Indonesia has rejected a suggestion by Singapore's mentor minister Lee Kuan Yew, that it considers an instrument such as the island's Internal Security Act, to fight terrorism. The controversial ISA, which is also present in neighbouring Malaysia, allows for the indefinite detention without trial or charge, of suspects. Mr Lee said Indonesian authorities were frustrated by not having tough security laws. In reply, Jakarta says it has in place anti-terror legislation and its police and intelligence agencies have successfully prevented several terror plots.

Presenter/Interviewer: Sen Lam

Speakers: Marty Natalegawa Indonesian foreign affairs spokesman

Natalegawa: Each country has its own way in addressing threats such as terror, it's really a comprehensive effort to overcome terror, which cannot simply be done through oppressive means, but also through, above all, through democratic means. We, because of our recent past there is a natural disgust among the voting politic in Indonesia with anything to do with the over enhancement of the role of the security forces, of the authorities so to speak. So we will proceed as we have in terms of having anti-terrorism laws to overcome the threat of terrorism, but we will be extremely cautious in not wanting to take away individual civil liberties, even against the threat of terror. The terrorism law that we have now is quite advanced in contrast to what we had before, but even this particular terrorism law only came about after tighter public scrutiny to make sure that the government, the authorities are kept honest in trying to pursue the perpetrators of those who intend to commit acts of terror.

Lam: So what do you make of Singapore's elder statesman Lee Kuan Yew's statement that Jakarta seems to wait for a bomb to go off, investigate, catch the perpetrators until the next time it happens again. In other words failing to prevent terror plots?

Natalegawa: Well, prevention is actually where the main challenge is now, correct that we can distinguish between acting after the event and prevention. But by its very nature prevention or actions we have taken that have succeeded in preventing terrorism is often not appreciated, because by definition it hasn't taken place. It is perhaps those who may not be privy to the kind of effective steps Indonesian government have taken that actually prevented acts of terror may come to that incomplete conclusion, as if we only act when something happens. We have effectively prevented acts of terrorism even before it happened because of the work of our intelligence institutions and also our police. So it's a bit unkind and not quite descriptive to say that we have not managed to foil actual terrorist attacks.

Lam: Do you think it's unhelpful for the Singapore's mentor minister to be making a statement at this time regarding the ISA and regarding Indonesia's method and ways of trying to fight terrorism?

Natalegawa: I mean we value and we respect the views of our neighbours, and including of course the senior minister Lee Kuan Yew. The last thing we would do is that fighting what is obviously a common vice, a common enemy, that we should be divided in terms of approach. So we would just like to simply highlight where we have common approaches rather than where we may have distinct approaches.

Lam: So is it accurate to say then that Indonesia and Indonesian society at present has no place for an instrument such as the Internal Security Act?

Natalegawa: At this time yes, we are as I said before, given where we are coming from in terms of this hard-won and much cherished democracy that we are enjoying, we would be extremely careful to make sure that even under the guise of fighting terrorism that we do not take away people's civil liberties. Not only have we acted after bomb or terrorism acts taking place, but we have actually managed to foil terrorist attempts. Those types may not be known publicly because by definition if you prevent certain acts from happening no one will perhaps ever know that such an attack was to have happened, in any case.