The president has recently appointed eighteen ad hoc Human Rights judges. Can Indonesia's Court of Human Rights function objectively and independently from the International Court of Justice? Indonesia is endeavoring to improve its human rights record. Last week, President Megawati Sukarnoputri appointed 18 adhoc Human Rights judges to preside over cases involving crimes against humanity. Twelve of the judges were appointed to the court of first instance. The other six were appointed to the court of appeal. The panel of ad hoc judges comprises practicing judges and professors from various national universities.
This panel will shortly be officially inaugurated and assigned to positions at the Central Jakarta District Court. Each judge will receive a basic monthly salary of Rp1 million (US$100 at Rp10,000 to the US dollar) and Rp4.5 million (US$450) for each case they preside over. Hotel and transportation costs whilst in Jakarta for judges originating from the provinces will be borne by the government.
In February, the panel of ad hoc Human Rights judges will preside over its first case-the post-referendum crimes against humanity committed in East Timor in 1999. Following this, the panel will hear the human rights abuses committed in Tanjungpriok, North Jakarta in 1984. Unfortunately, no investigations have previously been conducted into either the Tanjungpriok case or the East Timor case. Both may be classified as crimes of genocide.
The appointment of the panel of 18 ad hoc Human Rights judges is not free from controversy. Although many people are hopeful that the appointment of the judges will improve Indonesia's international image by illustrating its commitment to uphold human rights, many people are critical of the development.
Legal practitioner and human rights advocate T. Mulya Lubis says that the selection of ad hoc judges was premature. According to Mulya, "there are many holes". For example, one of the appointed ad hoc judges, Hendra Nurtjahyo, is only 33 years old. The Law on the Indonesian Court of Human Rights of 2000 stipulates that the minimum age of prospective ad hoc judges is 45. Hendra, a lecturer in the Faculty of Law at the University of Indonesia (UI) has since resigned from his posting.
Bambang Widjojanto, former chairman of Indonesian Legal Aid, expressed similar criticism. According to him, the rushed appointment of the panel of ad hoc judges made it difficult for the selection committee to inspect their resumes. Bambang also claims that "[the judges] training as prospective ad hoc judges was very short".
Todung Mulya Lubis has pointed out another issue of contention. According to Mulya, ad hoc judge Rudi M. Rizki from the University of Padjadjaran in Bandung, had previously worked under the former defense minister and military commander-in-chief, Gen, Wiranto. Wiranto has been linked to the post-referendum crimes against humanity committed in East Timor in 1999. In fact, many of the human rights cases tried by the panel of ad hoc judges will involve Indonesian Military officers. "Rudi Rizki could be biased when presiding over the East Timor human rights abuse case," suggests Mulya.
Several other ad hoc judges may also find it difficult to remain objective. One such judge, Binsar Gultom, is currently posted at the Bogor District Court. Formerly, Binsar was posted at the Dili District Court and Manatuto District Court in East Timor.
Binsar Gultom and other judges posted in East Timor undoubtedly have different political approaches than the Indonesian government. In view of this, Bonar Tigor Naispospos from the Solidarity for East Timorese People (Solidamor) has requested that Binsar be dropped from presiding over the East Timor case.
Another judge to have been criticized is appeal court ad hoc judge, I Gede Gusti Sukarata. According to Solidamor, Sukarata has a smeared record concerning human rights enforcement. Sukarata formerly ruled in favor of former Indonesian Democratic Party Chairman Soerjadi, facing a lawsuit from victims of the PDI riots in July 27, 1996. "Clearly, he is not beyond powerful intervention," says Bonar.
However, chairman of the selection team for ad hoc Human Rights judges from the Supreme Court, Benjamin Mangkoedilaga, rejects the above criticisms as premature. According to Mangkoedilaga, such criticism deems the panel of ad hoc judges incompetent, even before they commence their duties.
For Benjamin, the most important factor in bringing crimes against human rights to trial is the district attorney's charges. If the district attorney's indictment is complete and penetrating, the judge will surely find it difficult to conspire with the defendant. The Court of Human Rights will be open to the public, so judicial decisions are open to public scrutiny.
The above issues are technical. What about the ability and courage of ad hoc judges to take action on crimes against humanity? The existing legislation on human rights in Indonesia is arguably sufficient. Therefore, Indonesia's commitment to upholding human rights will depend on the quality of law enforcers – both judges and state prosecutors – as well as the commitment of the government in taking action against violations of human rights.
In the meantime, several of the ad hoc judges criticized have kept a low profile. "Just wait. We will give you the best possible results," said Binsar. Rizki was more outspoken in rejecting accusations that he actively helped Wiranto. "My position at that time was only as a passive assistant to Professor Muladi," said Rizki. An active contributor to the Habibie Center, Rizki has promised to prove that he can adjudicate independently.
[Wens Manggut, Hani Pudjiarti, Dwi Arjanto]