Dede Leni Mardianti, Jakarta – National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) Commissioner Amiruddin Al Rahab believes that Indonesia has not truly progressed from the starting point of the Reform era following the fall of the New Order regime in 1998. Amiruddin argued that the current situation is not much different from Indonesia's past, where human rights violations continue to occur.
"Reform is a transitional event. In reality, this transition has steered us away from the New Order but has never moved us anywhere else," Amiruddin said during a discussion on the fate of human rights investigations after 28 years of reform at the Komnas HAM office in Jakarta on Friday, May 22, 2026.
According to him, this stagnation continues to shackle Indonesia due to the lack of legal accountability for various past gross human rights violations. Consequently, trauma still haunts the survivors, while the perpetrators of these abuses have never truly faced prosecution.
As a result, the aspirations of the Reform movement to uphold human rights and free Indonesia of corrupt practices remain unfulfilled. "The core issue is the lack of accountability for various human rights violations committed during the New Order regime," he said.
Amiruddin then highlighted the various efforts of Komnas HAM to secure justice for victims of human rights violations, none of which have ever concluded. This situation has left the public in a state of psychological deadlock. He stated that the state continues to cast doubt on the truth behind past atrocities, questioning the evidence while remaining unable to resolve the issue through adequate legal mechanisms.
He cited the handling of the May 1998 mass rape cases, which have still not been brought before a human rights court despite Komnas HAM's long-standing investigation.
According to him, the debate over the existence of gross human rights violations should be tested in a court of law rather than dissolving into political polemics or public denial. "If you want evidence, go to court. Evidence can only be tested in court," he said.
Furthermore, Amiruddin noted that a lack of commitment from the Attorney General's Office and other state institutions to resolve human rights abuses has effectively stalled Komnas HAM's initiatives.
He explained that the case dossiers submitted by Komnas HAM are often rejected. Prosecutors frequently apply standard criminal law frameworks when evaluating gross human rights violations, whereas Komnas HAM operates under the specific mandate of the Human Rights Court Law.
Amiruddin cited examples of prosecutors rejecting dossiers because they deemed the evidence presented by Komnas HAM to be nothing more than a compilation of mass media reports. Prosecutors also demanded national identity cards (KTP) from the victims of these decades-old violations. This friction reflects a fundamental lack of convergence between the two legal approaches.
"So, the Attorney General repeatedly claims that the evidence from Komnas HAM is nothing more than public opinion," he said.
For Amiruddin, the goals of the Reformasi will only be realized if the state is willing to confront past gross human rights violations and work toward a genuine resolution.
A crucial first step would involve amending Law No. 26/2000 on the Human Rights Court. In the proposed revision, Amiruddin suggested that human rights cases should have their own distinct legal procedures rather than being equated with ordinary criminal offenses.
Amiruddin urged the government to take full responsibility for every human rights violation that occurred. He requested that the state stop shifting the burden solely onto Komnas HAM. "The legal duties have been carried out by Komnas HAM, fully executed. Other agencies, however, have never followed up," he said.
Source: https://en.tempo.co/read/2104979/komnas-ham-reform-has-stalled-since-199