Committee against Torture begins consideration of report of Indonesia

CAT
27th session
16 November 2001
Morning





Government Representatives Queried on
Treatment of Detainees, Allegations of Sexual Violence


The Committee against Torture began its review this morning of an initial report of Indonesia, questioning Government representatives, among other things, on allegations that detainees were often deprived of legal counsel and medical attention; that sexual violence was frequently used as a form of coercion or ill-treatment of women by soldiers and police officers in conflict areas; and that demonstrations were frequently quelled with deadly force.

The Committee also sought information on standards for pre-trial detention and on how it was decided whether cases were tried before civilian or military courts. The panel of 10 independent Experts noted that many allegations had been received of ill-treatment in areas of the country undergoing conflict, including Aceh, Papua, and the Moluccas, but that the report did not deal with these regions.

The delegation will respond to the Committee's questions at a meeting beginning at 3 p.m. on Monday, 19 November.

The Indonesian report was introduced by Lucia H. Rustam, Minister Counsellor of the Permanent Mission of Indonesia to the United Nations Office at Geneva. Mrs. Rustam said among other things that a National Human Rights Commission and a National Plan of Action for Human Rights had been established; that Human Rights Courts were being set up; that a number of soldiers, army officers, and former Government ministers had been sentenced for human-rights offenses; and that the Government faced obstacles in its efforts to promote human rights, including a lack of financial resources, the vast territory covered by the Indonesian archipelago, which rendered law enforcement difficult, and a lack of human resources.

Also representing Indonesia was Mohammad Anshor of the Directorate for International Organizations of the Department of Foreign Affairs.

Indonesia, as one of the 126 States parties to the Convention against Torture, is required to present periodic summations to the Committee of national efforts to put the Convention's provisions into effect. Government delegations generally appear before the Committee during the consideration of such reports to answer questions and provide additional information.

The Committee will reconvene at 3 p.m. to continue its review of an initial report of Benin.


Initial report of Indonesia

The report (CAT/C/47/Add.3) reviews implementation of the Convention on an article-by-article basis. The introduction notes, among other things, that while the 1945 Indonesian Constitution does not explicitly prohibit torture, it does so in practice by stating that every citizen of Indonesia has the same right and position before the law and has the right, guaranteed by the State, not to be tortured. The Penal Code states that "Any State official who in a criminal case uses coercion, whether to force somebody to confess, or to persuade someone in order to give information, will be put in jail for a maximum of four years"; and a Government regulation states that the country's Human Rights Courts have the authority to hear cases of physical and mental suffering and to adjudicate cases of "torture" inflicted by officers in order to gain confessions, to intimidate, or as any form of discrimination.

Indonesia's National Commission on Human Rights has been strengthened, the report notes, and a National Plan of Action on Human Rights has been developed. Further, the House of Representatives, in cooperation with the Government, in 1999 defined torture as contained in the Convention and decided that freedom from torture was also a non-derogable human right.

Articles of a 1981 law on Criminal Procedure allow for a request to determine whether an arrest or detention is legal and allow a request for compensation where a person is illegally arrested or detained, the report states; it contends that these and other measures ensure that police, prosecutors and judges do not carry out improper arrests or detentions and that they do not allow situations where abuses such as torture can occur.


Introduction of report

LUCIA H. RUSTAM, Minister Counsellor of the Permanent Mission of Indonesia to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said a National Commission of Human Rights had been established in 1993 and a National Plan of Action on Human Rights was in effect for 1998-2003. Among the latter's tasks were dissemination of international instruments to law-enforcement officers on torture and arbitrary detention; human rights training for law-enforcement officers; studies and dissemination of information on humanitarian law; a special programme for judges and prosecutors; protection for vulnerable groups; and anti-riot training.

A second amendment to the Constitution had incorporated a new chapter on human rights which mentioned the right of all to be free from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, Mrs. Rustam said. In addition, an Act adopted in 2000 established Human Rights Courts, and these were now being set up in regional and municipal capitals to try cases of gross violations. A Commission on Truth and Reconciliation had been established with the job of re-examining past cases of violations where witnesses and evidence might no longer be available but which had had a significant impact on the nation. Instances of torture committed by the Indonesian Army (TNI) were dealt with by the military police and by military prosecutors and judges.

The Government was determined to combat impunity for human-rights abuses, Mrs. Rustam said, and a number of soldiers, high-ranking military officers and ministers of previous governments had been sentenced for human-rights offenses. However, the Government also faced obstacles in its efforts to promote human rights, including a lack of financial resources, the vast territory covered by the Indonesian archipelago, which rendered law enforcement difficult, and a lack of human resources.


Discussion

Serving as Rapporteur on the situation in Indonesia was Committee Expert FELICE GAER, who said among other things that the information provided in the Indonesian report in reference to several Convention articles was limited and told little about practical implementation. On the other hand, the Government had taken a number of positive formal steps, including separating the police from military forces, holding democratic elections, and disbanding certain internal security organizations.

Among her questions were if Constitutional and legal prohibitions of torture were specific enough to offer practical protection, as there still was no law parallelling the definition of torture given in the Convention; if there was a timetable for the adoption of the draft new Criminal Code, and if the Code might include a more precise definition and a single, specific law prohibiting torture; if the Human Rights Courts, to be established by December of this year, would in fact begin operating, as no judges had yet been appointed; what the rules were for police custody and pre-trial detention; what were the consequences for violating custody and detention standards; if habeas corpus applied to military detention; what were the standards for determining whether cases were tried by military or civilian courts; and if, under a new decree, charges against police would be tried in civilian courts.

As for cases of torture that had been investigated, in most instances these had not resulted in trials, Ms. Gaer said. She asked what the obstacles were to bringing such cases to trial. In December 2000 there had been a number of cases of detention, abuse and death of students, she said; what had been the results of investigations into those cases? She asked for statistics on the numbers of complaints brought on allegations of torture or ill-treatment, and the results of the complaints; asked if a central registry was kept of detainees, including details on their legal and medical status; asked if authorities were obliged to provide medical assistance and legal counsel to detainees as a matter of course, as a number of cases had been reported to the Committee where these rights had not been provided; and asked if there had been trials of soldiers for carrying out abuses under the orders of a superior officer.

There appeared to be no information in the report on whether refugees or asylum-seekers could be returned to countries where they risked undergoing torture or maltreatment, Ms. Gaer said, and she asked if refoulement in such circumstances was prohibited.

Sexual violence appeared to be frequently employed as a form of torture, according to information provided by the non-governmental organization OMCT and the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on violence against women, Ms. Gaer said, and there appeared to be a narrow definition of rape that might allow such abuse to occur while women were in custody; she asked if a police officer or other official who sexually abused a woman detainee could be prosecuted.

The Special Rapporteur said numerous allegations had been received of sexual abuses, including rape, committed in areas where armed conflicts were under way, including Aceh, Papua, and the Moluccas, Ms. Gaer said, and that women rarely came forward with complaints because they lacked confidence in the police. She asked what was being done to increase confidence in the police and to ensure that investigations were carried out into complaints of rape and other human rights abuses; why the report did not refer to the human rights situation in conflict areas; why a vast number of allegations had been received that the police and army enjoyed impunity for acts of torture and ill-treatment in such locations; why it was alleged that the military frequently used deadly force in quelling demonstrations; and what were the mechanisms for monitoring and controlling the behaviour of soldiers and security troops.

Ms. Gaer also asked if the Government would ever bring to trial known leaders and organizers of groups that had carried out massacres in Ambon. She noted there were frequent allegations of collaboration between the army and paramilitary groups in cases of conflict, including what had occurred following the plebiscite in East Timor, and asked what the Government was doing to prevent such collaboration and if the Government would transfer members of the military suspected of human-rights violations to East Timor for trial, as it had been reported that Indonesia had done little to cooperate with the human-rights-based requests of the UN Transition Authority in East Timor (UNTAET).

Serving as Co-Rapporteur on the Indonesian document was Committee Expert YU MENGJA. Among his questions were if examples could be given of sanctions imposed on officials who had committed torture; what was done to ensure prompt and impartial investigation of complaints, as required by the Convention, and if examples could be given; what mechanisms were in place to allow complaints by detainees and prisoners and to protect those who complained from reprisals; and what was done, especially in regions of conflict, to protect suspects from coerced confessions.

Other Committee members also put questions. They asked, among other things, about allegations that persons held in military detention centres enjoyed few legal protections; if arrangements could be made for NGOs to visit detention centres to monitor conditions; what was done to prevent arbitrary or unreported detention; what was done to control the behaviour of private police forces or militias funded by private corporations for "protection" in some parts of the country, and which allegedly had committed abuses against local populations; if some members of the army served in these private militias, as reported; and why the Government had made only one response to 12 urgent appeals from the Special Rapporteur on torture of the Commission on Human Rights in relation to actions of the Indonesian security forces.




* *** *