No subject

November 05, 2002

THE lawyer for two foreigners detained in Indonesia's Aceh province said today 
he will ask a court to release the women from police detention.

Briton Lesley McCulloch and her American travelling companion Joy Ernestine-
Sadler have been held since September 11 when security forces stopped them in 
the south of the province where rebels are fighting for independence.

Rufriadi, head of the local legal aid office, said he will ask a court tomorrow 
to release the women with guarantees they will not flee Aceh or destroy 
evidence.

The women have been held in a detention room at Aceh police headquarters.

"During this time in detention they have been uncomfortable. Besides that, the 
health of Joy has declined in the last few days," Rufriadi told AFP. 

Prosecutors could not be reached for comment today.

They have said the women will likely be tried after the Muslim holy month of 
Ramadan, which begins tomorrow.

Rufriadi said he also wants to clarify the status of the prosecutors' case 
against the women because he does not know if they have finished work on the 
file.

Authorities allege McCulloch conducted research and Ernestine-Sadler engaged in 
humanitarian activities not in keeping with their tourist visas.

McCulloch was until recently a university lecturer in Tasmania, and is a 
frequent contributor on the Aceh dispute to Asian newspapers.

In a letter earlier smuggled out of her detention room she wrote that "the 
Indonesian military and police have a deep-seated hatred of my work".

An estimated 10,000 people have died since the Aceh conflict began in the 
energy-rich province on Sumatra island in 1976. Rights activists put the toll 
for this year alone at more than 1200. 
-- Agence France-Presse
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Business Times
November 6, 2002
Shipping News
Captain of Indon ferry arrested 

(JAKARTA) Police arrested the skipper of the ferry that sank in central 
Indonesia with scores of people aboard heading home for the Muslim fasting 
month of Ramadan.

The skipper told authorities the 30-ton wooden boat was carrying 125 passengers 
and crew. But police believe the actual number was closer to 200, and that 
overloading was a factor in the accident.

The Masohi Star went down just minutes after sailing from Ambon, a provincial 
capital 2,600 kilometres east of Jakarta, on its way to Seram island, about 150 
kilometres. Rescue officials said the search for additional survivors and 
bodies continues. 

Most of the passengers on the inter-island ferry were believed to be heading 
home to Seram for this week's start of Ramadan.

Shipping accidents are common in Indonesia, where much travelling is done by 
boat. 

In June 2000, nearly 500 people drowned when a ferry sank off the coast of 
Sulawesi. A year ago, 374 people, mostly asylum-seekers from Afghanistan and 
Iraq, died when a refugee boat sank en route from Indonesia to Australia. 
-- AP 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
South China Morning Post (via Joyo Indonesia News)
November 5, 2002
Focus
Indonesians are wary of reviving military rule 
Karim Raslan

The bombings in Bali have knocked Indonesia sideways, shocking the population 
and weakening business confidence just as the United States appears set to 
launch a war in the Middle East.

But even after last month's atrocity, Indonesians are wary of a return to the 
arbitrariness and brutality of past decades. The legacy of more than 30 years 
of abuse and repression under former president Suharto has left a high level of 
distrust and cynicism towards politicians, the security apparatus and their 
intentions.

As the extremist Muslim Abu Bakar Bashir is detained for questioning, many 
Muslims in particular are disturbed by the apparent lack of evidence against 
the cleric. Furthermore, the speed with which emergency powers were granted to 
the government by the decree on October 17 - just five days after the Kuta 
blast - has also dismayed many people. Under the new powers, Indonesia's 
intelligence agency would be permitted to detain terrorist suspects for nearly 
a year without trial and the death penalty could be imposed in the most severe 
cases.

Gunawan Mohamad, the founder of the influential weekly news magazine Tempo, 
said: ''Just as many Malaysians are proud of their Internal Security Act, I am 
proud that we don't have an equivalent here. I don't want to turn the clocks 
back - in the 1990s many of my friends were detained by Kopassus [special 
forces]; one never returned.

''We need the process of law to be observed. The Americans are so obsessed with 
results. Of course, we need and want those guilty of the bombings to be caught, 
put on trial and then punished. But why don't they give us the time to catch 
the terrorists? However, this does not mean that we are supporters of Bashir's 
divisive and bigoted rhetoric. We are not.''

Hamid Basyaib, a moderate Muslim scholar, reinforces the point: ''Liberal Islam 
is about justice for everyone. We have to be principled and uphold the law. If 
we make exceptions and allow injustice to take place our cause is done for. 
While I disagree with Bashir's message I cannot overlook his detention and 
absence of evidence.''

Chusnul Mariyah, a women's activist and academic, emphasises the importance of 
the historical context. ''Indonesia is in a period of transition. Many of us 
still have relatively fresh memories of the excesses of Suharto rule, when the 
law enforcement agencies did whatever they wanted. As a result these agencies 
have little credibility. Frankly, we don't trust them,'' she said.

''Besides, in Indonesia reformasi (reform) is still important. The 
democratisation is ongoing; it is not about to be stopped. We do not want a 
return to the Suharto-era tactics. As such it is not just a question of 
agreeing or disagreeing with Bashir. The real issue is, where is the proof? We 
also want the rule of law to be observed.''

However, Jason Tedjasukmana, an Indonesia-based journalist with Time magazine, 
said: ''It is important to remember that no-one has actually been detained 
under the emergency powers - there has not been a security sweep. People are 
apprehensive, but their fears may or may not be grounded.''

Of course, the intense pressure from foreign governments has not necessarily 
helped the situation. There is a perception, especially in Jakarta, that 
President Megawati Sukarnoputri has caved in to US and Australian demands.

Tedjasukmana said: ''The irony of the American position has not gone unnoticed. 
In the past the Americans supported the abolition of the anti-subversion laws 
that Suharto used against the opposition. Frankly, there is a widespread 
impression that a great deal is being done to suit American interests - without 
reference to past experiences.''

This sense of frustration has been made worse by the heavy-handedness of 
Australian security forces in raiding the homes of Indonesians living in major 
Australian cities. As these images are broadcast across Indonesia, many 
previously apolitical Muslims are becoming more convinced that Bashir's 
rhetoric - that the moves against him are in fact a blow against Islam - is not 
without substance.

This is extremely disturbing, and more so when one considers Indonesia has long 
been thought of as a haven for moderates. Ironically the US government also has 
chosen to air a series of commercials about US Muslims on Indonesian TV. It is 
hard not to feel perplexed and disappointed by the advertisements - little of 
which is relevant to Southeast Asian Muslims. Sadly, and this despite the scale 
of the budget, the US government appears to have overlooked the fact that the 
Arab world is markedly different from the Malay world.

The outside world must recognise the dilemma facing Jakarta.

Indonesians cannot simply turn back the clock to the Suharto era. They cannot, 
and will not, entrust their security blindly to a discredited military and 
police force. They want transparency and controls to prevent injustice and 
abuse. That does not mean they do not want to find the culprits of the Bali 
atrocity - they do and they acknowledge that their country will suffer, 
economically and politically, as long as these criminals remain at large. 
However, they need time. Is that too much to ask? 
-- Karim Raslan is a Kuala Lumpur-based lawyer and writer. 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
U.S. Aide Urges Indonesia on Terror
By Robert Burns, AP Military Writer
November 5, 2002, 4:30 PM EST

WASHINGTON -- Indonesia must do something to stop terrorism there or 
face "really terrible consequences," Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz 
said Tuesday in an Indonesian television interview. 

Wolfowitz's remarks, broadcast live in Indonesia, underscored the Bush 
administration's concern about anti-Western violence in the world's most 
populous Muslim nation and its push to enlist the Indonesian military in the 
global war on terrorism. 

Wolfowitz has pushed to restore U.S. assistance to the Indonesian military, 
suspended in 1999 by the Clinton administration to protest the involvement of 
the armed forces in human rights atrocities in East Timor. 

As a former U.S. ambassador to Indonesia, Wolfowitz has become the Pentagon's 
most prominent spokesman on terrorism there. His remarks in the television 
interview were reported by the Pentagon's internal news service. 

"If Indonesians don't do something to stop terrorism in Indonesia, it's going 
to have really terrible consequences for democracy in that wonderful, important 
country that I love so much," Wolfowitz was quoted as saying. 

One of the aims of terrorist organizations is to drive a wedge between 
democratic Muslim nations, such as Indonesia, and nations of the West, he said. 

"It is, I think, very noteworthy that you can read now on al-Qaida Web sites 
elaborate justifications and glorifications of the killings in Bali," he said, 
referring to the Oct. 12 bombings at an Indonesian nightclub that killed nearly 
200 people, mostly Australian tourists. 

The Indonesian interviewer noted that some in his country believe the United 
States was behind the Bali bombings. 

"That is just totally unbelievable fantasy," Wolfowitz said. "I can't believe 
that anybody rational actually believes that. The evidence is so clear that al-
Qaida and Osama bin Laden and the terrorist organizations that are connected to 
them have been behind a whole series of horrible attacks on innocent people and 
they claim credit for it." 
-- Copyright © 2002, The Associated Press 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tempo Magazine (via Joyo Indonesia News)
November 05 - 11, 2002 
Column 
The Antiterrorism Regulations-Indonesia's Miracle Drug? 
Todung Mulya Lubis [President of the Regional Council of Human Rights in Asia]. 

The Bali tragedy, which killed over 190 people and wounded countless others, 
has finally jolted the government into admitting the existence of terrorism in 
Indonesia. Various cities throughout Indonesia had previously been struck by a 
series of terrorist attacks prior to the Bali bombing, but these attacks were 
not considered dangerous and were not taken seriously. Although a number of 
suspects were caught, tried and even imprisoned in connection to these 
bombings, the brains behind the planning and organization remains a mystery. 
Consequently, the Indonesian public has become apathetic towards the country's 
seemingly paralyzed police force. Anxiety has become a permanent part of our 
lives. 

Indonesia's law enforcement authorities are receiving international assistance, 
but this does not guarantee that the Bali attack will be solved. The current 
national and international political climate, characterized by suspicion, 
tension and conflicting interests, will make the Bali tragedy even more 
difficult to solve. Consequently, fears are rife that the Bali bombing will 
become yet another murky chapter in Indonesia's history. Conspiracy theorists 
have already directed premature accusations against the CIA and the Al Qaeda 
network. 

Some observers blame weak legislation for the failure of Indonesia's law 
enforcement authorities to solve the series of bomb attacks. The government 
itself complained that the Criminal Code (KUHP) does not provide law 
enforcement authorities with the legal grounds necessary to investigate and 
catch terrorists. It was hoped that new legislative provisions would help 
loosen the paralysis that Indonesia's police and intelligence have experienced 
in fighting terrorism over the past four years. 

The government has issued two regulations intended to help crack down on 
terrorism. Government Regulation No. 1/2002 on Eliminating Criminal Acts of 
Terror serves as a general guideline for fighting terrorists. Government 
Regulation No. 2/2002 allows for the principle of retroactivity to be applied 
to the Bali bombing case. It is sad that the Indonesian Government needed a 
tragedy of the magnitude of the Bali bombing to formulate the legal grounds 
required to investigate, track down and take action against terrorists. 

However, the new regulations beg the question of whether the KUHP and the 
Criminal Code Procedures (KUHAP) are capable of dealing with terrorism. Any 
scholar of Indonesian law understands that the KUHP and KUHAP do provide the 
legal grounds required to conduct investigations into the bombing. The failure 
of law enforcement authorities to solve the series of bomb attacks that struck 
the nation could be attributed to procrastination by government officials in 
taking action against terrorism. The range of premature accusations could also 
be attributed to the government's lack of a strong political will to eliminate 
terrorism and conflicting interests within its ranks. It is ironic that 
government officials continue to openly debate the presence of terrorism in 
this country after hundreds of people have been killed and numerous others 
wounded by terrorist bombings. Is this not the true cause of the police and 
intelligence forces' reluctance to take action? 

Assuming that the KUHP and KUHAP do not provide strong legal grounds for 
fighting terrorism, do the new antiterrorism regulations fill this gap? The 
antiterrorism regulations empower security forces to undertake immediate steps 
to eliminate terrorism, including arresting and detaining terrorist suspects 
for six months based on intelligence reports as prima facie evidence. Such 
reports may originate from the offices of police intelligence, the Attorney 
General's Office (AGO), immigration and customs department, Indonesian 
Military, State Intelligence Agency (BIN), Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry 
of Foreign Affairs, or other intelligence sources from various government 
agencies. We can imagine just how easy it will be to arrest someone under these 
provisions, and how easily security forces could abuse the powers given to them 
under these regulations. 

Indeed, intelligence reports used as prima facie evidence must first be 
approved by a district court chairperson within seven days. However, it is 
difficult to imagine that Indonesia's courts will maintain their judicial 
independence on such matters. It is also questionable whether our judges have 
been trained to decipher intelligence reports and decide whether such reports 
constitute prima facie evidence. Therefore, although a district court must 
first approve any intelligence-based evidence, we are only slightly better off 
than during the New Order regime when Indonesia's public suffered at the hands 
of the anti-subversion laws. 

The majority of Indonesia's public support the fight against terrorism as well 
as the non-negotiable principle of prioritizing the national interest. However, 
it is our duty to remind the government that fighting terrorism should not come 
at the cost of violating our basic human rights, or the legal rights of 
suspects being investigated. The tendency of authorities to corruption makes 
this a very real danger. This can happen anywhere. 

In the United States, criticism has been directed at President Bush's policies 
for compromising the basic rights of suspects based on the raison d'etre that 
the United States is fundamentally based on the principle of respect for basic 
human rights. Although the American public supports the fight against 
terrorism, many people object to the victimization of innocent people in the 
name of eliminating terrorism. One incident, reported in the International 
Herald Tribune on June 13, 2002, concerned Syrian-born taxi driver, Nabil 
Amarabh in Boston, America. Security forces detained Nabil for eight months on 
charges of terrorism before he was allowed to meet with a defense counsel and a 
judge. Even if Nabil were guilty, his right to obtain immediate legal 
assistance should not have been hampered. 

A similar fate could happen to anyone in Indonesia. The antiterrorism 
regulations empower authorities to arrest individuals and freeze the assets of 
those individuals and corporations not only suspected of involvement in 
terrorist acts, but also suspected of providing funding assistance to 
terrorists, concealing information or providing any other form of assistance to 
terrorists. 

These provisions can be interpreted very broadly and reopen the door for 
security forces to use repression and promote a culture of fear. Who can 
guarantee that the regulations will not be abused to convict innocent persons 
who may have somehow "assisted" terrorists? And who can guarantee that the 
provisions will not be abused to detain anyone who poses a threat to the 
political authorities? Security forces now have six months to manufacture means 
to convict their enemies. Perhaps authorities may decide to release an arrested 
suspect after brainwashing them. 

Pessimists believe that the antiterrorism regulations spell the beginning of an 
authoritarian government, following the path set by President Bush. An 
international agreement to declare war on terrorism may unwittingly open the 
door to increased military power, which was kept in check by civil supremacy 
during the reformasi period. Once again, the United States has pledged military 
assistance to Indonesia, despite objections from several members of Congress 
and the US Senate. 

Criticizing the antiterrorism regulations is interpreted as opposing the fight 
against terrorism. It must be reiterated that the majority of the Indonesian 
public agree with every endeavor to eliminate terrorism. But giving birth to a 
new legal paradigm containing repressive elements will merely stifle the seeds 
of democracy that have begun to grow in Indonesia. 

If the government feels that the KUHP and KUHAP do not provide the strong legal 
grounds required to combat terrorism, they can add new articles to them to fill 
in the gaps. The government could also ratify the various United Nations 
conventions on eliminating terrorism, such as the International Convention for 
the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings (1977) and the International Convention 
for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (1999). Empowering the 
existing national legal framework and ratifying international conventions will 
allow the government to fight terrorism but also prevent the rebirth of an 
authoritarian government. 

Indonesia's success in eliminating terrorism depends on the political will and 
determination of government officials and authorities to take concrete steps in 
fighting terrorism. We should not assume that Government Regulation No. 1/2002 
will do this for them. Rather, the new regulations merely open the door to a 
dangerous rebirth of authoritarian government and, for this reason, they must 
be rejected. 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Indonesia's Bashir on top in court of public opinion 
05 November, 2002 15:33 GMT+08:00  
By Dean Yates 
Jakarta (Reuters) 

Indonesian Muslim cleric Abu Bakar Bashir is a long way from his first day in 
the dock, but the alleged spiritual leader of the Jemaah Islamiah terror 
network already has the upper hand in the court of public opinion. 

Virtually unknown a year ago, Bashir has become something of a cause celebre in 
the world's most populous Muslim nation since being arrested, finding 
credibility despite the militant views he holds and which most Indonesians 
reject. 

Bashir is being held over a series of church bombings and a plot to kill 
President Megawati Sukarnoputri, not the bomb attacks in Bali that killed 
nearly 200 people, although suspicion for the October 12 tragedy has fallen on 
Jemaah Islamiah. 

He has resisted questioning and Bashir's 35-member legal team boasts top human 
rights lawyers and looks like it will get bigger. The head of Indonesia's 
second largest moderate Muslim group visited Bashir in hospital after he was 
detained. The nation's vice president said he might do the same. 

All this poses a challenge to Megawati, a taciturn and passive leader, to 
thoroughly prosecute a case many diplomats see as a litmus test of her resolve 
to crack down on Islamic radicalism in the wake of the Bali blasts. 

Take prominent human rights campaigner Munarman, a feisty 34-year-old lawyer 
who runs the Legal Aid Institute, the premier defender of Indonesia's 
downtrodden masses. He has no love for radical Islam but has joined the legal 
team defending Bashir. 

"My hunch is that political motivations are certainly stronger here as opposed 
to upholding the law or combatting terrorism," Munarman said in an interview 
when asked why he thought the 64-year-old Bashir had been arrested. 

Bin Laden Admirer 
To many Indonesians such as Munarman, what concerns them is not Bashir's 
radical views -- he has called Osama bin Laden a true Islamic warrior -- but a 
host of other issues. 

Munarman said Bashir's case was a benchmark to ensure new powers to prosecute 
people over terrorism, introduced in the wake of the Bali blasts, did not open 
the way to the arbitrary arrests and abuses that marred the long rule of former 
autocrat Suharto. 


He and many others also see foreign pressure behind Bashir's arrest, something 
that inflames nationalist passions in a country that has had its fair share of 
international criticism in recent years, on issues such as East Timor to 
fighting terrorism. 

Then there is Bashir's advanced age and the image of the avuncular preacher he 
portrays. 

Indonesians respect their elders and were turned off by TV pictures of police 
breaking down the door to Bashir's hospital room in central Java, where he was 
being treated under detention for various ailments, to bring him to a police 
hospital in Jakarta last week. 

Police have said they had enough evidence to detain Bashir -- which took place 
days after the Bali blasts -- including testimony from a self-confessed al 
Qaeda member nabbed in Indonesia last June and handed over to the United 
States. 

Their questioning in Jakarta has been held up by Bashir's ill health and the 
cleric's reluctance to cooperate. 

Bashir denies any wrongdoing or links with Jemaah Islamiah. 

William Liddle, an Indonesia expert at Ohio State University, said he believed 
the country's elite was coming round to the fact it had a terror problem, but 
that there was anger at U.S. policies perceived as being unilateral and anti-
Muslim. 

"Most Indonesian players and observers are convinced that Bashir would not have 
been arrested without U.S. pressure. So he's a focal point for that anger," 
Liddle said. 

"Muslim moderates (also) have a long history of suspecting the government of 
using fundamentalists to discredit Islam." 

Where Are The Mass Protests? 
Despite support for Bashir, streets protests have been small. 

Sidney Jones, Indonesia director for the Brussels-based International Crisis 
Group, said this showed Bashir's views reflected a minority position, but also 
that some people were worried about being associated with opinions or actions 
that could lead to a crackdown under the new anti-terrorism law. 

"I think there is really deep concern among people who aren't members of 
hardline groups that we're getting into a situation where the terrorist label 
becomes what the PKI label was before," Jones said, referring to the banned 
Indonesia Communist Party (PKI). Being labelled PKI under Suharto was a 
political and social death sentence. 

Indeed, unless police produce some damning evidence, Bashir is likely to keep 
the upper hand in the public relations battle. 

Munarman said more lawyers wanted to join Bashir's legal team, including 
Muslims from moderate Islamic groups. 

"At the start of the year he was just ordinary. But when an old, sick person is 
forcibly shifted to Jakarta, it is the character of Indonesians to feel 
sympathy for them," he said.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~