Practice of torture during Soeharto’s regime

Muhamad Daud Berueh,
Staff Member,
The Commission for ‘The
Disappeared’ and Victims of
Violence (KontraS)

[The author works for Impunity Watch Division of KontraS, an NGO based in Jakarta, Indonesia. The group promotes political awareness of victims of abuses in pursuit of justice regardless of their religious background, race, ethnicity, ideology, class, gender and sexual orientation. He is currently interning with the AHRC in Hong Kong.]

The UN Convention against Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment defines the use of torture committed for the purpose of eliciting confession or information, to threaten, coerce or discriminate the victims. Under the Soeharto regime, torture was practised by the military against Indonesians critical of the government. Today, torture is deeply embedded in the police establishment in the conduct of their daily law enforcement duties.

This article will describe how torture had been practiced in the past. The ‘past human rights abuses’ refers to gross violations of human rights under the New Order regime (1965-1998), in which Article 43 of Law No. 26 of year 2000 on Human Rights Court, allows prosecution in an Ad hoc Human Rights Court. The Law No. 26 of year 2000 recognizes retrospective principles which allow prosecution of cases prior to its enactment. These includes prosecution in cases of the purge of ‘communists’ in 1965-1966; shooting and murder in Tanjung Priok in 1984; shootings in 1982- 1985; the assault and murder of villagers in Talangsari Lampung in 1989, and the abduction of activists in 1997-1998. The law stipulates that there no statute of limitations would be imposed for gross violation. This paper will examine how the government responded in providing reparation to victims of the past during Soeharto regime under the current law.

A. Methods of torture experienced by victims

Purge of ‘communists’ (1965-1966)

Events of mass killings of suspected communist occurred during the transition period from the Old Order regime of former President Soekarno to New Order regime of former President Soeharto. Through the establishment of the security command and order in 1965, Soeharto ordered the military and community organisations to arrest Communist Party members and their supporters. As a result, many people allegedly involved with the Party were arrested and detained without legal process. Between five hundred thousand to two million people were believed to have been extra judicially killed.

The torture of individuals alleged to be supporters of the Communist Party took place in military detention facilities. In its investigation report, the National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) summarizes the information from witnesses and victims. One of them explains the methods of torture used by the military. In the victim’s testimony, he said he was arrested in Gandhi Road in North Sumatra on allegation that he was involved in the Communist Party. In Komnas HAM’s report, the victim noted that while he was under interrogation by the military, he was hit on his back and thighs; he was flogged, kicked, beaten with batons, kept in a toilet filled with human excreta for 10 days and soaked in water for about a week. He was electrocuted to force him to admit that he had a gun. He was detained for four and a half years without trial.

Tanjung Priok massacre (1984)

On 12 September 1984, hundreds of protestors were killed and many others have disappeared when the military violently dispersed thousands of protesting religious leaders and their communities in North Jakarta Military District Command. The military indiscriminately shot at the protestors. Many protestors were arrested, one of whom was my father. At the military intelligence office in Tanah Abang, Central Jakarta, he was interrogated. He was questioned by four military men about the whereabouts of his other colleagues. They tied his hands. When he told them he did not know, they would repeatedly beat him with an iron pole until he lost his consciousness. He was transferred to the office of Kramat V Regional Security and Defence Command (Laksusda) in Central Jakarta. Laksusda was a military unit under the control of Security and Order Rehabilitation Command (Kopkamtib) whose task at that time was to arrest and interrogate persons opposing the policies of President Soeharto.

In Laksusda, my father was again asked the same questions. His replies were similar to those who had questioned him. He was electrocuted for two days. He was taken back to the home of military prisoners in Cimanggis, West Java. Here, his hair was shaved, he was threatened and forced to do physical activity, like a hundred pushups and sits ups every time they question him. If he refused to do so, the military police would step on him. My father was sentenced to 14 years imprisonment for his alleged subversive activities. His story and that of many other victims is narrated in a book titled: ‘They said God is not here: voices of Priok Tragedy victims’ published by KontraS in 2004. All the victims held at the military detention facilities were tortured, intimidated and terrorized. A report by Komnas Ham on Tanjung Priok indicates the methods of torture used against the detainees also includes beatings with weapons and kicking.

Mysterious shooting (1982-1985)

A joint military and police operation against thugs to reduce crime rates in Yogyakarta, Semarang in Central Java and in Bandung in West Java, have left around 9,000 people who were suspected thugs killed. Their bodies had traces of torture indicating they were tortured before they were executed. The report of Komnas HAM on this case indicated the victims have suffered:

Wounds on their neck indicating they had been strangled with wire before they were shot dead;

Massacre of Talangsari in Lampung (1989)

In 1989, military officers assaulted a group of civilians who allegedly wanted to establish an Islamic country in Indonesia, in Talangsari, Lampung. The assault left about 130 persons dead and displaced 77 others. About 46 people were tortured. After the assault, the military and the police arrested dozens of individuals opposing the government’s policy. Those arrested were tortured in several detention places in Lampung district.

Abduction of activists in 1997-1998

During this period, members of Student Solidarity for Democracy (SMID) who were demanding for restoration of democracy in Indonesia were abducted by the military. Their critical views were deemed threat to the State. While some of them were released, 13 others are still missing until today. One of the victims (see Mugiyanto’s interview) Mugiyanto, testified that he was tortured, and electrocuted. In an interview by the AHRC, he narrated his experience while in the military’s custody:

“I was interrogated for two days. I was blindfolded and stripped. I could only wear my underwear. During the interrogation, I was electrocuted, beaten, threatened, yelled at and subjected to other inhumane treatment. I could not know who did it because I was always blindfolded. I only knew Nezar Patria and Aan Rusdiyanto were also there because I could hear their voices.”

Physical impact

Victims of these past violations who were tortured had to endure various physical problems due to torture they have suffered. For example, one of the victims in Tanjung Priok case continues to cough blood to this day. He still also complains of pain of the wound in his chest. In May 2013, another victim died due to respiratory problem he had been suffering for years. It is common amongst the victims that as a result of prolonged physical injury, they had to sell their personal belongings to pay huge cost for their treatment increasing financial burden on them. Despite the victims release from prison and their names cleared of charges, they had difficulties in getting employment due to stigma attached to them.

Psychological impact

The victims also had to endure prolonged trauma. One of the activists who was abducted in 1997-1998 testified that he still fears the sound of a handheld radio. He could not walk alone two years after the incident. Another victim of Tanjung Priok still suffers trauma to this day. Every time he remembers what he experienced at the military detention facility. The physical and psychological suffering the victims endures also had impact on family relationships. For example, the victims’ children have difficulties in studying at universities because due to the injuries that their father suffered, they could not work and could not afford to pay for the school fees of their children.

C. Mechanism of redress for victims

Legal mechanisms under national law

The Law No. 26 Year 2000 on Human Rights Court regulates mechanism of redress for victims of past human rights violations. However, this law is deficient in providing remedy and redress to individual torture cases. Individual torture cases could not be tried in the Human Rights Court. It only hears torture cases found to have been performed systematically and widespread falling under category of crimes against humanity.

This law also regulates compensation, restitution and rehabilitation for victims of human rights violations. Article 35 stipulates that:

1. Every victim of a violation of human rights violations, and/or his/her beneficiaries, shall receive compensation, restitution, and rehabilitation.

The law defines compensation as damages for victims of past human rights violations payable by the State. The perpetrators, who could not fully compensate the victims’ loss, the State would take full responsibility for them. The same law defines restitution as punitive damages awarded to victims or his family by the offender or a third party. Restitution may take in form of returning the victim’s property rights, payment of damages for loss or suffering and reimbursement of expenses for funeral or other actions. Rehabilitation is the restoration of the original position, such as honour, good name, title or other rights of the victims (see article by Era Purnama Sari).

However, the procedures for victims to claim their rights under this law are tedious and lengthy. Not only that they have to wait for the legal proceedings to complete, they also have to initiate the process themselves in the first place. First, Article 19 of Law No. 26 Year 2000 requires the victims to file a complaint with the Komnas HAM who then conducts an investigation and summons a number of parties involved. Komnas HAM has the authority to investigate cases of human rights violations and to conclude whether the gross violations of human rights had taken place. The result of its investigation would be submitted to the Attorney General who has legal obligation to further investigate and to initiate prosecution. The Attorney General will later give recommendations to the court to provide the victims with compensation and rehabilitation. If the judges agrees with the Attorney General’s findings they will issue a verdict granting the victims request for adequate compensation and rehabilitation. Compensation and rehabilitation, however, can only be given to the victims if the court finds the perpetrators guilty of the crime.

Past human rights abuses can be tried only in an Ad Hoc Human Rights Court whose establishment can be politically very challenging. In fact, Komnas HAM has already conducted investigations in all the past human rights abuses and sent their reports to the Attorney General. However, to this day, the AG has refused to act on the recommendations by Komnas HAM. The establishment of an Ad Hoc Human Rights Court also requires recommendations from the Parliament to the President who will issue a Presidential Decree establishing the court.

ITanjung Priok massacre – a case study on compensation

The case of Tanjung Priok in 1984 is one of the cases of gross human rights violations examined by the Human Rights Court. The Ad Hoc Human Rights Court held hearing in 2003-2004 in Central Jakarta District Court. The Attorney General initially did not request compensation for the victims to the court. KontraS, an NGO, had to urge the AG to do so prompting the public prosecutor to request for. The trial of Tanjung Priok was held in four separate occasions. In these, only in the case on Sutrisno Mascung and others where the judges delivered a verdict granting compensation to victims. The judgement held the 15 victims were entitled for compensation and obliged the State should provide financial compensation to the victims. However, when the accused Sutrisno Mascung and others appealed their conviction to the High Court and the Supreme Court they were acquitted. The final decision reversed the earlier decision of the District Court which held that the accused and his associates were guilty sentencing them to 1 to 3 years of imprisonment. After they were acquitted, the government stopped providing compensation to victims.

In 2007, KontraS accompanied the victims who requested for the execution of orders on compensation for the victims from the District Court; however, the court dismissed the application because the defendants had already been acquitted.

Medical and psycho-social assistance through the Witnesses and Victims Protection Agency

After the Witnesses and Victims Protection Agency (LPSK) was established under Law No. 13 Year 2006, victims of human rights violations have had expectations to obtain redress. Under Article 7 of this law, the LPSK has the authority to facilitate victims of past human rights abuses in obtaining compensation by way of a ruling from the court. The LPSK also has the authority to provide the victims with medical and psychosocial assistance. Psychosocial assistance is provided by the psychologist to victims who suffers trauma or other psychological problems. But to receive such assistance, the victims had to meet all administrative requirements, like submitting a document explaining the abuse that had happened, and the medical and psychosocial problems the victim suffered. Once the requirements are considered complete by the LPSK, the victims will be interviewed by a psychologist and examined by a team of doctors.

The LPSK conducted this assessment to determine that the physical and psychological trauma the victims had suffered is indeed related to the violations. The result obtained by the team of psychologist and the doctors is submitted to the LPSK who will then decide whether the victims should be granted medical and psychosocial assistance. Also, under the LPSK regulation No. 4 of 2009 concerning Standard Operational Procedure granting medical assistance and psychosocial, before providing assistance the victims are required to obtain a letter of recommendation from Komnas HAM confirming they are indeed victims of past human rights abuses.

Since 2010, there are only about 16 victims whom the LPSK had given medical and psychosocial assistance. Many hundreds of others victims have not received assistance because they are still waiting for the recommendation from the Komnas HAM. The release of recommendation is overly delayed. In fact, one of the victims, Mr. Kasman of the of Talangsari case in 1989, died without receiving any form of assistance from the LPSK due to the Komnas HAM’s failure to provide the recommendation for him. As a result of the slow process in issuance of recommendation letters, the victims and KontraS filed administrative complaint against Komnas HAM with the Ombudsman.

In responding to the complaint submitted by KontraS and the victims, on 17 April 2013 the Ombudsman summoned the Chairman of Komnas HAM. In a telephone conversation in May 2013 with a member of the Ombudsman, the Chairman of Komnas HAM promised to organize a meeting with the LPSK to expedite the issuance of the letters of recommendation.

Conclusion

Law Number 26 Year 2000 on Human Rights Court cannot be expected to provide reparation to victims of past human rights violation. The process is very lengthy and the procedure is complicated. The definition of reparation, rehabilitation and restitution established by law is not in compliance with the international standards. For instance, to require that reparation could only be granted upon a final verdict of the court holding the perpetrators guilty effectively imposes condition on the victim’s right to reparation to the court’s decision and finding of guilt of the accused.

Also, medical and psychosocial assistance for victims provided by the LPSK is flawed because the process is too long and because there is no obligation on part of the Komnas HAM and LPSK on when they should complete the processing. It renders victims seeking assistance having to wait indefinitely. In addition, to require clearance from Komnas HAM before the LPSK could provide assistance further prolongs the procedures, when in fact, psychosocial and medical assistance should have been provided promptly. This is needed mostly by the elderly victims.

Article 35 para. 2 of the Law which states that compensation, restitution and rehabilitation should be based on the verdict of the court, must be amended. The present Articles hinders the victims ability in obtaining prompt, effective and adequate reparation.

Article 35 para. 2 of the Law which states that compensation, restitution and rehabilitation should be based on the verdict of the court, must be amended. The present Articles hinders the victims ability in obtaining prompt, effective and adequate reparation.

The regulation of LPSK No. 4 of 2009 concerning Standard Operational Procedure in the granting medical and psychosocial assistance must also be amended, particularly the section where it requires victims to obtain recommendations from the Komnas HAM. There should also be a clear time limit requiring Komnas HAM in issuing recommendation letters in support of the victims’ application to LPSK. The LPSK and Komnas HAM should also build a good communication in responding to victims’ requests for assistance.