Hera Diani, Jakarta – The government and the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) have agreed to only bring human rights violations cases in Aceh to court that occur after the signing of Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on Monday.
Indonesian chief negotiator Hamid Awaluddin, who is Minister of Justice and Human Rights, said on Friday that using retroactive principles when setting up a human rights tribunal in the province would open old wounds and disrupt the peace-building process.
"If we keep looking back to the past, we will continue to blame each other and there would be no end to it; there would be no peace in Aceh. So, we have decided to look forward," he said.
The government, he said, was making the decision in line with 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which will be ratified this year.
Hamid's statement came after the coordinator of the Commission on Missing People and the Victims of Violence (Kontras) Usman Hamid said settling all past atrocities carried out in Aceh was necessary to build a lasting peace in the province.
The MOU agreement signed in Helsinki orders the settlement of human rights violations through a human rights tribunal.
"The government officials have been interpreting this point wrongly. As the only country in the world with national human rights court, there is the possibility of trying past violations, or using retroactive principles," Usman said on Friday as quoted by Antara.
Retroactivity, he reminded, was adopted in human rights tribunals in Nuremberg, Tokyo, Yugoslavia and Rwanda, as well as crimes against humanity in East Timor.
Hamid, however, said the government should not worry about trying those responsible for past human rights violations in Aceh, as those trials would likely implicate both Aceh rebels and soldiers.
Most cases brought to the country's ad hoc human rights court since its inception in 2002 have involved soldiers.
Usman said that the MOU did not elaborate the point about the human rights tribunal, therefore the government should refer to the existing law on human rights, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and the law on the human rights tribunal.
Domestic and international rights activists have long pointed to human rights violations in Aceh, particularly when the province fell under a special military operation between 1989 and 1998. No alleged rights abuses occurring in Aceh have ever been settled.
Retroactivity in trying cases, meanwhile, can only be adopted upon approval from the House of Representatives.
Hamid said while the MOU might not be perfect, it had already succeeded in creating peace in Aceh, where around 15,000 people have died since the armed rebellion began in 1976.
"We have managed to maintain our basic positions, that is to sustain the unitary state of Indonesia, the Constitution and Aceh's status as part of the country," Hamid said. The Constitution, he said, was clearly stated in the second paragraph of the MOU.
Critics have said the contents of the MOU were flawed and open to interpretation. They pointed to the absence of GAM's acknowledgement of the 1945 Constitution, the use of the term "Aceh government", and the authority of an Aceh council from whom the House of Representatives must seek agreement on Aceh issues. Those privileges, they said, might end up leading to Aceh separating from the country.
Countering, Hamid said the term for the Aceh government and the high authority of Aceh Council were nothing new, as had been earlier laid out in the Law No. 32/2004 on regional autonomy.
"It doesn't mean that House of Representatives must bow to the Aceh Council. In regard to international agreements, for instance, legislators do not need to seek agreement from Aceh councillors." The same went for the province's hymn and flag, which were cultural symbols and Aceh, like other provinces, could not borrow money offshore unless it had approval from the Ministry of Finance, Hamid said.