Impunity is extensive in Indonesia. The murder of a prominent human rights activist is one of many cases that has made this evident to the international community. The death of Munir Thalib and the obstacles for a thorough investigation into his case, has exacerbated a feeling of urgency in local and international groups to address this national problem. Four years after his death, on September 7, 2004, Munir’s murder on Garuda flight 974, while en-route from Jakarta to Amsterdam, has yet to be fully resolved. Considerable impunity, coupled with a lack of government transparency, exists. Exactly who was behind the plotting of his death and for what reason remains unclear.
While primary suspect, Pollycarpus Priyanto, was found guilty by the Supreme Court in April 2007, for the murder of Munir, there remain suspicions over the involvement of others. In addition to his work for justice for hundreds of thousands of victims who had been tortured, killed or disappeared, Munir called for the cessation of military dominance in Indonesia. This may have posed a threat to some authority figures. The ambiguous nature of the investigation into Munir’s murder is made all the more suspect. Repeated calls for a thorough investigation bring into question the effectiveness of the current judicial system, as well as the proper observation of human rights.
The recent arrest of former deputy of the State Intelligence Agency (BIN), Chief Major General Muchdi Purwopranjano, on June 19, 2008, marks the beginning of significant progress in the fight for justice for Munir and for the fight against government impunity. No member of BIN has, up to this time, been accused or arrested for a criminal offense. As the first formal acknowledgment by the judiciary that state authorities may have been involved in the death of Munir, Muchdi’s arrest seems to indicate a degree of willingness by the state to indict those in authoritative positions. A parliamentarian has alleged that more high-status officials, such as BIN Chief Hendropriyono, participated in a ‘planning meeting’ for Munir’s assassination.
A declaration, issued by the European Union Parliament on March 13, 2008, pushed for a forward move in the case, calling on Indonesian authorities to “take all necessary actions to ensure those responsible for the murder are brought to trial and justice is delivered as soon as possible.” An awareness of human rights violations occurring in Indonesia beyond the Asia Pacific region thus exists. It is significant for highlighting the gravity of deficiencies in government institutions in the country. Furthermore, it is that global recognition of these issues that has and will continue to be pivotal. It can enable increased international pressure on the Indonesian government to take action, particularly with regard to past, unresolved, human rights abuses, like Munir’s.
It is nevertheless unfortunate that such pressure is necessary for major action to be taken by national authorities in the first place. The existence of an effective justice system depends on its ability to be independent. Whilst progress in Munir’s case has been made in terms of the case itself as well as for the greater good of the national judicial system, praise is somewhat dampened by the reality that it required considerable international pressure.
This is a key indication of the country’s progress in its present mode of transition. Indonesia’s ongoing Reformasi period following the downfall of Suharto in 1998, calls for a more open social and political environment. This requires a careful balance between the long-established socio-political norms of the past and the emerging practices of international standards, and only gradual progress is to be expected. However, ten years into Reformasi and the Indonesian authorities remain unable to balance ongoing military dominance with calls for greater democracy. Little progress has been made in furthering an impartial and adequately functioning judicial system. This has been clearly demonstrated by the ambiguities that continue to surround the murder of Munir. A real commitment by the President and the Attorney General in resolving this case, as well as others, related to human rights abuses, is thus questionable.
Just how determined then, is the Indonesian government, in upholding the rule of law and implementing an effective system of checks and balances, to ensure the accountability of state agencies? There is little to suggest a serious intent in achieving this. International pressure to effect the process of government actions, as well as the discrepancy that exists between Reformasi principles and reality, lend little hope for successful and significant achievements in the near-future.
Indonesia’s upcoming Independence Day, on August 17, will bring up questions about whether or not there exists a real reason to celebrate. Has satisfactory progress been made by the state since its declaration of independence in 1945? The fact that the murder of a prominent human rights defender could have involved officers of the state, while the fate of the country supposedly rested in its own hands, offers little cause for celebration. Munir’s murder does not bode well for other citizens in the same or similar professions, or for the advancement of the national interest towards understanding basic, fundamental, human rights. In spite of this, the ongoing fight against government impunity in the case of Munir , provides what little hope there may be left for ongoing progress in the country. The reality is that a successful Reformasi period depends upon achieving justice on behalf of Munir, the prospect of which the government ought to consider seriously.
