COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE HEARS RESPONSE OF INDONESIA

Committee against Torture
AFTERNOON

7 May 2008


The Committee against Torture this afternoon heard the response of Indonesia to questions raised by Committee Experts on the second periodic report of that country on how it is implementing the provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

Responding to a series of questions raised by the Committee members on 6 May 2008, the delegation, which was led by Rezlan Ishar Jenie, Director-General for Multilateral Affairs at the Department of Foreign Affairs of Indonesia, said with regard to the definition of torture, it was true the penal code was not worded in the terms of the Convention. However, the crime of maltreatment, involving the physical abuse of people, was covered. About the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the delegation said that the act establishing the Commission had been adopted in 2004. In 2005, the President issued a decree forming the Commission’s selection committee. In 2006, some non-governmental organizations (NGOs) had proposed certain amendments to the Commission, as they were concerned that the articles in the act contradicted the Constitution. Later, the Constitutional Court declared that the act had no legally binding power. This decision had been a shock to certain NGOs. The court’s decision thus terminated the process. But this did not mean that there were no solutions aimed at addressing the past gross human rights violations. The Government continued to conduct public debates on the issue. Three committees would be established for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission: one for the investigation of human rights violations, one on amnesty and one on compensation, reparation and rehabilitation.

On female genital mutilation, the delegation noted that the practice in Indonesia was merely a ritualistic procedure. It was assured that these symbolic activities did not inflict great pain. Also, it was women health officials who were carrying them out. The practice was carried out to respect beliefs and was not seen as a mutilation. It was not like in other parts of the world. Further, it was not true that 97 percent of baby girls had undergone female genital mutilation as had been stated by one of the Experts. This was a traditional and unharmful ritual. The Department of Health had conducted an awareness raising campaign through the dissemination of information which underlined that the practice of female genital mutilation was not obligatory. As an example, one circumcised women of the delegation said she was very happy when she was circumcised because she received a lot of money as presents.

The Committee will submit its conclusions and recommendations on the report of Indonesia towards the end of the session on Friday, 16 May 2008.

As one of the 145 States parties to the Convention against Torture, Indonesia is obliged to provide the Committee with periodic reports on the measures it has undertaken to fight torture.


When the Committee reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 8 May 2008, it is scheduled to begin consideration of the second periodic report of Zambia (CAT/C/ZMB/2).


Response of Indonesia

I GUSTI AGUNG WESAKA PUJA, Ambassador and Charge d’Affaires at the Permanent Mission of Indonesia to the United Nations Office at Geneva, in preliminary comments, said that the delegation of Indonesia had noted more than 50 questions by the Committee and they would answer them in detail and in written form. The oral responses they would provide today were clustered around the principal issues.

Responding to a series of questions raised by Committee Experts on 6 May 2008, the delegation of Indonesia said that, with regard to the definition of torture, it was true that the penal code was not worded in the terms of the Convention. However, the crime of maltreatment, involving the physical abuse of people, was covered. The fact that torture was not rightly covered did of course give too much room for interpretation. However, torture was defined in the human rights code. Also, the draft bill of the penal code defined torture in the terms of Article 1 of the Convention against Torture. The enactment of the draft penal code was taking a while because of the many changes that were involved. The absence of torture in the legal code did not mean that they were doing nothing against police and prison officers accused of maltreatment.

Concerning the issue of impunity, the police and military units had increased their efforts in training their officers in human rights norms and also about the Convention against Torture, and the result of this should be seen in the future. The fact that many military and police officials were being indicted for maltreatment showed that there was no impunity granted, the delegation said. With regard to safeguards, the Government had established a number of bodies to monitor and evaluate the different law enforcement units. Also, members of the police were tried in civil courts and not in military courts.

On allegations of the persecution of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community, the delegation said that in Indonesia, the freedom of religion and practice of religion was provided by the Indonesian legislation. It may only be limited when dissemination of religious beliefs, different from the main registered religions in the country, took place. This was in order to ensure public order. The Government was limiting its role to maintaining the law and protecting its citizens.

Concerning detentions, the delegation noted that according to the criminal procedure law, a person could be detained from 2 to up to 40 days. Concerning the rights of the detainees and detained foreigners, everyone detained in prison had the right to contact their families, advocates, legal councillor, translators, medical assistance and so on. Lawyers were provided by the State for those who were not able to provide for a lawyer themselves. In prisons, open and free visits by relatives and family were authorized. Concerning the detention of children with adults, this was linked to the fact that in one specific region there was no facility available to detain children, so they were detained with adults.

With regard to the use of evidence during trials, testimony obtained through torture was not considered as legal evidence. Concerning the registration of detainees, the delegation noted that there was no central register. Prisoners were controlled by the prosecutors, whereas detainees were controlled by the police.

About the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the delegation said that the act establishing the Commission had been adopted in 2004. In 2005, the President issued a decree forming the Commission’s selection committee. In 2006, some non-governmental organizations (NGOs) had proposed certain amendments to the Commission, as they were concerned that the articles in the act contradicted the Constitution. Later, the Constitutional Court declared that the act had no legally binding power. This decision had been a shock to certain NGOs. The court’s decision thus terminated the process. But this did not mean that there were no solutions aimed at addressing the past gross human rights violations. The Government continued to conduct public debates on the issue. Three committees would be established for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission: one for the investigation of human rights violations, one on amnesty and one on compensation, reparation and rehabilitation.

On internally displaced persons, the delegation noted that Indonesia was a disaster prone and conflict torn country. The Government of Indonesia had established a disaster management board which provided directives concerning emergency response and set standards for the supervision of internally displaced persons.

Concerning the role of the National Ombudsman Commission, the delegation said that this was an independent body that conducted oversight of State apparatuses providing public services. Its procedures mainly dealt with complaints raised by the people. The issues concerned the quality of the services provided. The National Ombudsman Commission also monitored and visited places of detention. The Commission saw a need for the immediate separation of child inmates from adult inmates. Also, it was of the view that alternatives had to be found to the imprisonment of children.

On the question of Papua, the delegation said that violence present in this region and that allegations of violent acts by police officers were always looked into. Further, the local Government was increasing its ability to train police in the area of human rights.

Concerning child issues, perpetrators of violence against children faced a sentence of imprisonment of up to three years. Separating male and female detainees and children from adults was planned, however, as the various prisons had no facilities to deal with this, it was currently impossible to fully implement this. Also, the minimum age to be tried in court would be raised from 8 to 12 years. On the issue of birth certificates, they were now made available free of charge.

On female genital mutilation, the delegation noted that the practice in Indonesia was merely a ritualistic procedure. It was assured that these symbolic activities did not inflict great pain. Also, it was women health officials who were carrying them out. The practice was carried out to respect beliefs and was not seen as a mutilation. It was not like in other parts of the world. Further, it was not true that 97 percent of baby girls had undergone female genital mutilation as had been stated by one of the Experts. This was a traditional and unharmful ritual. The Department of Health had conducted an awareness raising campaign through the dissemination of information which underlined that the practice of female genital mutilation was not obligatory. As an example, one circumcised women of the delegation said she was very happy when she was circumcised because she received a lot of money as presents.

Questions by Committee Experts

FELICE GAER, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the Report of Indonesia, welcomed the acknowledgment by the State party of the shortcoming concerning the definition of torture in the law. She noted that in today’s answers, no information was given about the legal proceedings concerning the individuals that were wanted by Interpol for their implication in the East Timor conflict. One of them was a colonel currently serving with the Indonesian military command. Was the Government planning to arrest this individual and respect its obligations under Interpol? Also, the question of sending such commanders from one hot spot to the other had not been addressed.

On amnesties, Ms. Gaer noted that the Truth and Friendship Commission had the ability to grant amnesties for serious crimes. Was the Government planning to end this? Concerning trafficking, how much money was the Government giving to law enforcement units to help them investigate cases of human trafficking.

On human rights defenders, Ms. Gaer said that without them being able to function normally, the whole human rights process and even the work of the Committee against Torture would be weakened. The Special Rapporteur had noted human rights defenders were suffering from serious constraints, imputable to the activities of various groups harassing human rights. Also, could the delegation ensure that none of the members of the non-governmental organizations present in the room would suffer from reprisal upon their return in Indonesia?

Further, Ms. Gaer asked what effective measures were in place to cancel regional laws that were not in line with international standards. Coerced confessions were not considered legal, yet the Special Rapporteur had found that this was commonly used in police stations, what was being done to address this? Had there been cases where people complained that their testimony had been coerced?

CLAUDIO GROSSMAN, the Committee Expert serving as Co-Rapporteur for the Report of Indonesia, said long detentions period created serious problems, and 61 days were a long time.

Other Committee Experts asked further questions and made comments about the registration of young people in places of detention. On the question of female genital mutilation, one Expert did not contest the financial gains linked to it but underlined that there were no health gains acquired. The fact that the female genital mutilation was being carried out by health officials was not necessarily a good argument. The Committee looked forward for the State to come back to them on this subject. Also, an Expert welcomed the raising of the penal age from 8 to 12, but said it should be raised further.

Response by Delegation

Responding to additional questions raised, the delegation of Indonesia said that, concerning coercive evidence, if a legal officer forced someone to confess, he could be subjected to four years of imprisonment. Also, if a person said his confessions had been made under torture, these confessions would not be taken into account.

Concerning female genital mutilation, it was not a problem and the Government was providing information to the public that it was not obligatory both for religious practices and for health benefits. There was no harm from female genital mutilation, even though there was no benefit.

Concluding, the delegation said that all these initiatives were work in progress and much remained to be done.

____________

For use of the information media; not an official record