carried out by the official authorities, in this case members of the Police or the TNI.

Thirdly, the Jakarta Metropolitan Police carried out legal proceedings – including coercive measures – arbitrarily against the protesters. This is because since being arrested and taken to the Polda Metro Jaya, the demonstrators have not had a clear legal standing, whether as witnesses or even suspects. The demonstrators were questioned and their statements were recorded in the Interrogation Report (BAI) as a mechanism that is not regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code but is often carried out by the Police. Likewise, their property was confiscated and until now their whereabouts are unclear. In fact, there were no two pieces of evidence shown to the TAUD as a basis for processing the demonstrators. However, unfortunately, based on the statement of the Head of Public Relations of the Polda Metro Jaya, Senior Commissioner Pol. Ade Ary Syam Indradi, his party has actually named 19 demonstrators as suspects.

This action is clearly a violation and abuse of the criminal procedure law which in essence has the spirit of guaranteeing transparency and the accountability of the work of law enforcers, one of which is the Police.

In the Criminal Procedure Code, all implementation of coercive measures have consequences for accountability. However, in reality, in this case, the Polda Metro Jaya became the sole actor who moved without accountability by arresting demonstrators without clear investigation administration, conducting examinations without following the provisions of the procedural law, and searching and confiscating the demonstrators’ belongings without court permission as regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code.

Fourth, the act of forced arrest and arbitrary detention of the demonstrators by the Metro Jaya Police without explaining their whereabouts until the providing of legal assistance is a form of short-term enforced disappearances or forced disappearances in a short time. The Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED) as a treaty body established based on the 2006 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED) Convention recognises that a condition in which a person is detained secretly and outside the protection of the law and can return later either alive or dead is a case of enforced disappearance even though the period is short.

Based on the complaints received through the TAUD hotline, the first report of the demonstrators received was the arrest carried out by the Police at around 17.00 Western Indonesian Time (WIB) against Del Pedro Marhaen as the Director of the Lokataru Foundation and M. Iqbal Ramadhan who is the Assistant Public Attorney of the LBH Jakarta. After being arrested, the whereabouts of the two people were unknown for almost six hours. Furthermore, apart from Del Pedro and M. Iqbal, of the total 27 demonstrators who reported complaints to the TAUD, 25 of them were only given access to legal aid at around 04.00 WIB in the morning (23/08/2024). This means that on average, people who were arrested were detained for almost 11 hours with their whereabouts unknown.

In this regard, we assess that in the brutal incident that occurred on 22 August, the Police are suspected of having carried out short-term enforced disappearances which have resulted in minimal legal protection including the access to the right to legal aid. We need to emphasise that the enforced disappearances that befell the demonstrators are a serious human rights violation. Furthermore, the enforced disappearances that continue to occur until now are due to the lack of seriousness of the State, in this case the Government and the DPR, to immediately ratify the ICPPED so that it can fill the gap in legal regulations in Indonesia regarding enforced disappearances.

Fifth, there are obstacles to access legal aid for those arrested at the Polda Metro Jaya. The TAUD as a legal assistant for the demonstrators was obstructed by the Polda Metro Jaya Police officers. The Police argued that the demonstrators were not allowed to be accompanied because they did not have a power of attorney and there were no further instructions from their leaders regarding the process of handling the demonstrators. In fact, after the TAUD gained access to enter the examination room, the demonstrators had completed the examination process. We also found the fact that the victims of arbitrary arrests who were children were not provided with assistance by the Correctional Agency (BAPAS) during the examination process or by their parents/guardians.

The actions of the Police officers clearly constitute obstacles to access legal aid that violate various provisions of the criminal procedure law and various instruments regarding human rights (HAM). Assistance or the provision of legal aid is the right of the companion as well as the right of all parties who are facing the law. This is guaranteed in the Criminal Procedure Code, the Advocate Law, the Legal Aid Law, the Human Rights Law, as well as the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, and the United Nations Principles and Guidelines on Access to Legal Aid in Criminal Justice Systems.

Sixth, the active involvement of the Indonesian National Armed Forces (TNI) in handling demonstrations has violated laws and regulations and trampled on the democratic rights of citizens. That is in the violent incident that occurred during the demonstration on August 22, 2024 at the DPR/MPR building, the TNI was also deployed to provide security. In fact, in the documentation obtained by the TAUD, the TNI was involved in carrying out violent acts to the point of arresting demonstrators.

Furthermore, referring to the TNI Law, the context of deploying the military in assistance duties through Military Operations Other Than War (OMSP) must be approved through a State political decision between the President and the DPR. The problem is, the involvement of the TNI in securing the August 22 demonstration at the DPR was not carried out based on a State political decision. This is clearly a form of defiance of the laws and regulations and is a significant setback to the agenda of Security Sector Reform (SSR), democracy, and human rights.

Seventh, the brutality of the security forces that occurred during the demonstration on August 22, 2024 cannot be viewed as a single event. This brutality must be viewed as a unity and a series of causalities with the brutality that occurred previously, such as in the series of demonstrations throughout 2019, which claimed up to 50 lives, as well as the rejection of the Omnibus Law on Job Creation in 2020 which resulted in 5,198 people being arrested, the largest number since the post-reformation, including the brutality of the security forces in forced evictions in cases of Rempang or Wadas or other cases in the name of development.

The loss of life and physical and psychological injuries due to the brutality of the security forces on various occasions is not just a violation of the law or an ordinary crime, but has led to a more serious level, namely crimes against humanity as regulated in Article 7 of the Rome Statute of 1998 and Article 9 of Law 26/2000. This should be actively responded to by the Indonesian National Human Rights Commission to ensure whether or not the elements of gross human rights violations, namely systematic and/or widespread, are fulfilled through a pro Justitia investigation.

Eighth, we also highlight the existence of efforts to limit information and violations of the protection of journalistic work at the location of the demonstration. Based on data obtained by the Journalist Safety Committee (KKJ), at least 11 journalists in Jakarta were victims of violence by officers through acts of intimidation, the destruction of work equipment, death threats, psychological and physical violence resulting in serious injuries. Violence against journalists was mostly experienced when journalists were documenting the repressive actions of the TNI and Polri officers against the protesters. Violence committed by officers against journalists is a violation of the guarantee of journalistic work protection as regulated in the provisions of Article 18 paragraph (1) of Law Number 40 of 1999 concerning the Press.

Furthermore, the violations arising from the violence against journalists are the right to information of the public, especially regarding the handling of the protest by officers. This information should be conveyed periodically and transparently through the mass media, considering the large number of protesters involved, so it is important for the families and relatives of the protesters and the public in general. This action violates Article 19 paragraph (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive and impart information.

Based on the above, the Advocacy Team for Democracy (TAUD) urges that:

1. The President and the Indonesian House of Representatives must be held accountable for the arbitrary and brutal practices of the security forces, especially those carried out by the Indonesian Police and the involvement of the Indonesian Military (TNI) in securing the action so far;
2. The President and the Indonesian House of Representatives must immediately remove the Chief of Police for his failure to provide protection to citizens in exercising their basic rights to express opinions in public and instead become an actor in violating the human rights of citizens;
3. The President and the Indonesian House of Representatives must form an independent team with adequate civil society representation to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the use of Police force and its excesses on the security and safety of citizens and to conduct a professional, independent, transparent, and accountable fact-finding mission and to demand accountability for the security forces suspected of being involved in this case;
4. The President and the Indonesian House of Representatives must immediately ratify the ICPPED;
5. Independent State institutions (the National Commission on Human Rights / Komnas HAM), the Ombudsman RI, the National Police Commission / Kompolnas, the National Commission on Violence against Women / Komnas Perempuan, and the Child Protection Commission of Indonesia KPAI) are actively conducting investigations into this case according to their scope of authority;
6. Komnas HAM is conducting a pro Justitia investigation into allegations of serious human rights violations related to the brutality of security forces in various demonstrations;