International Tribunal Could
Try Rights Abusers: Jones
M. Taufiqurrahman, The Jakarta Post/Jakarta
The acquittal of former East Timor governor Abilio Soares of human
rights abuse highlights the flawed Indonesian human rights court
and could prompt the international community to set up a tribunal
to right the wrongs in the judicial process, analysts say.
Sidney Jones of the International Crisis Group (ICG) said the credibility
of the ad hoc human rights tribunal established here in 2002 had
plummeted, leaving a big question about the country's commitment
to human rights
protection.
"The international community who closely watched the court
proceeding, keep asking the question why the process has turned
so ugly," she told The Jakarta Post on Sunday.
Jones said the ad hoc tribunal was not only to blame for the rights
tribunal fiasco as "the Attorney General's Office under the
leadership of M.A. Rachman has drawn up a very weak prosecution
against Abilio".
There were a few ad hoc judges who strove to uphold justice against
those implicated in the human rights abuses, but they were powerless
in the face of weak cases brought forth by the prosecutors, Jones
said.
The initial faith in Indonesian authorities prompted the United
Nations in 2000 to rule out the possibility of trying those implicated
in the mayhem that surrounded East Timor's independence in an international
court.
Jones said the Attorney General's Office under new leader Abdul
Rahman Saleh could start reviewing the court proceedings that had
led to Abilio's acquittal.
During an interview with the Post earlier, Jones said the United
Nations could set up The Commission of Experts to review the entire
judicial process both in Dili and Jakarta.
Abilio, the only official jailed for atrocities related to East
Timor's breakaway from Indonesia in 1999, was acquitted by the Supreme
Court last week on the grounds that the territory was under military
rule at the time of the bloodshed.
A total of 18 civilians, soldiers and police officers were brought
to the ad hoc rights tribunal for the bloody rampage, but only three
civilians were sentenced to jail terms, including Abilio. All the
military and police
defendants were acquitted.
Abilio, an East Timor native, was sentenced to three year's jail
in 2002 for failing to control his subordinates during an attack
on a Liquisa church that left 22 civilians dead.
The United Nations is currently considering setting up a team to
review what has transpired in the ad hoc rights tribunals.
East Timor leaders, however, have said they would prefer to instead
build good ties with their giant neighbor, rather than concentrate
on the past.
Contacted separately, law expert Andi Hamzah said Law No. 26/2000
on human rights that sanctioned the ad hoc rights tribunal was flawed
as it blurred the boundaries between ordinary and gross human rights
violations.
"The law stipulates that gross violators of human rights must
be sentenced to at least 10 years' (jail), aside from death or life
sentences. However, in Abilio's case, he only got three years in
jail, which means he did not
commit gross human rights abuses," he told the Post.
In the face of the improper application of human rights law, the
Supreme Court had no choice but to acquit Abilio, Andi said.
He said the jail sentence for Abilio was based on his minor involvement
in the atrocities.
"Despite his minor role helping the Indonesian Military rule
the strife-torn province, the prosecutors were obliged to bring
him to justice. Therefore they charged him under the law on human
rights which could be applied retroactively; that's the only way,"
he said.
He said the prosecutors' determinations had led to a weak case
against Abilio.
"The law setting up the human rights tribunal needs amending
so that it concerns only gross violations of human rights,"
he said.