Sunday, November 10, 2013

PBB Akan Keluarkan General Allegation dan Prompt Intervention untuk Kasus Penghilangan Paksa di Indonesia


Siaran Pers


Kelompok Kerja PBB untuk Penghilangan Orang Secara Paksa atau United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (UNWGEID) (1) akan mengeluarkan General Allegation (2) kepada pemerintah Indonesia yang belum menjalankan rekomendasi DPR untuk menyelesaikan kasus Penghilangan Paksa Aktifis 1997-1998. Selain itu, akibat terjadinya intimidasi terhadap para aktivis dan keluarga seperti yang terjadi pada keluarga Aristoteles Masoka (3) di Papua, dan potensi intimidasi, terror dan balasan dari pihak-pihak lain, UNWGED juga akan mengeluarkan Prompt Intervention untuk pemerintah Indonesia.

Pada tanggal 8 November 2013, Mugiyanto yang merupakan penyintas penculikan aktivis pro-demokrasi oleh Kopassus pada tahun 1998 dan Ketua Ikatan Keluarga Orang Hilang Indonesia (IKOHI) dan Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD) (4) bersama dengan Sekjen AFAD, Mary Aileen D. Bacalso dari Filipina dan delegasi dari International Coalition Against Enforced Disappearances (ICAED) diundang oleh UNWGEID untuk menghadiri Sesi Sidang ke 101 di Kantor Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa di Jenewa, Swiss. Dalam pertemuan tersebut, selain diminta masukan pada UNWGEID tentang hubungan Penghilangan Paksa dan hak-hak ekonomi, sosial dan budaya, Mugiyanto secara khusus diterima oleh UNWGEID untuk berdialog dan menyampaikan laporan dan harapan korban penghilangan paksa di Indonesia.

Dalam pertemuan yang digelar selama satu jam mulai pukul 16.00 waktu Jenewa tersebut, Mugiyanto menyampaikan tiga hal; 1. Rekomendasi DPR tentang kasus penghilangan paksa aktivis 1997-1998 yang belum ditindaklanjuti oleh Presiden SBY, dan 2. Tindak lanjut laporan kasus Aristoteles Masoka yang diculik di Jayapura Papua pada tanggal 10 November 2001 dan intimidasi yang dialami oleh keluarganya di Papua setelah melaporkan kasus tersebut ke PBB pada tanggal 25 September yang lalu. Selain itu, Mugiyanto juga menyampaikan kekhawatiran korban penghilangan paksa di Indonesia terkait pencalonan salah satu orang yang oleh Komnas HAM diduga bertanggung jawab dalam penghilangan paksa tahun 1998 sebagai Capres dalam Pemilu 2014 nanti.

Setelah mendengar penjelasan dari Mugiyanto, anggota UNWGEID Olivier de Frouville mengatakan bahwa WGEID akan meminta keterangan dari pemerintah terkait kasus Aristoteles Masoka dan kemungkinan mengeluarkan Prompt Intervention (5), serta mengeluarkan General Allegation untuk kasus Penghilangan Paksa aktivis 1997-1998 yang rekomendasinya masih belum dilaksanakan oleh Pemerintah, dalam ini Presiden Republik Indonesia.
General Allegation adalah salah satu prosedur UNWGEID yang sangat kuat yang disampaikan kepada anggota PBB yang tidak mau menjalankan Deklarasi PBB tentang Penghilangan Paksa (UN Declaration for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances 1992), untuk menyelesaikan kasus penghilangan paksa yang dilaporkan kepada badan PBB.

Sementara Prompt Intervention adalah prosedur UNWGEID yang disampaikan kepada pemerintah untuk bertindak bila terjadi kasus terror/intimidasi, balasan kepada korban, keluarga korban, aktivis yang berjuang untuk kasus penghilangan paksa.
Jenewa, Swiss, 10 November 2013

Contact person:
Mugiyanto; Mobile: +62-81399825960, Email: mugiyanto@gmail.com

Catatan:
1. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Disappearances/Pages/DisappearancesIndex.aspx
2. Lihat penjelasan tentang General Allegation di sini: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Disappearances/Pages/Procedures.aspx
3. Aristoteles Masoka adalah korban penghilangan paksa di Papua tanggal 10 November 2001. Aristoteles adalah sopir Theys Eluay ketika Eluay ditemukan meninggal akibat tindak kekerasan oleh TNI. Sejak saat itu, Aristoteles tidak pernah kembali sampai hari ini.
4. Untuk mengetahui AFAD, lihat www.afad-online.org
5. Lihat penjelasan tentang Prompt Intervention di sini: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Disappearances/Pages/Procedures.aspx


Wednesday, October 23, 2013

My Torturers Are Still in Power


[An interview with Mugiyanto, one of the activists who were tortured and disappeared months before the collapse of the Soeharto regime in May 1998. He spoke to Danilo Reyes, editor of Article 2, recalling his ordeal in an underground secret detention centre. Fifteen years on, their torturers still wield power and influence in Indonesia.]

Mugi: Thank you Danilo. As basic information my name is Mugiyanto, chairperson of the Asian Federation against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD) and IKOHI. I am a survivor of the disappearances that happened in Indonesia in 1998 when Soeharto was still in power.
Briefly, this is what happen to me at that time. I was a student activist struggling for democracy, for freedom, for reform in Indonesia but at that time my organization was the Student Solidarity for Democracy in Indonesia (SMID). We just affiliated with the People’s Democratic Party (PRD), which was, at that time announced as illegal by the government. We were accused as the mastermind of a riot at that time. The riot happened on July 27, 1996 and then after that my organization was accused by the government of being the mastermind. As this took place around the revival of the Indonesia Communist Party that was the accusation by the government since then we worked in the underground secretly.

We organized the people’s movement although we were banned and we worked underground. That was in 1996, 1997 and 1998. There was also the external factor of the economic crisis. That was the economic crisis that also hit Indonesia very badly and this also gave rise to the popular movement. In 1998 the government had a political agenda: it was the general election and the specific agenda for that general election was in order for the old ruling party to win the election in order for Suharto to be re-elected for the seventh term.

So, the government was very repressive at that time. And that was exactly the reason that the government started disappearing people.
So, one of the cases was what we called the disappearance of Pro democracy activists in 1997 to 1998. The name of the case given is 1997 to 1998 because at that time the disappearance targeted Pro democracy activists. That was the background, that was the context and because of that I was taken from my house. The safe house was actually in Jakarta and it was in the evening on March 13, 1998 and I was taken from my safe house to the military branch and then I was brought again to another military office still in East Jakarta, interrogated again and after that I was brought again to what we called the “mysterious place”.

I was brought there by about seven people, I did not know. When I was forced to get in the car initially they forgot all about me. And then after an hour the car stopped and then they asked me to get out of the car and I walked only three steps. Then they started interrogating me. When I was still blindfolded, they asked me about my name and also the names of my friends I live with. And that was the first time that I was beaten. They did not like my answers because I told them I lived alone. They told me I was lying and started kicking me. When I fell to the ground they forced me to stand up again and interrogated me again. And every time they did not like my answer, or were not happy with my answer, they kicked me, they beat me on my body, on my face and then I fell down again.

After that they stripped off my clothes so that I was only in my underpants still blindfolded and was asked to lay down it’s like a military bed and then they tied both my hands and my legs. It was very cold. And also I heard the water flowing and the sound of whipping. I thought at that time I was brought to the rice field that they were about to killed me.

Danilo: Whipping sound? Not a person weeping?

Mugi: Yes, not a person it’s just a siren like they started interrogating me again about the names of my friends, the leaders at that time and also about my activities, why we wanted to replace Suharto, why we support the Independence of Timor Leste, why want to bring back the military to barracks, why we want to repeal what we called the package of the five political laws which according to us, according to me and my organization were the backbone of the old regime.

Danilo: So, what are those laws?

Mugi: This law is about the General Election, about mass organization, about the parliament in the Central and local level. I can’t remember these five package of political laws issued by the government in 1985 and the fourth is about the sole ideology basically in this law it is said that the political party should only be three political parties that all organization must be based on the ideology of Pancasila, something like that. These are the things that we identify as the backbone of the new order the five political parties and the dual function of the military as in Indonesia the military has a social and political role.

And they also asked me about what we thought to be the solution to the economic crisis in Indonesia at that time. And those are the questions given to me and my two other friends because later when I was there I realized that I was not the only person being held there, being interrogated there. Because when they interrogated me and they don’t like my answer they tortured me. And that was also the time that I realize that the whip was not the sound of whipping (that I thought), but it was the electric shock.

Danilo: Electric shocks applied to somebody else?

Mugi: At that time to me, so it is electric shock because when it touch my leg. That was the torture I had experienced: electric shocks. I was blindfolded and after they interrogated me. They interrogated someone else. Maybe five meters from me and then I realize that he was my friend.

Danilo: How did you know he is your friend?

Mugi: I know very well because he spoke and answered the questions of the interrogator. So, I listened to him, he was about five meters away. He was screaming when he was tortured. There was another person who was being tortured and interrogated there. I also realize that he was my other friend. We were in the same safe house at that time because, in fact, those two friends of mine where taken from my house one hour before me. When I entered the safe house, the safe house was already surrounded by different military officers. So that was happened to me. I was there for 2 days and 2 nights in this X place, mysterious place.

Danilo: So, there were two other persons, your friends who were there, so did you know the places where you were taken and who were those?

Mugi: At that time we did not know. We knew the place after we were released and then KontraS conducted the investigation based on the testimonies of those released. And the conclusion was the place is the illegal detention centre of the Special Armed Forces the Kopasus in Indonesia, in East Jakarta, it was an underground detention cell.

Danilo: So, they discovered that it was an underground cell?

Mugi: It was an underground and the military also admitted because there is a military against Kopasus. There were also an investigation by the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) and there was also an investigation by the military. It was the place but at the time they conducted the investigation the detention did not exist anymore today because they already demolished it. So that’s what I have experienced in terms of torture.
After these two days, because it happen on Friday 13 of March and 15 of March in the afternoon, three of us were brought again to another place. We did not know because we were blindfolded during the two days. We were all blindfolded and only wearing underpants. So after two days we were brought to a place and then we were interrogated again for about two hours. I was interrogated for two hours by the military officers and then when I was interrogated my blindfold was released so I tried to identify where it was in the Jakarta Regional Command Office. After this two hours interrogation three of us were brought to another place, again blindfolded again, and brought again in the vehicle.

Danilo: It was the fifth place already, right?

Mugi: Yes, fifth place. We were brought again and inside the car we were also intimidated by the person behind us. Mugi, what is the last word you want to say to your parents something like that. Mugi, what is your religion, Muslim? You have to pray. Can you pray? You cannot pray because you are a communist. That’s what they said and after that the car stopped and we realized that it was in Jakarta Police Regional Office and then they released my blindfold and then they said, Mugi you are safe here, and then the three of us were brought there and then we were under went the legal process, we were interviewed by the Police. I told them I didn’t want to be interviewed, I wanted a lawyer. They said, Mugi don’t make it difficult you are safe already here so, let’s undergo this legal process and I said no, no, I need a lawyer.

And they beat me with a stick on my back and also intimidating me with the mask because I was still traumatized with the mask because one of my interrogator wore the mask in the Kopasus detention because once my blindfold was released in the Kopasus detention Centre that was when I was in the toilet and they took my photograph. But when someone took my photograph my blindfold was released and I saw that the photographer was wearing the mask. So I never recognized the faces of these interrogators. So we were in a police detention centre, we were finally undergoing the process, we call it the questioning and we were charged with the Anti-Subversion Law because we were against the government.

I was interrogated for 5pm until 1pm. Then after that, after 11pm the police sent us to cells in the isolation cell. Me, Nezar and Aan my other friend were placed in separate cells. One big cell, one person at that time we were there. That was the time that Munir, was taking this issue. Munir was one of my lawyers at that time. So, I was there on March 15 detained by the police and charged with subversion which could mean the death penalty in Indonesia Law.

And then it was in March we were really isolated but next to me was a the cell full of detainees, political detainees from the supporters of Megawatti because many people were detained at that time as there were a lot of demonstrations. They were demanding the reduction of the price of the basic needs, and so on, and so on. At that time they were against corruption and then there were several detainees next to my cell (I was in cell number 11). The next cell was 10. In one big cell, several detainees knew me as the PRD activist. So they would be the one supplying me the newspapers, like the smuggled newspapers and give me cigarettes and they also help me communicate with Nezar and Aan my other friend into synchronizing the answers of the interrogation so I write down and send them messages.

So that was in March. Then in May we read that students held a lot of demonstrations, so we motivated each other me, Naser and Aan we would shout, the student demonstration are becoming bigger and bigger, so we encouraged each other at that time because we were still very traumatized by that time two days in Kopasus detention centre.

In May 12, 13 and 14 the time when the popular movement reached its climax after the shooting of the student in a University and the death was followed by burnings in Jakarta. There was looting everywhere but there were no police, there was no military in Jakarta at that time. What happened was the burning of buildings, looting of the malls and also the rape of the Chinese Indonesian woman.

So, it was from 12 to 15 and finally on the 21st Soeharto announced his resignation. We were very happy at that time inside the prison. And then after Soeharto resigned, the security in prison was loosened. I had better food. Initially the prison officers were very repressive, they kept monitoring us and they didn’t allow us to communicate with each other or go out to exercise like the other prisoners; but after Suharto resigned we were allowed to go out and exercise with the other detainees. And then we had better food unlike before. We have better rice like that spinach and tofu.

It was in May that Suharto resigned and then by June he was replaced by his Vice President, B. J. Habibie. Habibie repealed the Anti-subversion Law. That was the reason why we were released on June 6, 1998 because the law that was used as a basis of detention was repealed. So we were released. So that was happen to me, that’s what I experience.

But I was still traumatized. By that time, after I was release that was on June 6. On June 8 Munir wanted us to have a press conference for the three of us about our experiences. I have the written testimony, it is also in the internet in my blog as well. My testimony of what happen to me. I think there is also an English version of my testimony. But I was still traumatized at that time. After that we were still in the safe houses. We were coping with our mental depression.

Danilo: Even after you release you were staying in a safe house?

Mugi: Yes, yes provided by KontraS.

Danilo: Did you feel secured?

Mugi: Yes, we had to in order to feel secure, and cope with the trauma that I had experienced. It took one month, I think, it was only one month; then I went home to my hometown in Central Java. Then, after two months I went again to Jakarta. That was in October and then KontraS assigned me to go to the Philippines. I met Aileen of Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearances (FIND) in August 1998. I also made use of that time to meet the human rights organizations, specially with FIND working with disappearances. Then in October 1998, we went to Geneva that was the first time we brought this case about disappearances. That was the first time that we worked together on my case at the Working Group on Enforced Disappearances in Geneva, I think.

Danilo: Were you able to identify, file charges against those who abducted and tortured you?

Mugi: Yes

Danilo: And what happened to your complaint?

Mugi: What happen is under investigation of KontraS and advocacy by Kontras led by Munir at that time the government was pressured. They had the military court to try the case so the military police conducted the investigation and they found out the military was involved, specifically the Special Armed Forces whose commander at the time is General Prabowo. Based on the findings it was the Kopasus group for Anti-Terror and below that the Anti-Terror group, they established a small team consisting of 11 officers which was called the “Rose team”. It consisted of 11 officers finally these 11 officers were brought to military court in 1999.

The 11 officers brought to military court along with the higher officer. The commander of the Kopasus General, Lt. General Prabowo, and the commander of Group four Col. Kairawan and the replacement of Prabowo because in May, Prabowo was replaced by Col. Mudi, he was the one who was involved in the assassination of Munir (of KontraS and my former legal counsel). Three of them were not brought to military court but to the military honorary council of the military. Three of them were brought there and after that the 11 official members of the Special Armed Forces of this rose team were sentenced two years maximum 24 months.

Danilo: Because of torture you suffered and your two other friends?

Mugi: The charges were not on torture. Torture was not a crime at that time (editor’s note: until now torture is not a criminal offense in Indonesia). The charges filed against them was about the soldiers “mistakenly interpreting the order of commander”. It was a disciplinary sanction by the court.

Danilo: So, it was an administrative sanction?

Mugi: Administrative not criminal. For mistakenly interpreting the order of the commander. These 11 Kopasus officers and then the three officers, like General Prabowo, were expelled from the military and also Mudi and Kairawan. That was what happened in the military court. I was not in Indonesia at that time. I didn’t give testimony in court. What we know now is that many of the 11 officers of the Kopasus were promoted to higher positions at this moment.

Several numbers of the soldiers involved in torture were promoted in Ache; and as for the victims, we got nothing. Because it’s not a crime in Indonesia we only have abduction and only after 2000 after we have this law on establishing Ad Hoc Human Rights Court we began again to make a campaign. We ask Komnas HAM to start its investigation on the case because we believe that this is the gross violation of human rights violation and a crime against humanity.

We asked Komnas HAM, and it was only in 2005 that Komnas HAM establish on Ad Hoc team to investigate our case. In 2006 Komnas HAM concluded that it was true that there is gross violation of human rights on the category of crime against humanity in the form of disappearances, torture. And then Komnas HAM handed over their report to the Attorney General Office (AGO) for the investigation and prosecution of the case in the Ad Hoc human rights court. One of the weakness in the Indonesian legal system is that, we have government regulation on compensation rehabilitation and restitution that the victims could only access if there is a court decision. If not that is impossible.

I’m talking about the torture and other acts within the category of gross human rights violations. So we don’t have legal remedy. No single person for the victims of enforced disappearances in 1997 - 1998 received any remedy until now. What we had is only recently on the last one year the families enjoyed the service from the government in the form of psychosocial and medical services by the LPSK or the victims and the witnesses protection body. But this on the provision that there should be evidence from the Komnas HAM that the person is really a victim or the family of the victim. This is not remedy, this is not reparation. This is what happened actually in the case of Tanjung Priok. There were three cases of gross human rights violations that were brought to the Human Rights Court. The first is the case of East Timor; second, is the case of Tanjung Priok massacre against Muslims in 1984 in Jakarta and the third, was the case of Abepura in 2000. Abepura was brought to the permanent Human Rights Court, not to Ad Hoc court.

In the case of Tanjung Priok, the court actually ordered the government to provide compensation to the victims. The problem, however, was that in the appeal in the court of appeal the judges said that there was no human rights violation. Yes, there is no human rights violation. One of the elements of the crime was that it has to be done as part of systematic and widespread action targeting civilians. What happen in Tanjung Priok at that time was that, it is not the military but it was a civilian group who attacked the military. That is why no one was convicted. So, everyone was released basically.

Danilo: There is no concept of command responsibility?

Mugi: Yeah, there is none because the court did not consider it a crime. The good thing is at least the judge ordered the state to provide compensation, rehabilitation and restitution to the victims, but it was not implemented. So that happens in Indonesia and many cases of gross human rights violations. I am not involved in torture cases in recent torture cases so I don’t know exactly because there are many torture cases in the police detention, I don’t know exactly in terms of remedy.

Danilo: Do you think after 1998 after Suharto left torture remains a widespread and systematic practice? In the past, it is more on political threats;
but these days what do you think are the reason for using torture?

Mugi: It still happens. In the media torture happens in many police detention centres during interrogation. When I was detained back in March 1998 the torture was so bad against the drug abuse suspect. Before as they were taken to the police they first have to pass this torture chamber. They were interrogated before being sent to the cell. I heard that it is still happening these days. Although not as bad as before, and it happens also Indonesia. It is only in big cities where there is media coverage the police is careful. But this kind of detaining people, interrogating people, torturing people happens in small police offices related to plantations, for example mining, nobody knows because no one is able to have access there. And the reason is I think there is a problem anywhere is the law enforcement.

On the other hand the police and military said that: no we cannot be repressive like before because we are afraid of human rights. That’s what they said. The police are using the double standard in the case, for example now the biggest issue in Indonesia is religious intolerance.

Danilo: I’m curious Mugi the person who helped you while you were in detention was it Munir?

Mugi: Yes.

Danilo: He represented you and the other persons whom you worked with now, Daud, his father was also a torture victim. And you are working with them in terms of advocacy protection of rights demanding for remedy but in you none of those who abducted, tortured you was prosecuted with criminal liability. So how do you address this kind of questions dealing with victims? How do you explained that to them? Do you ask question?

Mugi: Yeah, Of course. That is the difficult part. In the context that as if what we have been doing is useless for example because we have been struggling for 15 years since Soeharto no single person persecuted and the victim is not even the right to remedy. Yes it is a big challenge for me personally and also for us because it looks like giving a false hope to the victims. Example, if we call for justice this perpetrator should be persecuted that our call. But on the other hand the Tanjung Priok case has been brought to court but the result was that the victims got nothing. The perpetrators are free. So, do we want to have same court decision again?

This is difficult part but what we talk to the victims what we shared with them is that the good thing in among the victims community is they are not individuals. For example they are not only thinking of themselves and this is reflected with statement of the victims. They go to the mother of the victims saying I have been struggling for years and what I believe is Indonesia is the State that abides by the law, so the law should be upheld. And so what happened to my son, to myself, I don't want other generations to experience the same. Not only herself, but for the future generation of our nation. That's why I personally in my writing and also in my conversation my speech for example, I gave identify to the victory of the victims. That what we are doing is not useless, it is rather symbolic one. In the history of Indonesia, it never happened that the generals were brought to a court room for prosecution. Although they were not convicted as guilty, but they were indeed taken to court, as it happens in the case of Tanjung Priok.

Danilo: What you’re discussing is very important as it strikes you.

Mugi: Exactly. We have said be free to organize but this is not all because of the victims, the biggest challenge is ahat about the daily needs of the victim? Because justice for victim struggling for 15 years is like abstract. They have their own definition of justice. What is important for me is I can continue life but not in this way. Because my son supposed to be breadwinner and he was taken I have bad economic life and so on and so on the government should provide for me.

Danilo: So after 1998 reforms in terms of law, new laws, some of those were have reforms but not all and there have been ratification of the CAT Convention. So this contributes to the development of the norms and the legal framework of Indonesian legal system. But do you think Indonesia today, with these developments of normative standards, does the legal system protects the rights or defeats?

Mugi: Of course, it protects the rights formally. It protects the right in terms of norms, but the problem is in Indonesia we have many good laws, good regulations but they are not enforced. So it is meaningless. Without enforcement it is meaningless like a paper tiger. We understand this because of the fact that Indonesians, for so many years, at least for last three decades and the authoritarian regimes, we have been under such repressive situation. No government officials, specially the security apparatus, were held accountable.

There is such a kind of Culture of impunity, a long history of impunity and you could go to Philippines yes, ok and also the other aspect is because of the fact that the reform that we have in Indonesia in 1998 does not really change. The culture, the system is still there.

Danilo: When you say the system what is it still there? Can you give an example.

Mugi: For example the military is still the problem in Indonesia up until today. Although they don’t have their automatic representation, like in the New Order regime, but they are still given many strategic positions by political parties. They were powerful in the past and they were still powerful and very influential today.

So the political party wants them. That is why they recruit the military men in different political parties, like Prabowo, and also the other generals in different political parties. They are the ones who have the agenda to be immune from any accountability, and so on.

Danilo: What do you think now Prabowo was the commander by the group who tortured you and your friends? Prabowo remain an influential person in Indonesia, so how do you articulate this kind of obstacle and lack of punishments and absence of those who are perpetrating gross violation of rights in the Indonesian society these days? How do you articulate?

Mugi: Yes, it is very difficult for us to bring people, like Prabowo in judicial process to get the formal judicial punishment. We do this ‘social punishment’. Even if our actions is not official punishment, we are doing this is to tell public about who these persons are. The big challenge in the human rights community is that human rights are not attractive issue in Indonesia in comparison to the issue of corruption. And when we are talking of corruption many people should talk out of Human Rights.

Danilo: Why?

Mugi: Because I think it’s not directly related to them. They are not victims. Maybe for them its abstract that’s why Prabowo is popular and also they don’t know (about the violations he committed in the past). The people don’t know the human rights community. We are still in the secret room, still isolated. Those who talk about justice and human rights, like Kontras, are small in numbers; and the others, they don’t see the importance of bringing perpetrators to justice is public discourse.

Danilo: Thank you Mugi.

Source: Article 2 of AHRC Publication, http://www.article2.org/mainfile.php/1202/444/
Posted on 2013-09-03

Saturday, October 05, 2013

Reposting; Ratifying Convention on Disappearance

Ratifying Convention on
Disappearances

Mugiyanto, Jakarta | Opinion | Mon, January 11 2010, 9:32 AM


At the end of its 2004-2009 term, the House of Representatives (DPR) left an exemplary legacy in the field of human rights. On Sept. 28, 2009, it surprisingly issued a set of comprehensive recommendations to the government on the disappearances of pro-democracy activists in 1997-1998.

The recommendations consist of four points that cover the areas of justice, truth, reparations and a guarantee of non-repetition, in which they reflect the victims’ rights.

Of the four recommendations, two are addressed directly to the President, urging the President to establish an ad hoc human rights court and to search for the 13 people still missing.

The other two are addressed to the government to provide compensation and rehabilitation to the victims, and to ratify the Convention on Enforced Disappearances for the purpose of preventing cases of enforced disappearances happening again in the future.

The four recommendations were issued by the House through its plenary session as a result of the work of the parliamentary special committee on the report by the National Human Rights Commission on the disappearance cases in 1997-1998.

The House was mandated by Article 43 of the 2000 law on the Human Rights Court. The committee had been working on it for two years, since it was established in February 2008.

This article, however, wants to highlight the recommendation to the government to ratify the Convention on Enforced Disappearance, which indicates Indonesia’s intention to comply with the development of the international human rights treaty.

Civil society organizations have repeatedly urged the government to ratify the Convention on Enforced Disappearances.

Back in March 2007, three months after the adoption of the convention by the United Nations General Assembly in New York, the ratification of the convention was promised by the then justice and human rights minister Hamid Awaluddin in a high-level speech during the first sessions of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland.

Once it ratifies the convention, Indonesia is legally bound to comply with its provisions. One of the important forms of compliance is the inclusion of the act of disappearance as a crime in domestic legislation (currently, it falls under abduction, kidnapping, deprivation of liberty). Others are measures on the obligation of the state to hold the perpetrators accountable and take preventative measures.

As stipulated in Article 39 of the convention, it will come into force on the thirtieth day after the date of deposit of the twentieth ratification with the secretary-general of the United Nations.

As of today, the convention has been signed by 81 governments and ratified by 18 states. Of those 18 ratifying states, eight states are from Latin America, four states from Europe, four states from Africa and only two states from Asia. The two Asian states that have ratified the convention are Japan and Kazakhstan.

The composition of the ratifying states has not yet reflected the purpose of the convention, which is to put an end of the global phenomenon of disappearances. The fact that there are eight Latin American states and only two Asian states seem to imply that the convention is more relevant to Latin American states. The fact, however, is that it is needed more by Asian countries as disappearances are still ongoing phenomena in the region.

The report of the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances in the last three years indicated that Asian regions submitted the highest number of cases of enforced disappearances as compared to other regions. Of the countries in the region, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Iraq, India, China, and the Philippines are those among the contributors.

It is because of this situation that an organization like the Asian Federations against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD) in cooperation with the Latin American Federation of Association of Families of Disappeared Detainees (FEDEFAM) has been conducting a series of lobbying and campaign activities in Indonesia and other countries in the region in order that more Asian states ratify the convention.

Worth mentioning here is that Indonesia, Timor-Leste, Thailand, the Philippines and Nepal are supportive and in the process of studying eventual ratification of the convention.

In its final report entitled Ad Memoriam Per Spem which means “from Memory to Hope” released in 2008, the joint Commission for Truth and Friendship (CTF) of Timor-Leste and Indonesia produced one specific recommendation that related to disappearances.

The recommendation is for both governments to establish the Commission on Disappeared Persons. The said commission is tasked to locate the missing persons who disappeared in Timor-Leste during the conflict. Now that both governments are preparing to follow up on the said recommendation, immediate ratification of the convention will provide several benefits, some of them are:

First, the criticism by the international community that the Commission for Truth and Friendship is denying justice and accountability will be less profound than before. This is because it will base its recommendations on the international treaty directly related to the matter.

Second, the said Commission on Disappeared Persons, or whatever name both governments will give to the new follow-up institution, will fulfill and be compatible with international standards.

This will prevent the possibility of receiving international criticism later for not complying with existing standards and according to the principles of organizations working on the issues of disappearances and missing persons.

Third, being the state parties to the convention, both governments will obtain technical assistance from others. This includes, among others, in searching for, locating and releasing disappeared persons and, in the event of death, in exhuming and identifying them and returning their remains (Article 15 of the convention).

Fourth, ratifying the convention means laying the foundations for the ongoing institutional reforms that both governments are doing to prevent the same crimes happening again in the future.


The writer is the chairman of the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD) and Indonesian Association of Families of the Disappeared (IKOHI).

Source: http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/01/11/ratifying-convention-disappearances.html

Friday, August 30, 2013

Combating Disappearances in Asia; From Impunity to Accountability!

In January 1981 in San Jose, Costa Rica, the victims and families of victims of enforced disappearances from Latin American countries held the First and Founding Congress of FEDEFAM and created a slogan that later for decades became their encouragement; No Hay Dolor Inutil. They know very well and put this confidence in their struggle for justice; There Is No Useless Pain! The pain they have been feeling and experiencing during years of military dictatorship.

It was also during this occasion that they adopted 30 August as the International Day for the Disappeared (IDD). They wanted to dedicate a day in one year for their disappeared loved ones. On IDD, they raise their voice loud for the government to listen: Where are their loved ones?

Three decades later in Asia, after the United Nations officially adopted the IDD as an internationally acknowledged day for the disappeared in 2011, the same call heard again. This time very very much louder.

It is still a big challenge to make disappearances as a history of the past in Asia. The continent still contributes the biggest portion of cases to the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances as compared to other regions. Only four countries ratified the International Convention against Enforced Disappearances; Japan, Kazakhstan, Iraq and Cambodia. Other countries in the region that are still practicing the crimes are not committed to to prevent, let alone combat this heinous crime. They still very much enjoy the dark era of impunity despite the fact that Ban Ki-moon, the Secretary-General of the United Nations frequently says that we have been moving from the Era of Impunity to Era of Accountability.

Ah, C'mon Mr. Presidents and Prime Ministers!


Monday, August 19, 2013

SUSPENDED COFFEE; The Beauty of Sharing Coffee with Those Can't Afford It



I opened internet this morning and read an amazing brief story which goes as follow:

"We enter a little coffeehouse with a friend of mine and give our order. While we're approaching our table two people come in and they go to the counter -
'Five coffees, please. Two of them for us and three suspended'
They pay for their order, take the two and leave. I ask my friend:
'What are those 'suspended' coffees ?'
'Wait for it and you will see'

Some more people enter. Two girls ask for one coffee each, pay and go. The next order was for seven coffees and it was made by three lawyers - three for them and four 'suspended'. While I still wonder what's the deal with those 'suspended' coffees I enjoy the sunny weather and the beautiful view towards the square in front of the café. Suddenly a man dressed in shabby clothes who looks like a beggar comes in through the door and kindly asks
'Do you have a suspended coffee ?'

It's simple - people pay in advance for a coffee meant for someone who can not afford a warm beverage. The tradition with the suspended coffees started in Naples, but it has spread all over the world and in some places you can order not only a suspended coffee, but also a sandwich or a whole meal."


***

The story struck my conscience; Why no one do this in Indonesia (as far as I know)? I believe we all feel that sharing suspended coffee is beautiful especially in society where the gap between the rich and poor are so huge and that the rich don't care about the poor. We still remember very well how few days ago a public officer (Chair of SKK Migas) stole 700,000 and plus US$ from the state/public institution's fund and hide them in their homes and offices. Thanks to KPK it finally caught them and arrested them!


People in many cities in the world have done so, sharing Suspended Coffees to the less fortunate. So why don't we initiate this in our city, Jakarta, Bogor, or somewhere else. We can initiate and start talking with the coffee shop's or warung kopi's owners who are our friends. Suspended Coffee require the cooperation between the buyers and coffee shop managers or owners. This way, we will have beautiful community and society.

We will not get poor by buying one cup of Suspended Coffee for other. The coffee shop owners will have more customers, and those who are less fortunate will also be able to enjoy good coffee with dignity.

So let's do it. It is simple!

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

A Rendezvous of 17 Years

Yesterday, 22 July was the 17th anniversary of the People's Democratic Party, the PRD of Indonesia. I was there until I quit in November 2000 when the leadership brought the party to a totally different direction as we can see now!

Yesterday, dozens of my former comrades gathered in Jakarta (Morrisey) for a reunion under the banner "Tujuan Kita Satu Ibu", which is the title of the poem of our disappeared comrade, Wiji Thukul. I am not sure if "Tujuan Kita (MASIH) Satu Ibu", although many of my friends still hope so, which I doubt.

I was not with them yesterday, but I saw the BMP of the Philippines rallying at the SONA by President Noynoy Aquino at the Batasan. It was a rendezvous. I did the same 17 years ago, as PRD, in a People's Caravan against the VFA in the Philippines and the Slam APEC!

A day before, our comrade-teacher Doug Lorimer of Australian passed away. He was one of those who influenced my way of seeing, analyzing and responding to social beings. RIP Doug. Thanks for all you shared with us.

Tuesday, June 04, 2013

INDONESIA: A victim of enforced disappearance speaks out on government's reluctance to provide remedies

FOR PUBLICATION
AHRC-ETC-023-2013
June 04, 2013



An interview with Mugiyanto, a victim of enforced disappearance, published by the Asian Human Rights Commission

AHRC-ETC-023-2013.jpgDuring 1997-1998, members of Student Solidarity for Democracy (SMID) who demanded democratisation in Indonesia were abducted by the military. Their critical view was deemed to be a threat to the state. One of the victims was Mugiyanto who, along with several others, were eventually released following strong demands from the public. As of today, there are 13 more activists whose whereabouts are still unknown. They are: Suyat, Yani Afri, Sonny, M. Joseph, Noval Alkatiri, Dedy Hamdun, Ismail, Ben Peter, Abdun Naser, Hendra Hambali, Ucok Siahaan, Yadin Muhidin and Wiji Thukul. (Picture of Mugiyanto, taken from www.mugiyanto.blogspot.com)

To commemorate the International Week of the Disappeared, Mugiyanto spoke to the AHRC on his experience as well as the victims' efforts to encourage legal proceedings on the abduction of activists in 1997-1998.

Would you like to share what had happened in relation to the abduction you experienced?


When the abduction took place, I was active in an organisation called the Indonesian Student Solidarity for Democracy (SMID) which was affiliated to the People's Democratic Party (PRD). We had to conduct our activities in secret since 27 July 1996 as our organisation was banned by the government. Our organisation was accused of masterminding the 27 July 1996 riot. I stayed in a rented house that my friends and I called the 'safe house' located in Klender, East Jakarta.

On 13 March 1998 at around 7 pm I was arrested by around 10 men -- two of them were wearing military uniform. From the rented house I was taken to several places including the office of the District Military Command in East Jakarta. I do not know to where else they took me because I was blindfolded during the whole journey but I could hear the voice of my friends Aan Rusdiyanto and Nezar Patria. We were taken to an unknown place we called 'X' where we were tortured for two days. I learned later that 'X' was the headquarters of Kopassus (the Army Special Forces) in Cijantung, Jakarta. During the abduction, the military asked me about the best solution for the economic crisis ongoing at that time, the independence of East Timor, the reason why I was against the dual function of The Indonesian Armed Forces and why I supported the struggle of the people of Aceh for independence.

Two days after I was moved to another unidentified place. Again I did not know what that place was because I was blindfolded. Only later I understood that it was the office of Jakarta Metropolitan Police. We were detained there for 3 months for the allegation on conducting subversive activities because they thought we wanted to overthrow the New Order regime. When I was detained at the Jakarta Metropolitan Police, Munir was the person who was defending me. I met with Munir often since then.

Do you know why were you targeted? What kind of activities were you engaged in at that time?

At that time my role (in the) SMID was to organize international campaigns in Europe, Asia and Australia. I was campaigning for the release of political prisoners both those who engaged with the PRD and other types of political prisoners.

How long were you detained and what exactly happened during this time?

I was interrogated for two days. I was blindfolded and stripped that I was only wearing my underwear. During the interrogation I was electrocuted, beaten, threatened, yelled at, and subjected to other inhumane treatment. I do not know who did it because I was always blindfolded. I only knew Nezar Patria and Aan Rusdiyanto were also there because I heard their voices in 'X'.

How did the abuse affect you and your family?

My parents live in fear as many strangers came to my house. Some of my neighbours in the village looked down at me because I was detained at Jakarta Metropolitan Police. It is just how most people live in village think: anybody who once had been arrested must have been a bad person. I personally experienced trauma for approximately two years. Every time I heard the sound of a hand transceiver or being alone on the road I was always worried and scared.

What do you do to encourage the settlement of the case?

The first thing I did was joining the other victims' and their families and established the Indonesian Association of Families of the Disappeared. I brought together the victims from Aceh to Papua which was facilitated by the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS) in October 2002. I also empowered the victims both mentally and economically. I advocate for the settlement of the case along with KontraS, Indonesian Legal Aid Institute Foundation (YLBHI) and other organisations. We are demanding justice for the victims of enforced disappearance by conducting demonstrations as well as well lobbying various state institutions. We are probably the only organisation that had held a demonstration in front of Kopassus's headquarters in Cijantung. We do not do this at the national level only but also at the international level. Almost every year we go to the UN Human Rights Committee and the UN Human Rights Council or send complaints via email. The activities we do are supported by friends from regional NGOs such as AFAD, AHRC, EURO Mediterranean and other regional organisations in Latin America.

Who do you think was responsible for the abuse that you endured?

No doubt, the persons who are responsible for abducting and disappearing activist during 1997-1998 were former President Soeharto and the armed forces commander at that time. Commander of Kopassus who ordered Rose Team to abduct the activists was also responsible. Those individuals were policy makers when the abduction and enforced disappearance took place.

What was the government's response to the victim's effort to fight?

The government's responses have been very slow. The victims found the attitude of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono is very disappointing on this matter. He has been in power for nine years but still cannot solve this case. The Parliament gave positive response in 2009 by issuing four recommendations delivered by a special committee established in 2007-2009. The aim of the committee's establishment was to follow up the investigations result concluded by the National Human Rights Commission which was submitted to the Attorney General in 2006. The four recommendations were for the President to establish an Ad Hoc Human Rights Court to examine the case of involuntary disappearance; for the government to find the 13 activist who are still missing; for the government to provide compensation and restitution to the victims; and for the Government to ratify the International Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. These four recommendations are yet to be executed by the President as of today.

What are the obstacles you and other victims have experienced in the search for justice?

The main obstacle is that the state tend to ignore the settlement of past human rights violations cases. This happens because who are serving in the government today are individuals involved in the abuses. The biggest challenge ahead is to make the past human rights issues being discussed widely in the society as much as for instance, the issue of corruption.

Victims of enforced disappearance have joined political parties founded by the persons who allegedly gave orders to abduct you. How do you feel about this?

Personally I do not mind if my friends join a political party. Yet what troubles me is the fact that a former friend of mine entered the political party led by people who are responsible for the abductions and enforced disappearances or other serious human rights violations such as the People's Conscience Party (HANURA) and Gerindra. I of course cannot do anything to prevent my friends from joining such political parties. All I can do is conducting campaigns to public and persuade them not to elect parliamentary candidates or leaders involved in human rights violations, corruptions and crimes against the environment. People should understand that public officials must have a clean track record.

What are your expectations of the current government?

The current government only has a year left before the election in 2014 and I do not believe that they will be able to solve this case within such short period of time. Yet I hope the government -especially the president- will lay the foundations of solving the case in the remaining one year. By 'foundations' I refer to policies issued by President such as Presidential Decree, Instruction, or Regulation which are in favour of the victims.

What motivates you to keep on fighting?

It is just something that comes from within me. I am part of the victims and their family. I can understand what the victims feel as I myself have been there. My own mother also always teaches me kindness. Throughout the last 10 years I have been very close to the victims of past human rights violations and their families. They are also the ones who motivate me to keep fighting together in demanding justice.

As the 2014 general election is approaching, what message would you like to deliver to the public in Indonesia?

I will hold campaigns to the public to persuade them not to elect parliamentarian and presidential candidates who have been involved in human rights violations. I will do so by holding discussions, film screenings, using the media and other means. Most Indonesians do not know who had actually perpetrated human rights violations. For example, neighbours in my village told me that they will vote for Prabowo for the presidential election. They want to vote for him because they do not know who Prabowo actually is. The campaign on do not vote for human rights violators, corrupted politicians and candidates who contribute to the destruction of the environment is part of public education which needs to be held systematically.

What is your message to the international community?

I am hoping the international community will note blindly believe the reports made by government on human rights situation in the country. If you only listen to the government then you will get a false picture on the situation in Indonesia that everything is fine. It is important for the international community to listen to the voice of the victims or the NGOs. Please do not give false judgment on the situation in Indonesia as what one of the international organisations did recently by giving the President an award or religious freedom of tolerance when actually there have been many cases on discrimination and violence against minorities during his administration. As for the case on abduction and enforced disappearance, I hope the international community will support the victims and their struggles in various means.

The AHRC is not responsible for the views shared in this article, which do not necessarily reflect its own.

Source: AHRC June 4, 2013 can be downloaded at: http://www.humanrights.asia/opinions/interviews/AHRC-ETC-023-2013

Sunday, May 19, 2013

Tak Lelah Berjuang Bersama Korban Pelanggaran HAM


Foto: Sinar Harapan

Di tengah lelah, perjuangan melawan lupa tetap harus dilakukan.

"Saya akan terus berjuang bersama korban", kata Mugiyanto Sipin. Begitulah pria kelahiran 2 November 1973 itu memastikan komitmennya untuk tetap membantu korban penculikan dan keluarganya, meski satu persatu teman-temannya dilihatnya telah tergiur bergabung bersama partai politik.

Komitmen itu terlontar lantaran ia melihat masih banyak yang harus diperjuangkan terkait pelanggaran hak asasi manusia (HAM) di masa lalu, termasuk pencegahannya agar tak lagi terulang di masa mendatang.

Di mata Mugiyanto, apa yang terjadi di masa 15 tahun setelah peristiwa reformasi di tahun 1998 masih jauh dari harapan ketika melihat tindakan-tindakan yang seharusnya pemerintah lakukan terkait pelanggaran HAM. “Bagaimana pun tujuan reformasi mengsyaratkan kalau problem-problem masa lalu dapat terselesaikan,” begitu ujarnya.

Memang pada masa pemerintahan presiden Gus Dur dan Megawati, sempat ada tindakan pengadilan terhadap pelanggaran HAM. Ia mencontohkan seperti pelanggaran yang terjadi Timtim tahun 1999. Hanya saja, kata Mugiyanto, pada periode itu pun sebetulnya tidak berbuah hasil karena semuanya dibebaskan dan para korban tidak mendapatkan hak-hak mereka seperti kompensasi, rehabilitasi dan restitusi.

“Ironisnya kegagalan itu berlanjut dan paling terasa pada pemerintahan sekarang yang berlangsung dalam dua periode. Sama sekali tidak ada pengadilan pelanggaran HAM, jadi kesannya malah mundur,” ucap Mugiyanto. Belum lagi, dijelaskannya, soal niat untuk menghidupkan kembali UU KKR (Komisi Kebenaran dan Rekonsiliasi), dulu dibatalkan Mahkamah Konstitusi (MA) pada tahun 2006, yang nyatanya masih mengambang.

Biarpun masa pemerintahan presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) akan berakhir pada tahun 2014 nanti, Mugiyanto masih menyimpan sebuah harapan. Diharapkannya presiden SBY setidaknya mau membuat landasan politik penyelesaian. Misalnya, membentuk komite kepresidenan untuk menyelesaikan pelanggaran HAM masa lalu.

Harapan Ratifikasi
Perjuangan agar semua kasus dapat terselesaikan memang melelahkan buatnya dan teman-teman seperjuangan yang lain. Sebab selain harus mengawal kasus HAM yang belum terselesaikan, seiring berjalannya waktu mereka terus menerus harus mencari metode melawan lupa dari pelbagai pihak, termasuk pemerintah.

“Ini harus diselesaikan, karena bila tidak, bisa jadi kita atau siapa pun yang dapat menjadi korban berikutnya,” ungkap ayah dari Mentari Malahayati dan Kirana Luna Nauli tersebut.

Nah sebagai jaminan agar pelanggaran HAM itu tidak terjadi lagi di masa mendatang, Mugiyanto menjelaskan harus ada tindakan pemerintah untuk melakukan proses adopsi atau meratifikasi Statuta Roma yang merupakan dasar pendirian bagi Mahkamah Kejahatan Internasional atau International Criminal Court (ICC).

Kasus-kasus pelanggaran HAM dijelaskan Mugiyanto, yang merupakan ketua IKOHI (Ikatan Keluarga Orang Hilang Indonesia) itu, harus selesai karena peristiwa yang dialami para korban berdampak serius dalam kehidupan mereka.
Masalah-masalah itu terjadi pada rusaknya mental, ekonomi hingga fisik para korban. Lantaran melihat kenyataan itulah Mugiyanto mengaku tidaklah adil melihat mereka harus berjuang sendirian, apalagi ia juga pernah merasakan jadi korban penculikan pada tahun 1998.

“Saat ini, saya merasa kalau hidup saya ini adalah hidup yang kedua. Dulu ketika disiksa, lalu mata ditutup, saya merasa sudah mati, tapi ternyata masih hidup. Jadi saya merasa ini merupakan hidup kedua yang harus dijalani dengan sebaik-baiknya. Lagi pula saya merasa dekat dengan keluarga korban, seperti mbak Sipon,” begitu pria yang dulu menempuh pendidikan sastra Inggris di Univesitas Gajah Mada (UGM) angkatan tahun 1992 itu.

Mugiyanto mengaku berjuang bersama IKOHI memang tidak ada keuntungan material. Meski begitu ia juga tak tertarik masuk dunia politik mengikuti jejak beberapa teman seperjuangannya di tahun 1998. Ia mau berjuang karena merasa kadung dekat dengan mereka, para korban.

“Saya ini tidak punya mimpi mewah-mewah. Saya ini berasal dari keluarga desa yang sederhana. Bapak sejak dulu mengajarkan kesederhanaan. Bapak yang dulu bekerja sebagai mandor perkebunan negara di Jepara selalu bilang intinya manusia itu harus berbuat baik untuk sesama,” katanya.

Keterangan:
Artikel ini diterbitkan di Koran Sinar Harapan, Sabtu 18 Mei 2013 atau bisa dilihat di http://shnews.co/detile-19647-tak-lelah-berjuang-bersama-korban-pelanggaran-ham.html

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Reconstructing Historical Memory Resource


Me with Prof. Pilar and Prof. Erin

I am very honored to have taken a part at the workshop for formulating the handbook on historical memory in the University of British Columbia (UBC), Vancouver, Canada whose result can be downloaded here:

http://reconstructinghistoricalmemory.com/

For my participation, I would thank Prof. Pilar Riano-Alcala for this as well as Ms. Mo Bleeker of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland.

I believe this online resource will be a helpful tool in our work for reconstructing historical memory in building democracy, upholding rule of law and ensuring human rights, as well as in creating peace in our post-conflict or post-authoritarian situation.


Listening to the presentation of the participant from Canada.

Friday, April 26, 2013

Penantian Harus Dihentikan*

Oleh Mugiyanto**



Sebulan yang lalu, tepatnya pada hari Rabu, 27 Maret 2013, kami mendapatkan kabar duka, Pak Paimin, 70 tahun, ayahanda dari salah satu korban penghilangan paksa tahun 1997-1998, Suyat, meninggal dunia di rumahnya di sebuah desa kecil di Gemolong, Sragen, Jawa Tengah. Almarhum Pak Paimin meninggal setelah 15 tahun menunggu hasil perjuangan yang dilakukan oleh anaknya yang lain, Suyadi dan Suyadi, dalam mencari kejelasan tentang nasib Suyat yang diambil oleh kelompok bersenjata di kampung sebelah pada Bulan Februari 1998.

Sampai ajal menjemput, Paimin masih belum mendapatkan kabar, apakah anak yang disayanginya masih hidup atau sudah meninggal. Dalam sebuah wawancara dengan harian Kompas (15/9/2009) Almarhum Paimin bersama istrinya Tamiyem pernah menyampaikan harapannya;

”Nek sih waras, ayo mulih. Ne wis ora ana, kuburane nengdi? (Kalau masih hidup, ayo pulang. Kalau sudah meninggal, di mana kuburannya),” kata Tamiyem.

”Nek dipenjara, nengdi (kalau dipenjara di mana),” tambah Paimin sambil mengisap rokok dalam-dalam dengan mata menerawang. Perasaan sedih, kesal, marah, dan tak berdaya tergambar di wajah keduanya.

Almarhum Paimin juga pernah memelihara kambing beberapa tahun yang lalu. Keluarga merencanakan untuk memotong kambing tersebut bila Suyat kembali pulang. Namun karena Suyat belum pulang juga setelah ditunggu beberapa tahun, kambing itu pun akhirnya dijual untuk menutupi kebutuhan sehari hari.

Pak Paimin bukan satu-satunya orang tua korban penghilangan paksa aktifis tahun 1997-1998 yang meninggal sebelum mereka mengetahui kabar anak-anak mereka. Sebelumnya, Ayahanda Yadin Muhidin telah meninggal di Jakarta (2003). Ayahanda Herman Hendrawan meninggal di Bangka (2004). Ayahanda Wiji Thukul meninggal di Solo (2006). Ayahanda Noval Alkatiri meninggal di Jakarta (2004). Ibunda Yani Afri meninggal di Jakarta (2012), dan terakhir Pak Paimin, ayahanda Suyat meninggal di Sragen (2013). Mereka semua meninggal dunia akibat sakit yang kami duga berhubungan dengan tekanan fisik dan mental akibat kehilangan orang-orang yang mereka cintai. Tetapi yang jelas, mereka semua meninggal sebelum bisa menikmati hak-hak mereka atas kebenaran, keadilan dan pemulihan yang menjadi tanggung jawab Negara, khususnya pemerintah untuk memenuhinya.

Angin segar telah bertiup sejak September 2009 ketika Ketua DPR mengirimkan surat rekomendasi hasil sidang paripurna DPR mengenai kasus Penculikagarn dan Penghilangan Paksa Aktifis tahun 1997-1998 kepada Presiden. Empat (4) rekomendasi tersebut adalah; 1) Agar Presiden membentuk Pengadilan HAM Ad Hoc; 2) Agar Presiden beserta instansi terkait mencari 13 aktifis yang masih hilang; 3) Agar pemerintah memberikan kompensasi dan rehabilitasi kepada keluarga korban; 4) Agar pemerintah meratifikasi Konvensi Internasional Anti Penghilangan Paksa.

Sejak saat itu, berbagai wacana terus dimunculkan oleh pemerintah, mulai dari wacana pemberian lapangan pekerjaan kepada para korban, kemudian wacana permintaan maaf dan yang terakhir adalah pernyataan yang disampaikan oleh anggota Dewan Pertimbangan Presiden Albert Hasibuan bahwa Presiden SBY telah memerintahkan kementerian dan lembaga terkait untuk mempersiapkan pembentukan pengadilan HAM Ad Hoc untuk kasus 1998. Namun sayangnya harapan itu pupus kembali ketika Menkopolhukam Djoko Suyanto yang mengatakan bahwa Pengadilan HAM Ad Hoc masih belum bisa dibentuk, karena menunggu kelengkapan penyelidikan (Kompas, 28/3/2013)

Tidak kali ini saja harapan para korban dipupuskan oleh pejabat pemerintah. Sebelumnya, para korban juga telah dikecewakan oleh “permainan pingpong” Komnas HAM, Kejaksaan Agung dan DPR dengan “bola” berkas penyelidikan dugaan berbagai pelanggaran berat HAM. Akibat “permainan pingpong” inilah, setidaknya 6 berkas kasus dugaan pelanggaran berat HAM kini tertumpuk di meja Jaksa Agung. “Bola pingpong” menjadi “bola panas” dan tak ada yang berani menyentuh, apalagi menendangnya.

Mandegnya penyelesaian kasus ini sebenarnya bisa diatasi oleh kebijaksanaan (wisdom) dan ketegasan (firmness) Presiden SBY. Pasal 28I Ayat 4 UUD 1945 yang menyebutkan bahwa Negara, khususnya Pemerintah memiliki tanggung jawab atas perlindungan, pemajuan, penegakan dan pemenuhan HAM. Selanjutnya UU No 26 tahun 2000 tentang Pengadilan HAM pada Pasal 43 Ayat 2 disebutkan bahwa Pengadilan HAM Ad Hoc dibentuk atas usulan DPR dengan Keputusan Presiden. Dengan demikian, memang tak terbantahkan bahwa Presiden lah pemegang kunci penanganan dan penyelesaian kasus Penghilangan Paksa Aktifis 1997-1998.

Dimulai dari yang kecil
Dalam sebuah talkshow di stasiun Metro TV pada hari Jumat, 22/3/2013, Menkopolhukam Djoko Suyanto menjelaskan bahwa ia memang ditugaskan Presiden SBY untuk menyusun kebijakan penyelesaian pelanggaran berat HAM masa lalu secara menyeluruh. Karenanya Menkopolhukam mengatakan bahwa pemerintah tidak akan menangani kasus per kasus, yang karenanya pemerintah tidak akan mengelar Pengadilan HAM Ad Hoc untuk kasus Penculikan dan Penghilangan Paksa Aktifis 1997-1998.

Menurut saya, penyelesaian secara menyeluruh tidak bisa dilakukan tanpa memulainya dengan hal yang kecil, atau sebagian. Dengan rekomendasi dari lembaga tinggi Negara yaitu DPR pada tahun 2009, kasus Penculikan dan Penghilangan Paksa Aktifis 1997-1998 bisa menjadi awal menuju penyelesaian menyeluruh yang diakan dilakukan oleh Pemerintahan SBY sebelum masa kerjanya habis.

Penyelesaian kasus ini sudah terlalu lama dinanti oleh keluarga korban. Waktu 15 tahun seharusnya bisa digunakan oleh keluarga korban secara maksimal untuk mengembangkan diri sebagai individu dan berkontribusi pada kehidupan sosial sebagai warga masyarakat. Hal yang sama juga terjadi pada tataran negara. Seandainya berbagai kasus pelanggaran berat HAM ini telah bisa diselesaikan secepatnya, pada awal masa reformasi, sebagai bangsa tentu kita telah bisa maju, mencapai tujuan negara sebagaimana diamanatkan dalam mukadimmah UUD 1945. Beban sejarah bangsa ini harus segera diselesaikan.

Berbeda dengan bayang-bayang menakutkan yang direka-reka para aparat negara, atau mereka yang merasa terlibat atau dilibatkan dalam dugaan kasus pelanggaran berat HAM ini, harapan dan keinginan keluarga korban Penghilangan Paksa Aktifis 1997-1998 sebenarnya sangat sederhana. Mereka pertama-tama, dan terutama ingin mendapatkan kejelasan status anak-anak atau suami mereka yang menjadi korban penghilangan paksa. Mereka telah bersiap menerima kabar apapun dari negara. Bila jawaban ini mereka dapatkan, lebih dari separuh beban penderitaan mereka akan terobati.

Gambaran tentang Pengadilan HAM masih terlampau buram dalam harapan para keluarga korban yang masih hidup dalam tekanan. Namun mereka tetap memiliki keyakinan bahwa karena Indonesia adalah negara hukum, maka hukum harus ditegakkan.

Ibu Tuti Koto, Ibunda salah satu korban penghilangan paksa 1997 Yani Afri, yang pernah ditemui Presiden SBY di Istana Presiden telah meninggal dunia 5 November tahun lalu, sebelum mendapatkan realisasi janji Presiden. Beberapa waktu yang lalu (27/3/2013), Pak Paimin, ayahanda Suyat juga meninggal, sebelum mendapatkan kabar kepastian. Bapak Presiden SBY, berapa banyak lagi keluarga korban penghilangan paksa harus meninggal. Berapa lama lagi keluarga korban akan harus menunggu?

Penderitaan keluarga korban menjadi semakin bertambah saat melihat mereka yang diduga pelaku penculikan aktivis ini muncul di TV-TV dan berapi-api memberi janji-janji semu tentang keadilan dan kesejahteraan rakyat. Penantian ini harus dihentikan. Keluarga korban berhak mendapatkan keadilan.

Keterangan:
* Tulisan ini dimuat di Koran Sinar Harapan 25 April 2013, bisa di akses di http://cetak.shnews.co/web/read/2013-04-25/11252/penantian.harus.dihentikan#.UXomjEqyOSq

** Mugiyanto adalah penyintas penculikan aktifis pro demokrasi 1998, sekarang Ketua Ikatan Keluarga Orang Hilang Indonesia (IKOHI)



Monday, April 15, 2013

Laporan Khusus BBC Indonesia

Mugiyanto mencari keadilan
Terbaru 15 April 2013 - 15:50 WIB

Lihat sumber: http://www.bbc.co.uk/indonesia/laporan_khusus/2013/04/130415_tokoh_mugiyanto.shtml

Mugiyanto, salah-seorang korban penculikan Tim Mawar Kopassus di tahun 1998, memilih mendampingi keluarga korban penculikan demi mencari keadilan.

Lima belas tahun silam, tepatnya di sebuah petang nan muram, 13 Maret 1998, Mugiyanto diculik oleh beberapa orang dari rumah kontrakannya di Jakarta Timur.

Ketika itu situasi politik Indonesia memasuki fase genting, tatkala tuntutan mahasiswa dan kekuatan oposisi agar Presiden Suharto turun dari kursi dari kursi kekuasaan, makin menguat.

Di saat itulah, bersama sejumlah rekannya sesama aktivis Partai Rakyat Demokratik, PRD, pria kelahiran 1973 ini diambil secara paksa oleh sekelompok orang -- yang belakangan diketahui pelakunya adalah anggota pasukan elit Angkatan Darat, Kopassus, melalui tim kecil yang disebut Tim Mawar…

Mugiyanto (kiri), Aan Rusdianto dan Nezar Patria, tiga aktivis PRD, menggelar jumpa pers di kantor YLBHI, 1998, beberapa pekan setelah dibebaskan.

Digelandang dengan mata tertutup ke sebuah tempat (di markas Kopassus, Cijantung, Jakarta Timur), Mugi – demikian sapaan akrabnya -- dan sebagian kawan-kawannya, lantas disiksa, diteror, serta diinterogasi…

Mugiyanto (yang ketika itu berstatus mahasiswa Fakultas Sastra, UGM, Yogyakarta, dan berusia 25 tahun) dan lima aktivis PRD lainnya termasuk beruntung, karena kemudian dia berhasil dilepaskan, tetapi tidak bagi 13 aktivis lainnya -- yang nasibnya belum jelas sampai sekarang.

Sekitar dua tahun setelah dibebaskan, dan masih dihantui semacam trauma, Mugi justru “terpanggil” untuk bergabung dengan keluarga korban penculikan, demi mencari keadilan.

"Dalam beberapa hal, saya merasa ini hidup kedua saya,” kata Mugi agak menerawang, menjelaskan latar belakang pilihannya itu, dalam wawancara khusus dengan wartawan BBC Indonesia, Heyder Affan, Selasa, 26 Maret 2013 lalu.

“Karena,” lanjutnya, “saya pernah berada dalam situasi di mana hidup dan mati itu batasnya sangat tipis”.

"Dalam beberapa hal, saya merasa ini hidup kedua saya. Karena, saya pernah berada dalam situasi di mana hidup dan mati itu batasnya sangat tipis..."

“Ya, sebagai rasa bersyukur bahwa saya adalah orang yang beruntung (karena masih hidup), maka membuat saya kemudian untuk bersama dengan mereka (keluarga korban penculikan).”

Melibatkan keluarga orang hilang dan didukung pegiat HAM lainnya, Mugi mendirikan Ikatan Keluarga Orang Hilang Indonesia (Ikohi), untuk mengetahui keberadaan mereka yang masih hilang (“Setidaknya, kalau mereka meninggal, dimana mereka dikuburkan,” kata Mugi), serta mendesak diberikannya hukuman setimpal kepada pelaku utamanya.

“Saya menjadi seperti terpanggil setelah melihat bahwa keluarga korban masih semangat, dan menginginkan keadilan ditegakkan”, Mugi lebih lanjut menjelaskan.

Hal ini dia lakukan juga tidak terlepas dari sikap politisi di parlemen, yang menurutnya, “sama sekali tidak ada komitmen terhadap penegakan HAM terhadap penyelesaian kasus ini, padahal mereka adalah orang-orang yang menikmati buah perjuangan kawan-kawan yang hilang”.
Bunyi ‘ctak,ctak’

Apa yang terjadi di ruangan penyiksaan di salah-satu ruangan di Markas Kopassus Cijantung, yang terjadi lima belas tahun silam, masih menyentak alam sadar Mugiyanto -- hingga saat ini.

(Dalam situs pribadinya, Mugiyanto menggambarkan suasana penyiksaan yang dialaminya: “Mata ditutup, dua tangan dan dua kaki diikat di tempat tidur velbed. Hanya memakai celana dalam. Di sana ada suara sirine yang meraung-raung, suhu ruangan yang sangat dingin, dan alat setrum listrik yang bunyinya seperti cambuk…)

Selama dua hari, 13-15 Maret 1998, Mugiyanto mengaku disekap, diinterogasi, dan disiksa.

“Sampai sekarang, bisa dikatakan saya belum bisa sepenuhnya menghilangkan trauma,” aku Mugi, dengan nada datar.

Tak gampang untuk menghilangkan trauma, katanya.

“Prosesnya memang lama, memang butuh waktu”.

"Terutama ketika saya mendengar seperti cambuk, yang mana itu adalah suara setrum listrik: ctak, ctak, ctak…Saya setiap mendengar suara itu, langsung teringat masa lalu... "

“Terutama ketika saya mendengar seperti cambuk, yang mana itu adalah suara setrum listrik.

“Ctak, ctak, ctak…”

“Saya setiap mendengar suara itu, langsung teringat masa lalu, ” ujar Mugi.

“Sama mendengar handi talkie, karena itu alat komunikasi yang dipakai orang yang menculik saya pada waktu itu, ketika mata saya ditutup”.

(“Rumah kontrakan saya sudah dikepung. Badan saya melemas. Saya sudah membayangkan kematian. Lalu dengan tenaga tersisa, saya raih saklar untuk mematikan lampu. Persis pada saat itulah mereka menggedor rumah. “Buka pintu! Buka pintu!”. Kunci pintu kubuka, lalu sekitar 10 orang masuk…”)
Melawan trauma

Sempat diinterogasi di Koramil Duren Sawit Jakarta Timur, Mugi kemudian dibawa ke Markas Kopassus Cijantung.

Selama dua hari, di tempat itu, Mugi ditempatkan satu sel dengan aktivis PRD Nezar Patria dan Aan Rusdiyanto.

Walaupun matanya ditutup rapat, pria asal Jepara ini mampu mengenali suara dua rekannya itu.

Kepada wartawan BBC Indonesia, Heyder Affan, Mugiyanto menjelaskan langkah-langkahnya menghilangkan trauma.

(Dalam kesaksiannya, di kantor YLBHI, 20 Juni 1998, yang saya hadiri, Mugiyanto menuliskannya kesaksiannya: “Ada juga sarana siksa yang sangat mengerikan, para penculik sengaja memperdengarkan suara jeritan orang lain yang sedang disiksa…”)

“Saya tahu dari teriakannya waktu disiksa,” katanya, suatu saat.

Bagaimana Anda bisa ‘kuat’ kembali, dan kemudian memilih terjun total bersama keluarga korban penculikan untuk mencari keadilan? Tanya saya.

“Cara saya menghadapi trauma,” ungkapnya, “bukan dengan menjauhi dunia ini, dari dunia hak asasi manusia, dari para korban”.

“Tapi,” imbuhnya, dengan nada lantang,” saya mengintegrasikan diri saya bersama-sama dengan mereka”.

“Saya menulis, saya berbicara, saya bercerita, itu proses dari penyembuhan psikologi saya,” ungkap Mugi.

(“Saya menuliskan lagi cerita ini dengan jantung berdebar. Saya berusaha melawan trauma, walau sulit. Amat sulit. Saya tidak bisa melupakannya. Saya hanya bisa mengelolanya dan menyimpan memori ini untuk dijadikan energi hidup yang positif,” tulis Mugi dalam situs pribadinya.)
Peradilan HAM adhoc

Upaya pengungkapan kasus penculikan terhadap aktivis pada periode 1997 dan 1998, belum seperti yang diharapkan, demikian kesimpulan para pegiat HAM.

"Ada juga sarana siksa yang sangat mengerikan, para penculik sengaja memperdengarkan suara jeritan orang lain yang sedang disiksa…"

Para pegiat HAM menyatakan, setidaknya masih ada 13 orang aktivis yang diculik pada periode itu yang masih belum jelas nasibnya.

Pelaku utama yang diduga bertanggungjawab dalam kasus penculikan juga dianggap belum tersentuh sama-sekali.

Tuntutan pembentukan Peradilan HAM adhoc untuk mengungkap kasus-kasus kekerasan tidak juga direalisasikan oleh pemerintah, sementara Komisi Kebenaran dan Rekonsiliasi yang semula diharapkan kini menguap begitu saja.

Tetapi, harapan Mugiyanto dan keluarga korban penculikan sempat berbinar, ketika terdengar sayup-sayup bahwa Presiden SBY menyetujui pembentukan Pengadilan HAM adhoc kasus penculikan 1997-1998.

Isyarat ini ditangkap oleh Dewan Pertimbangan Presiden, Albert Hasibuan, Selasa, 19 Maret 2013 lalu, yang kemudian dia utarakan kepada media.

“Waktu itu presiden mengatakan diadakan persiapan-persiapan pada para menteri untuk mendirikan pengadilan HAM ad hoc," kata Albert.

Para aktivis HAM menuntut pelaku utama penculikan diadili melalui peradilan HAM adhoc.

Informasi penting ini, tentu saja, agak melegakan Mugiyanto, ketika kali pertama mendengarnya.

“Kami sudah senang, dan mengharap itu direalisasikan,” kata Mugi, yang masih dipercaya sebagai Ketua IKOHI, Ikatan Keluarga Orang Hilang Indonesia.

Belakangan, informasi itu dibantah oleh Menteri Koordinator Politik dan Keamanan Djoko Suyanto. Dia mengatakan, Albert Hasibuan salah menafsirkan pernyataan Presiden.

Menurutnya, Presiden SBY meminta agar kasus dugaan pelanggaran HAM masa lalu diselesaikan secara komprehensif, secara total dan keseluruhan.

Djoko Suyanto juga menyatakan, peradilan HAM adhoc belum bisa digelar, karena Komnas HAM menurutnya belum menyebut siapa pihak yang bertanggungjawab.

“Bukan hanya institusi (yang disebut), melainkan orang… Komnas HAM belum sampai ke situ,” kata Djoko, Kamis, 21 Maret 2013 lalu.
Tidak boleh terulang

Kejaksaan Agung sejauh ini telah berulangkali mengembalikan berkas penyelidikan yang dimajukan Komnas HAM sejak 2006 lalu.

Alasannya, pengadilan HAM ad hoc belum terbentuk dan telah digelarnya pengadilan militer untuk kasus ini (yaitu terhadap 11 orang pelaku lapangan yang tergabung dalam Tim Mawar, yang merupakan tim kecil bentukan Kopassus, TNI Angkatan Darat).

Hasil penyelidikan Komnas HAM, yang digelar sekitar enam tahun silam (2005-2006), menyatakan, sudah ada bukti permulaan yang cukup untuk menyimpulkan terjadinya kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan.

Mugiyanto menyatakan, peradilan HAM adhoc penting digelar agar siapapun yang berkuasa, tidak boleh mentolerir tindakan menghilangkan orang secara paksa.

Ketua Komnas HAM saat itu, Abdul Hakim Garuda Nusantara menyatakan, ada bukti permulaan pelanggaran HAM berat dalam kasus penculikan aktivis 1997-1998.

Menindaklanjuti rekomendasi Komnas HAM ini, DPR pada September 2009 kemudian meminta Presiden Yudhoyono memerintahkan Jaksa Agung melakukan penyelidikan atas kasus ini.

Menurut Mugi, apa yang dilakukan Komnas HAM dan sikap DPR ini merupakan upaya kemajuan dalam penyelidikan kasus penculikan.

Tetapi, menurutnya, “kemajuan-kemajuan tersebut tidak kemudian ‘ditutup’, tidak kemudian disimpulkan oleh pemerintahan SBY”.

“Padahal,” lanjutnya, “ini tinggal sedikit (langkah penuntasannya).”

“Sehingga sekarang semua menjadi menggantung,” kata Mugi, agak masygul.

Tetapi, apa pentingnya pembentukan peradilan HAM adhoc ini? Tanya saya lagi.

Dengan nada tegas, Mugi menyatakan, peradilan ini sangatlah penting.

“Peradilan HAM adhoc itu hanyalah salah-satu cara yang seharusnya diambil pemerintah, tetapi dia sangat penting,” tegas Mugiyanto, yang kini meneruskan kuliah di Universitas Kristen Indonesia, UKI.

“Selain memberi punishment (hukuman) kepada para pelaku dan mereka yang bertanggungjawab, adalah juga untuk memberi pesan kepada masyarakat Indonesia, kepada siapapun yang berkuasa ke depan, bahwa tindakan menghilangkan orang secara paksa, itu tidak boleh ditolerir, tidak boleh terulang,” tandasnya.
Diselidiki bertahap

“Tapi dia (pengadilan HAM adhoc) bukan satu-satunya jalan,” imbuh Mugi cepat-cepat.

Menurutnya, ada cara lain yang juga harus dilakukan untuk melengkapi proses peradilan.

"Tapi dia (pengadilan HAM adhoc) bukan satu-satunya jalan. Kita mengenalnya sebagai mekanisme non judicial. Jadi korban menjadi perhatian utama untuk didengarkan keterangannya, untuk dipulihkan hak-haknya..."

“Kita mengenalnya sebagai mekanisme non judicial,” katanya.

Inilah Komisi Kebenaran, kata Mugi, yang dipusatkan kepada para korban.

“Jadi korban menjadi perhatian utama untuk didengarkan keterangannya, untuk dipulihkan hak-haknya, dan sebagainya,” kata pria kelahiran Jepara, Jawa Tengah, ini.

Faktanya sekarang, peradilan HAM adhoc belum dibentuk dan Komisi Kebenaran tidak jelas rimbanya, menyusul keputusan MK yang membatalkannya? Tanya saya.

“Sampai saat ini memang jalan di tempat,” aku Mugi, menyusul keputusan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang membatalkan Undang-undang Komisi Kebenaran dan Rekonsiliasi.

Sejauh ini, pemerintah dan DPR sejauh ini belum menyiapkan UU KKR yang baru, walaupun dua tahun silam, draf RUU yang baru telah diserahkan ke Sekretariat Negara, japada pertengahan September 2010 lalu.

Namun demikian, menurut Mugi, penyelesaian kasus penghilangan paksa aktivis 1997-1998 “bisa dilakukan secara bertahap”.

“Mulai dari apa yang paling diharapkan oleh keluarga korban, (yaitu) supaya mereka mengetahui apakah orang-orang yang mereka kasihi, anak-anak mereka sayangi, suami mereka, masih hidup atau sudah meninggal. Mereka ingin kepastian itu,” tegasnya.
Saling menguatkan

Bagaimanapun, Mugi, IKOHI dan lembaga lain seperti Kontras, terus melakukan berbagai upaya untuk mendesak agar kasus penculikan aktivis 1997-1998 dituntaskan.

Selain berupa aksi-aksi unjuk rasa di depan Istana Merdeka ( melalui “Aksi Kamisan”), Mugi dan kawan-kawan juga melakukan berbagai upaya melalui lobi di DPR (yang pernah membuahkan rekomendasi DPR agar pemerintah menyelesaikan kasus penculikan, pada 2009 lalu) hingga kampanye di luar negeri.

Keluarga korban kasus penculikan terus menjalin kontak untuk saling menguatkan.

Ke depan, menurutnya, pihaknya juga terus melakukan komunikasi dengan Menkopolhukam, dan orang-orang di sekitar Presiden SBY.

“Kalau kami tidak bisa bertemu Presiden SBY,kami akan temui orang-orang dekatnya,” katanya dalam sebuah wawancara.

Tetapi, bagaimana Anda dan keluarga korban bisa mampu menjaga energi, sehingga mampu menjaga stamina untuk terus mendesak penyelesaian kasus ini?

"Karena, dari saling menguatkan, timbul semangat atau pengetahuan kesadaran bahwa kita tidak sendiri, bahwa yang menjadi korban tidak sendiri, dan karena yang menjadi korban tidak sendiri, maka yang berjuang tidak sendiri..."

Rupanya, semenjak mereka mendirikan IKOHI sekitar olima belas tahun silam, diantara keluarga korban kasus penculikan, melakukan apa yang disebut Mugiyanto sebagai upaya “saling menguatkan”.

“Ya , karena dengan kata menguatkan itulah, yang kemudian melandas berdirinya IKOHI,” kata Mugi, yang baru saja dikaruniai anak kedua, Minggu, 14 April 2013 lalu.

“Karena,” kata Mugi, “dari saling menguatkan, timbul semangat atau pengetahuan kesadaran bahwa kita tidak sendiri, bahwa yang menjadi korban tidak sendiri, dan karena yang menjadi korban tidak sendiri, maka yang berjuang tidak sendiri.”

Menurut Mugi, salah-satu cara paling sederhana yang terus dilakukan adalah “bertelepon dan berkirim surat”.

“Itu menjadi elemen yang luar biasa untuk menguatkan korban,” ungkap Mugi yang mengaku hobi berkebun di halaman depan rumahnya.
Didukung keluarga

Secara khusus Mugi menyebut ayah dan ibunya, sebagai dua sosok penting dalam perjalanan hidupnya.

“Mereka dua orang yang luar biasa, yang mendukung apa yang saya lakukan selama ini,” ungkapnya.

Dia kemudian mengungkapkan sebuah momen tidak terlupakan, yaitu ketika ayahnya menemuinya di tahanan Polda Metro Jaya, setelah kelompok penculiknya menyerahkannya kepada aparat kepolisian.

Mugiyanto mengaku, kedua orang tuanya, istri dan anaknya, merupakan orang-orang luar biasa dalam perjalanan hidupnya.

Dia mengaku, saat itu merasakan kesedihan luar biasa, saat ayahnya dan kakaknya menjenguknya di ruang tahanan.

Sang ayah, menurutnya, tetap mendukung apa yang dilakukannya.

Restu orang tua ini pula yang menjadi pendorongnya untuk tetap yakin atas pilihan perjuangannya.

Mugiyanto kemudian menyebut istrinya, Mutiara Taripar Pulo, serta anak pertamanya, Binar Mentari Malahayati, sebagai dua orang yang mampu membuatnya tetap bersemangat dalam memperjuangkan korban kasus penculikan.

“Anak saya, masih berusia 12 tahun, tapi dia inspirasi luar biasa buat saya,” ungkap Mugi, seraya menambahkan bahwa anaknya mengetahui bahwa dirinya pernah menjadi korban penculikan.

“Dan dia bangga,” tambah Mugi. “Dia bercerita kepada teman-teman sekolahnya”.

Dia memberikan sebuah contoh, ketika anaknya ikut membagikan buku yang diterbitkan IKOHI seputar kasus penculikan, kepada teman-temannya.

“Bagaimana dia dengan bangga membagikan buku itu kepada teman-temannya,” kata Mugi, yang saat ini berambisi menulis buku tentang apa yang pernah dia alami.

“Itu menurut saya, juga sumber dari kekuatan, motivasi yang saya dapatkan dari orang-orang terdekat saya,” papar Mugi.
Mau memaafkan?

“Saya bisa memaafkan, tapi ada syaratnya,” kata Mugiyanto, ketika saya tanya, apakah suatu saat dia dapat memaafkan pelaku utama penculikan atas dirinya?

“Syarat-syaratnya, tentu saja, dia harus mengakui bersalah,” tegasnya.

“Tapi ini secara personal”, katanya, menambahkan cepat-cepat.

"Ya mengakui bahwa itu tindakan yang salah, kemudian minta maaf, kemudian dia harus memperjelas mengapa dia melakukan itu...Dan lebih dari itu, bagaimana dengan orang-orang yang saat itu bersama saya (yang kemudian tidak kembali), itu ada di mana?"

“Kalau secara publik, lain lagi ya”.

Menurutnya, aksi penculikan yang kemudian disertai penyiksaan atas dirinya, merupakan tindakan kejahatan yang di luar batas-batas kemanusiaan.

“Tetapi toh sebagai pribadi, saya masih membuka pintu permaafan, tapi dengan syarat-syaratnya,” tandasnya.

“Ya mengakui bahwa itu tindakan yang salah, kemudian minta maaf, kemudian dia harus memperjelas mengapa dia melakukan itu.

“Dan lebih dari itu,” tambahnya, “bagaimana dengan orang-orang yang saat itu bersama saya (yang kemudian tidak kembali), itu ada di mana?”

“Setelah semuanya clear, saya pikir secara personal, saya bisa memaafkan,” tegas Mugi, yang mengaku belakangan membaca sejumlah buku karya Michael Sandel, ahli filsafat politik dan guru besar di Universitas Harvard, AS.

Menanggapi sejumlah korban penculikan yang memilih terjun ke politik dan bergabung dengan partai politik yang didirikan mantan jenderal yang diduga terlibat penculikan, Mugiyanto mengaku “kecewa”.

“Apa yang saya terima dari senior-senior kami, itu bukan yang seperti itu, bukan yang kemudian berpihak pada orang yang melakukan kekerasan kepada kami, bukan orang yang melakukan tindakan represi kepada kami,” jelasnya.

“Tapi kemudian, saya lebih reseptif, bahwa ‘ya sudah memang itulah pilihan dia',” kata Mugiyanto, yang mengisi waktu luangnya antara lain dengan menonton Liga Primer Inggris.

"Saya penggemar berat Liverpool..., " ujarnya seraya tertawa, sekaligus menutup wawancara yang berlangsung sore di kantor BBC Jakarta.

Wednesday, April 03, 2013

BBC Indonesia: Perjalanan Mugiyanto dalam berjuang mencari keadilan bagi para korban penculikan 1998

Wawancara Tokoh dengan BBC Indonesia
http://www.bbc.co.uk/indonesia/multimedia/2013/03/130329_audio_tokoh_mugiyanto1.shtml

Friday, March 08, 2013

Mereka bertanya, "Di mana anak kami?"

Wawancara khusus soal penghilangan paksa: "Mereka bertanya: di mana anak kami?"
Diperbaharui 4 March 2013, 18:00 AEST


Pemerintah dan DPR pekan ini bertemu membahas rekomendasi DPR terkait kasus penghilangan paksa yang terjadi pada awal Reformasi 1997-98, di mana 3 orang masih dinyatakan hilang dalam kasus itu. Namun hasil kesepakatan keduanya akan mengembalikan hasil penyelidikan ke Komnas HAM dan menunggu koordinasi dengan Jaksa Agung. Apa pendapat aktivis yang pernah diculik pada masa itu dan suara dari keluarga korban? Radio Australia melakukan wawancara khusus dengan Direktur Ikatan Korban Orang Hilang yang juga pernah diculik, Mugiyanto Sipin.

RA: Mas Mugiyanto, Bagaimana tanggapan Anda sebagai korban penculikan atas pernyataan Pemerintah dan DPR yang hendak mengembalikan kasus penghilangan paksa ke Komnas HAM?

Mugiyanto: Terus terang saya kaget dengan perkembangan terakhir. Kenapa kaget? Karena kasus ini sebetulnya proses penyelesaiannya sudah cukup maju setelah pada 2009 DPR sudah memberikan 4 rekomendasi kepada Pemerintah, yaitu untuk membentuk Pengadilan HAM, mencari 13 orang yang masih hilang, merehabilitasi dan kompensasi pada keluarga korban dan meratifikasi Konvensi Penghilangan Paksa.

Tetapi apa yang terjadi pada pekan ini, sebagai hasil rapat antar pimpinan DPR dan Pemerintah, membuat kecewa dan kemunduran luar biasa.

Yang membuat saya heran, kok DPR malah menyetujui sikap dari Pemerintah untuk mengembalikan berkas ke Komnas HAM. Bukankah DPR yang merekomendasi hal itu?

Dari pertemuan itu kelihatan betul DPR disetir oleh Pemerintah, seperti yang terjadi pada masa Orde Baru di bawah Soeharto. DPR hanya jadi rubber stamp Presiden Soeharto pada waktu itu.

Saya mencurigai ini adalah ekspresi politik Pemerintahan SBY yang masih denial terhadap kasus pelanggaran HAM untuk menjalankan tanggung jawabnya menyelesaikan kasus penghilangan paksa dengan tidak membentuk Pengadilan Ham, tetapi malah mengembalikan kasusnya ke Komnas Ham.

RA: Anda melihat ada motif apa di balik sikap Pemerintah dan Parlemen?

Mugiyanto: Saya curiga ini digunakan sebagai komoditas politik untuk kontestasi Pemilu 2014, jadi mereka tarik-ulur di sini.

Tapi sikap kami sebagai korban dan keluarga korban, kami inginnya tak peduli untuk kepentingan apa. Mau kami kasus ini diselesaikan, dalam hal kebenarannya diungkap, pelaku diminta bertanggung jawab, keluarga korban diminta kompensasi dan rehabilitasi yang memang hak-nya dan Pemerintah membuat serangkaian kebijakan agar peristiwa serupa tidak terjadi lagi.

Kalau itu dilaksanakan, menurut saya, Presiden SBY kan mendapat kredit yang baik dan meninggalkan warisan yang luar biasa bagusnya dalam penegakan HAM

Cara Pemerintah yang dilakukan saat ini dengan mengembalikan kasus ini ke Komnas HAM untuk menyelidiki untuk menentukan siapa tersangka, siapa korban dan di mana korbannya itu membodohi.

Bukankah sudah jelas, bahwa mandat dan wewenang Komnas HAM sesuai Undang Undang 39 tahun 1999, kalau yang diinginkan Pemerintah untuk mengidetifikasi siapa tersangkanya, itu bukan tanggung jawab Komnas Ham, tapi itu tanggung jawab penyidikan yaitu Jaksa Agung.

Menurut saya itu sudah cukup untuk Jaksa Agung melakukan penyidikan.

RA: Seberapa besar arti Pengadilan HAM buat korban dan keluarga korban?

Mugiyanto: Pada hari ini keluarga korban menganggap Pengadilan HAM itu tidak sepenting kebutuhan dan keinginan keluarga korban untuk mengetahui nasib keberadaan mereka yang masih hilang.

Saya sempat bertanya sama mereka, Kata yang muncul pertama dari mereka itu bukan “diadili saja mereka para pelaku.”

Tapi yang muncul dari mereka bertanya di mana anak kami, suami kami dan orang-orang yang kami kasihi itu? Kalau mereka masih hidup ada di mana? Kalau mereka sudah meninggal, kuburannya di mana? Dan itu kan ada di salah satu point rekomendasi DPR, Itu harapan dari keluarga korban yang harus dipenuhi Pemerintah.

Tidak dipungkiri di hati saya dan keluarga korban jika Pengadilan digelar saat ini , saat lembaga peradilan ngga bisa dipercaya, saat pelaku masih dominan, pengadilan malah menjustifikasi dan melegalkan impunitas.

RA: Pesimis atau optimis Pengadilan Ham bisa digelar di Indonesia, atau penemuan keberadaan mereka yang diculik?

Mugiyanto: Kami selalu optimis dan memiliki harapan. Itu terbukti ada capaian dan progress. Salah satunya adalah rekomendasi DPR yang merupakan pengakuan dari Negara terhadap kasus ini.

Kalau Pemerintah belum melakukan rekomendasi, itu soal lain.

Ada kemajuan yang lain, seperti korban sekarang bisa mendapat layanan psiko-sosial dari LPSK, tapi harapan kami bukan penyelesaian parsial seperti itu.

Kami masih ada harapan terakhir, Presiden SBY masih punya waktu beberapa bulan ke depan untuk diganti dengan yang baru supaya meninggalkan warisan yang baik buat penegakan Ham di Indonesia.

RA: Jelang beberapa bulan sebelum pergantian Pemerintahan, apa yang akan dilakukan para korban dan keluarga korban?

Mugiyanto: Kami akan terus mendorong Pemeirntah untuk menjalankan tanggung jawabnya menyelesaikan kasus pelanggaran HAM berat masa lalu sesuai dengan Undang Undang Dasar 45.

Kami akan terus lobi yakinkan lembaga-lembaga yang relevan. Kita akan terus berkomunikasi dengan (Menko Polhukam) Pak Djoko Suyanto dan (Anggota Dewan Pertimbangan Presiden bidang hukum dan HAM) Albert Hasibuan.

Walaupun di dalam hati kami ada kemarahan, tapi kami akan coba kemas itu menjadi sesuatu yang positif untuk dinegosiasikan dengan lembaga lembaga Pemerintah.

Kalau kami tidak bisa bertemu dengan SBY, kami akan temui orang orang dekatnya.

Wawancara khusus Laban Laisila dengan Direktur Ikatan Korban Orang Hilang yang juga pernah diculik, Mugiyanto Sipin. (Credit: ABC) : http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/indonesian/radio/onairhighlights/wawancara-khusus-soal-penghilangan-paksa-mereka-bertanya-di-mana-anak-kami/1-0