FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 3, 2006
AS-092-2006
A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
INDONESIA: Flawed state institutions unable to uncover Munir’s killers
Close to two years after the death of Indonesia’s leading human rights activist Munir Said Thalib, little has been revealed regarding why he was killed and who was responsible. Local and international pressure, including significant efforts by Munir’s wife Suciwati, has failed to compel the Indonesian government to provide answers to these questions. Indonesia’s first elected president, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, came to know of Munir’s death during his presidential campaign. Since then he has made solemn promises to uncover the perpetrators and these promises have been seen by the international human rights community as a pledge of his commitment to democracy and human rights. It is now time to review the results.
After nearly a year of investigation, Indonesia’s prosecution charged Garuda pilot Pollycarpus Priyanto with premeditated murder and falsification of documents in August 2005. In December 2005, Pollycarpus was sentenced to 14-years imprisonment by the district court in Jakarta. The court judgment noted clearly however, that Pollycarpus was not acting alone and further investigation must therefore be conducted to uncover all those behind Munir’s murder. In fact, the presidential fact-finding team appointed to inquire into this case mentioned several senior state officials who should have been investigated, but never were. Both the police and prosecution ignored the team’s report, and the trial went ahead without further investigation. In the same manner, both institutions have seen fit to ignore the court recommendation that further investigations be conducted. Not only does this raise questions regarding the authority of the Indonesian judiciary, but it also raises questions regarding the functioning of the police and prosecution mechanisms.
While the head of the criminal division of Indonesia’s National Police, Makbul Padmanegara has reportedly said that he will meet with Suciwati weekly to discuss the ‘progress’ of her husband’s case, the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has learnt that for the last two weeks no meetings have commenced. Even if any meetings were to take place, what outcome could they possible have? The Indonesian police are seen as human rights violators, not defenders. Senior police officers are known to have committed gross human rights abuses in other parts of Indonesia, including East Timor (1999), Abepura (2000) and Wasior (2001). They are seen as having links with the military and state intelligence bodies. When officers such as Muchdi Purwopranjono, former National Intelligence Agency (BIN) deputy chief, as well as ex-Commander of Army Special Forces, are suspected of being involved in Munir’s murder, it is hardly surprising that the police are unable to conduct any independent or credible inquiry.
The office of the attorney general of Indonesia has little more credibility than the Indonesian police. In fact, the attorney general is known to rarely prosecute serious criminals, whether they are accused of corruption, extrajudicial killing or torture, unless political manipulation is involved. There have been recent protests against the attorney general’s office regarding numerous cases of grave corruption, while local rights groups have for years denounced the office for non-prosecution of gross human rights abuses, including the May 1998 riots, the Trisakti and Semanggi cases, and the case of Wasior and Wamena. Under these circumstances, the attorney general’s commitment to prosecute those ultimately responsible for Munir’s death is also in doubt. This doubt is further fuelled by the attorney general having ignored recent requests made by Suciwati and human rights groups to make public the phone conversations between Muchdi and Pollycarpus.
That these state institutions are unable or unwilling to answer the question, ‘who killed Munir’, is a serious setback to the Indonesian government, and particularly President Yudhoyono. There is no such thing as a democratic nation without the rule of law, and there can be no rule of law without effective police, prosecution and judicial institutions. Flawed institutions merely reflect flaws within the government. While President Yudhoyono has made numerous promises regarding Munir’s case, these promises have yet to be translated into effective action. It is not enough for him to instruct institutions to conduct investigations; he must ensure that these investigations take place. Any legitimate government must be able to rely on effective institutions to enforce the rule of law within the country.
It is therefore essential for the government to establish an independent investigation team to uncover the truth behind Munir’s death, as the AHRC has previously recommended. The team must comprise of senior state officers and it must have the necessary political backing and authority to undertake its task. This must include investigating senior military and intelligence officers and ensuring their effective prosecution. The questions surrounding Munir’s death will not go away. It is for the Indonesian government to decide whether it will attempt to provide answers and serve justice to Munir and his family, or whether it will renege on its commitment to human rights and democracy. The Asian Human Rights Commission, together with many others, will continue to monitor this case and demand resolutions.
