Tony Hotland, Jakarta – Crystal clear jurisdiction of military tribunals is essential in curbing impunity and achieving transparency toward a more professional military, the Indonesian Human Rights Monitor (Imparsial) group noted Friday.

Just as the House of Representatives is of the view soldiers who have committed common crimes should be tried in civilian court, Imparsial said military tribunals should not deal with graft and human rights violations committed by soldiers.

The House and the government are amending the 1997 law on military tribunals in a series of steps toward military reform, following the collapse of Soeharto's 32-year authoritarian regime that relied on the military to sustain power.

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has agreed soldiers who commit common crimes should be tried in civilian court, pending the lengthy amendment of the Criminal Code. But activists say the military community is still resistant to the changes.

"The Military Tribunal Law and the Military Criminal Code must spell out the types of crimes the tribunals are allowed to handle, and it should not include graft and human rights cases," said Imparsial's Bhatara Ibnu Reza.

The House will subsequently amend the Military Criminal Code with a completed amendment of the Military Tribunal Law.

Graft should be left to the Anti-Corruption Court or civilian courts, and human rights cases to human rights tribunals. A clear jurisdiction of military tribunals, said Bhatara, should also include re-positioning the tribunal under the Defense Ministry.

"Being under the military headquarters means we are unable to minimize the influence of command since tribunal officers rely on the headquarters when it comes to pensions, promotions and salaries. They will be easily influenced when working a case," he said.

A review of the discretional rights of supervisors, who have the power to determine punishments in offenses, should also be made effective to make sure authority is exercised in a professional manner, said Bhatara.

"These supervisors decide if an offense is an administrative one and goes to tribunal or not. Unchecked authority is the cause of the impunity we see now," he said.

Imparsial also noted the rights a defendant is entitled to in a military tribunal are fewer than in a civilian court.

Unlike the Criminal Code, the current Military Tribunal Law does not rule on a defendant's rights to contact a lawyer, to access healthcare or a doctor, receive family visits, be tried in an open court or demand compensation or rehabilitation. A military tribunal also is closed to the public.

"Besides jurisdiction and structure, the law needs to look at these very few rights and make improvements," said Imparsial's Donny Ardyanto.