Minggu, 15 Desember 2013

Part II: Nelson Mandela and the Truth & Reconciliation Commission for Indonesia, especially Papua!


Part II: Nelson Mandela and the Truth Commission & Reconciliation to Indonesia, particularly Papua

Nelson Mandela was still fresh when he was placed back into the womb of the earth after 10 days since his death, citizens of the world, the country of South Africa, Pretoria Province, village of Qunu have celebrated his life. His life prevails in this world. Consistency and capacity in the struggle, perseverance through a period of punishment, austerity to understand where change has to start, vastness to unfold the hidden power in humans, had led Nelson Mandela as a leader who gives hope to journey together in the world in the millennium era . If depicted, Nelson Mandela is an artist, who makes works out then unload after the exhibition. Artists are generally very selfish to remove their work. Nelson Mandela did not treat conflict of power, oppression as part of a way to market his expertise to solving the nation. This is about the way of life. His ways of making the life better in this earth are remarkable beauty.

Expertise that exist in the community, not on himself, Nelson Mandela created a system that allows people to fill it with their ability to resolve problems caused by political appartheid. His ability to build systems was not arise from an abstract idea of struggle as often outlined in the paper leaflets of others. Policies that Nelson Mandela produce were a product of his encounter with the South Africans everywhere in the quest to understand what was going on with them. His ability to bring the suffering of the people as the perspective of the policy makers to make Nelson Mandela appeared as a leader who not only change the Afrikaans whites but also Africans who wanted to establish dominance over the land claimed as the property of their ancestors.

I have already explained about the condition of the people when the transfer of power or sovereignty took place in South Africa. The transfer of power as the subject of analysis in the study of international relations and politics often appears to describe a result that ended in mass violence. Now this is happening in mass violence involving Syrian civil war. Many mentioned analysis of the role of international politics that often distrubs political negotiation process in a country that faces a crisis of the transfer of power. Policy of the United States the most widely highlighted in the transfer of power everywhere around the world still occupates political analysis or often discussing hiddenly. U.S. involvement in politics in South Africa was also very large. I think the United States was very grateful that even Nelson Mandela sympathetic to the communist party, but decided to organize an anti - appartheidnya advocacy through the ANC, so the support of the United States flowed to him strongly. Even Nelson Mandela's ability to transfer power without bloodshed and was followed by a national reconciliation process, is actually a dream of idealism in the United States in this own country that this process is not yet fully running.

But when the transfer of power taking place in South Africa, the minority white groups who were in power, were anxiety and fear of possible claims for the return of the native African lands. It turned out to be a victory of Nelson Mandela who did not produce a transfer of power that led to civil war. In the period after Nelson Mandela came out of prison before the presidential election was done, there is a murder that was about to be directed to the civil war  At that time, an African was killed. But Nelson Mandela walked to meet people in the country and immediately conducted a press conference to express his condolences to the events that happened and asked people to calm down. People are asked to not be triggered by issues that incited them. Minority white groups were asked to calm down and continued the ongoing production while adapting the new regulatory system to bring the perspective of the African group in the state policy. But the most important above all was that every citizen is given agreements to vote, one person one vote.

When Nelson Mandela was in prison, a wife of his friend, Joe Slovo, Ruth First who died from a bomb detonated while they were involved in the demonstration of anti apparteid. At that time, Ruth’s daughter,  Gillian slove was only 12 years old. She was moved to London , England where she grew up with some relatives there. Her father, Joe slove continued the struggle as a leader of the anti appartheid South Africa through the Communist Party. Joe slove was one of Mandela’s friends,  as a young lawyer when he began to enter Johannesburg. Gillian slove wrote about her mother's story of struggle, including the suffering endured by Africans in a very detailed description and evocative soul. Red Dust is a novel of her that was worn by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission when they began to enforce the cessation of the cycle of violence in South African society. Gillian slove involved as a member of the family who processed  Ruth First 's death through the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Gillian slove described the tension and anger when she met with Craig Williamson in the trial conducted by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa before determining an amnesty to the murderer of her mother. Slove family, accepted the decision of amnesty to the killers of Ruth First as part of the forgiveness given by the family to the state which was forwarded to Craig Williamson, after hearing the motivation of premeditated murder.

So what exactly is the Truth and Reconciliation Commission? Truth and Reconciliation Commission was established by applying the principles of rights demostrated by the UN’s principle of human rights to the entire nations in this world. The application of human rights implies to avoid enforcement to all situations that result in discrimination action until the violence of a person or group to another person or another group accumulated.  Suppose a person accused of subversive, as principle, he or her rights should be protected. A soldier who on behalf of the state does killer arbitrary to the people, his or her rights must also be protected. Protecting the right of a person does not negate the possibility of a person or entity to be punished. Punishment a person must pass through a court process that allows justice to be opened. In the transfer of power as happened in South Africa,  the possibilities for justice and law enforcement can be diverted or may give rise to new tensions in society. Judicial institutions are available but are often not ready to do a trial which allows those involved in acts of violence can receive the law decreed them. Instead they process cases of human rights violations in the country are often not satisfied with the decision made by the court.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission set up in South Africa for the first of all was not a place where decisions about right and wrong should satisfy those who are disadvantaged, either the state or the people. The purpose of creation is to function in shared history, about the motivations behind acts of violence occurred, causing murder, violence such as robbery, the release of other civil rights that  owned by a citizen. Truth and Reconciliation Commission was formed to rebuild lives as fellow citizens because they have to live together as a community within a country. That is why the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was not placed as part of the existing judicial system. Truth and Reconciliation Commission established as a separate independent agency of government control.

It is interesting to observe how the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa to work. As a Commission,
it was set out in the legislation formation decisions decided in parliament. Laws governing the implementation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission set reworded together before gradually from the bottom of society to the level of advocacy organizations that work with communities. The goal is to hear from people, especially groups who want a legal settlement against cases of violence that has claimed the lives of a family or community members. Inspiration provided by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa when it is applied in other countries appears different and tailored to the needs of their history of violence.

Currently there are 26 countries in the world that have adopted the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa to resolve the conflict in the history of the transfer of power in the nation, respectively. Indonesia is one of them which has adopted but has failed to work through. I want to see quickly what has been done by the Indonesian and how it relates to Papua.

There are at least four interesting writing that can be deepened further related to the discussion of the Turth and  Reconciliation Committion in Indonesia. These writings were published from the practice of law and human rights advocacy performed in the enforcement of justice in Indonesia. There are two important institutions that I mean that are KONTRAS  and Elsham which are along with other civil society organizations after the Reformation to provide input to the government on the importance of the establishment of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Government through the TAP MPR No 5/2000 establishes the need for national reconciliation. Government set Act No.27 of 2004 on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission which was expected to provide a sense of justice to the issue of nationality since the G30 PKI, Tanjung Priok, Trisakti, Aceh and Papua.

Unfortunately, the efforts of civil society organizations (
KONTRAS etc) to request a review of the law against perceived unfair clause, even eventually led to the Constitutional Court abolished the TRC Act. Elsham posts related  efforts to establish the importance rebuilt Truth and Reconciliation Commission, after abolished by the Constitutional Court is a very important study. Two other studies departed from an academic background as a legal assessment that helps people to understand the position of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission as part of the legal issues in Indonesia. Momentum where Nelson Mandela had died raised the issue of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission as an important independent agency that should be set up again by the Indonesian government.

As I 've explained in the first part of my article about Nelson Mandela, this paper is a continuation of it. I wrote Nelson Mandela in particular in relation to the advocacy that I and fellow citizens of the Republic of Indonesia is doing for justice and law enforcement in Papua. On top of all interests  without ignoring various debates about Truth and Reconciliation forms suitable for Indonesia  as ever conducted in ongoing discussion between Gunawan Muhammad and Pramudya Ananta Toer, Franz Magnis Suseno with Sulastomo involving Martin Aleida. Articles from Franz Magnis Suseno and Sulastomo were to respond SBY government's efforts to apologize to former polical communist prisoners , published by Kompas, but Martin Aleida posts deemed too open so it could only appear in the online media discussion on culture and politics. Discussion of Gunawan Muhammad and  Pramudya Anantar Toer also online materials published earlier when the Abdurahman Wahid’s government put forward the Truth and Reconciliation Commission as well began the process of apology to former political prisoners.

Repetition opens discussion on the interest of national reconciliation, in my opinion are two different things with the procurement of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Academic discussion to understand the practice of reconciliation in Indonesia arrived at the conclusion that reconciliation meant different from that practiced in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa. When the Moluccas and Aceh conflict still resonates, the discourse on reconciliation excavated from the community of practice that are “baku bae ( Maluku ) and Islah ( Aceh ). Use of Islah also practiced for the reconciliation process Tangjung Priok case. In my opinion, the various terminology reconciliation in accordance with the practice of public life in Indonesia, could be used as far as the setting is set by law.

Act No.27 of 2004 had been removed by the Constitutional Court demanded by civil society organizations to conduct a judicial review of a few verses on the TRC Act. Rejection paragraph mainly related to amnesty notion mentioned in the law. As I explained above, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa, the possibility of granting amnesty law in the form of legal  to the accused person was possible. Truth and Reconciliation Commission is given the authority to dig up the truth of the violent events that occurred would consult with other groups that decision must be given to the defendant in accordance with the action based on the motivation that pushed the accused person to commit into a violent action. In the case of mass violence that occurred in the community, there is motivation along the gradually awakened. For example, mass violence in North Maluku could be described as an increase in fear and terror escalation nurtured in society. Who did it ? I discussed at length on this subject ( Adeney - Risakotta , 2005). But in the history of conflict in Indonesia, there are groups who have never played, but slaughtered. Suppose citizens said to be involved with the communist party, 1965-1967 events, but also in the time of the Reformation, groups of Christians were slaughtered in Ternate and Tidore. These were groups that never did fight back in the place where they were slaughtered.

I would like to reiterate the argument that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is not merely a legal process to punish. The main purpose of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, is committed to ensuring the continuity of life together in society by cutting a circle of violence. This perspective often misses from the discussion of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Indonesian. When I checked Act 27 of 2004 , this perspective did not appear. In the TAP MPR which conceptualizes the need for a national reconciliation does not mention of it. The purpose of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission encourages the political process in the country openly and representative to reduce the possibility of the use of the state policy or a dominant group to mobilize violence resulting in murder and mass slaughter.

In Indonesia, according to me, there are two laws that still has the legal power to implement the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, though  Act No.27 of 2004 has been abolished by the Constitutional Court. The first is the Law No.21 of 2001, chapter 46, verses 1-3, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Papua Special Autonomy Law. Formulation of objectives of the for Truth and Reconciliation Commission in the Papua Special Autonomy Law that is different from the one set in the Law on Governing Aceh. The second is the number 11 of 2006 on Governing Aceh Special Autonomy Law to replace Special Autonomy Law and the results of the peace agreement between the Indonesian government and the Free Aceh Movement , known as the Helsinki MoU.

How is it different and what can be done, I will discuss in the next section.

Part III :  Recognition of Indonesian Government,
Relevance of  Truth and Reconciliation Commission for Human Rights  Violation in Papua.

See also

Part I: Go with peace Nelson Mandela, father of rainbow human beings

Tidak ada komentar:

Posting Komentar