APSN Banner

Opposition grows against the controversial security bill

Source
Jakarta Post - February 7, 2012

Ridwan Max Sijabat, Jakarta – The House of Representatives is looking to delay the deliberation of the controversial national security bill following public rejection due to claims that it deviates from the Constitution.

After rejection from human rights groups, on Monday the House received the same views from several security analysts who said the bill lacked clarity.

Arry Bainus of Bandung's Padjadjaran University in West Java, Hermawan Sulistyo of the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) and Ludiro Madu of Yogyakarta's State Development University (UPN) were of the same opinion that the bill had no clear vision and contradicted the Constitution and many laws.

They suggested the House should return the bill to the Defense Ministry, the institution that had drafted the bill. "You need to return the bill for a review. We will support you," Hermawan told lawmakers during a hearing with the House's Commission I on defense, foreign affairs and information on Monday.

Agus Gumiwang, a Golkar Party lawmaker who presided over the meeting, replied that the commission would likely ask the House leaders to return the bill since it had met with increasing rejection from lawmakers in the commission.

"The bill is too general. Also, it weakens the authority of the Indonesian Military [TNI], the police and the National Intelligence Agency [BIN]," Agus said.

During Monday's hearing, security analysts voiced their criticisms of the bill. "If the bill is intended to be an umbrella for the 2004 Indonesian Military (TNI) Law and the 2002 National Police Law, such thought is no longer valid because the TNI and the police now have their own territorial jurisdiction," Arry said.

Arry also criticized articles in the bill that were mostly prone to multiple interpretations. "Almost all chapters in the bill allow multiple interpretations," he added.

The bill gives regional administrations, especially governors, regents and mayors, the power to get involved in dealing with security affairs. This stipulation is against the 2004 Regional Autonomy Law, which says only the central government has full authority in matters of security, foreign affairs, finance and law.

In addition, Hermawan said he was suspicious that some articles would be a pretext for the military to revive provincial and regional security and defense commands (Kopkamtibda and Laksusda), which were used by the military in the Soeharto era to oppress the people.

Meanwhile, Sidharto Danusubroto, an Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) lawmaker, said his faction had urged the House to return the bill to the government for a total overhaul. He said the Defense Ministry should involve others in preparing its content because the bill deals with cross-sector issues.

According to him, the bill was not in line with Chapter 30 of the Constitution which required all citizens to take part in state defense, the details of which would be set out in further regulations.

Sidharto questioned the definition of national security threats, which the bill put as "all activities and acts, either personal or collective, that threaten state defense". "Could someone who provokes hatred against the state be seen as a national security threat?" he asked.

Sidharto also opposed many chapters in the bill that put governors, regents and mayors in the provincial and regional security and defense board as it was against the 2004 Regional Autonomy Law.

He said the bill adopted decrees of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) No. 6 and 7 on the separation of TNI and the police, and other relevant laws regulating the two institutions. It would however leave a grey area, mainly because there was an unclear separation of the job descriptions of the two forces in the fields of defense and security.

The commission was also of the same opinion that the bill, after its review, would be deliberated by a joint committee from relevant commissions, including Commission II on domestic governance, regional autonomy, state apparatuses and agrarian affairs, and Commission III on legal affairs and laws, human rights and security.

Country