IKOHI; Desember 2009 - November 2014
IKOHI menggelar Kongres ke 4 tanggal 12-13 November 2014. Dalam agenda pemilihan pengurus IKOHI 2014-2017, Wanma Yetti (Sebelumnya Sekretaris Jenderal IKOHI, Keluarga Korban Tanjung Priok 1984) dan Zaenal Mutaqqin (Koordinator Program IKOHI) dipilih secara aklamasi menjadi Ketua dan Sekretaris IKOHI. Mereka adalah orang-orang yang diyakini oleh Kongres sebagai pasangan yang paling tepat memimpin IKOHI ke depan. Tantangan pada masa Pemerintahan Jokowi-JK tidak kecil, tapi kami meyakini kemenangan pasti akan bisa diraih oleh korban pelanggaran HAM bersama IKOHI dibawah kepemimpinan Yetti - Jejen.
Bagi saya, Kongres ke 4 tersebut adalah saat dimana saya bisa sedikit menarik napas lega. Sejak 5 tahun lalu, saya sebenarnya sudah ingin menyerahkan kepemimpinan IKOHI ke kawan-kawan yang lain. Tetapi kita semua tahu, tidak semua yang kita butuhkan atau inginkan bisa kita dapatkan.
Terima kasih kepada semua keluarga korban yang telah memberikan dukungan, kritik, arahan dan peringatan sehingga saya bisa menyelesaikan tanggung jawab saya sebagai Ketua IKOHI sebagaimana dimandatkan Kongres ke 3, sejak 10 Desember 2009 sampai 12 November 2014.
Banyak sekali tantangan dan rintangan. Tetapi kami juga sempat merayakan dan mensyukuri keberhasilan yang kami capai yang mungkin tidak semua dari kami bisa merasakan. Saya juga beruntung karena bersama IKOHI dan gerakan HAM secara umum bisa memastikan bahwa pelanggar HAM tidak menjadi Presiden RI saat ini, melalui Pilpres bulan Juli 2014.
Saya selalu ingat dan meegangnya dengan erat, kata-kata yang dijadikan tema pertemuan federasi organisasi korban penghilangan paksa di Amerika Latin, FEDEFAM di Costarica tahun 1981, bahwa duka cita dan penderitaan yang telah kita alami tidak akan pernah sia-sia.... NO HAY DOLOR INUTIL... "There is no useless pain"
Untuk kawan-kawan pengurus IKOHI dan korban pelanggaran HAM, You'll Never Walk Alone! Dan perjuangan terus berlanjut! Aluta Continua!
I was with IKOHI, a national association of victims of human rights violation, and AFAD, an Asian federation of organizations working directly on issues of enforced disappearances, and later with INFID, as Program Director. Currently, I work as an Advisor at the Executive Office of the President of the Republic of Indonesia (KSP). I can be reached at mugiyanto@gmail.com.
Friday, November 21, 2014
Tuesday, August 05, 2014
Cerita Relawan: Nenek; Pilpres dan Jokowi
Disclaimer: Javanese Guidance, karena percakapan menggunakan Bahasa Jawa.
Nenek; Pilpres dan Jokowi
Dikabarkan terdapat ribuan Golput-ers di kawasan perkotaan yang 9 Juli lalu gagal menjadi dirinya. Mereka dikalahan oleh keharusan untuk mencoblos Jokowi agar fasisme, fundamentalisme dan militerisme bisa dicegah untuk kembali menguasai Indonesia.
Di kampungku, sebuah desa kecil di tengah hutan jati dan perkebunan karet di daerah pantura Jawa Tengah, ratusan pengangguran, buruh kebun dan buruh tani juga gagal menjadi #Golput. Kalau selama 25 tahun terakhir mereka bisa tidak peduli pada setiap Pemilu, kali ini tidak. Saat berjumpa mereka minggu lalu, mereka bilang, "Capres nomer siji medeni, Mas. Mengko uwong-uwong do diculik koyo kowe, Mas.. Nik dibalekno si ijik lumayan. Lha nik koyo Wiji Thukul, terus kepiye??!!"
Hebat, orang-orang kebanyakan ini bisa melafalkan nama Wiji Thukul dengan fasih, seperti menyebut nama temannya sendiri. Mereka juga kelihatan tahu betul kasusnya. Kata mereka, mereka sering nonton berita di TV, jadi tahu Wiji Thukul, Jokowi dan Prabowo. "Nanging wong nok kene orak nonton Tivi Wan, Mas. Nontone Metro Tivi, luwih adhem"
Nah, kembali ke hari coblosan 9 Juli. Kakak tertua saya, termasuk orang yang sangat resah dengan Capres No 1. Karena itu, ia memaksa menjadikan dirinya relawan aktif, berkampanye untuk Jokowi di desa kami. Hal yang tak pernah ia lakukan sejak pemilu tahun 77, 82 sampai 2009 yang lalu.
"Jokowi kudu dimenangno, To" begitu ia memanggilku, "To" dari "Yanto". "Indonesia kudu nduwe Presiden sing merakyat, peduli karo wong cilik, tur resik" kata kakakku meyakinkanku mengapa harus memenangkan Jokowi. "Lha nik Prabowo, ben ngadepi Komnas HAM lan Pengadilan HAM wae" saran kakakku. Kakakku yang ini pernah datang ke Jakarta, dan bersama keluarga korban penculikan aktivis yang lain mendatangi Jaksa Agung, minta supaya Jaksa Agung menyidik dan mengadili penculik aktivis. Jadi ia lumayan update dengan kasus penculikan dan keterlibatan Prabowo.
Tanggal 9 Juli pagi hari, kakak saya bergegas mendatangi satu-satunya nenek kami, mungkin orang paling tua di kampong kami, yang kami simpulkan lahir sekitar tahun 1920, yang saat itu sedang menyapu halaman!
Kakak saya bilang, “Mbah, mengko melu nyoblos ya. Nyoblos Jokowi. Nyoblos nomer loro” kata kakakku sambil menunjukkan jari telunjuk dan jari tengahnya pada nenek. “Ojo salah, nomer loro nok sisih tengen”. Kakak saya terus menjelaskan ke nenek sambil agak berteriak, karena pendengaran nenek sudah jauh berkurang. Setelah itu, nenek dengan percaya diri menjawab, “Iyo, mengko tak nyoblos nomer loro”
Sehabis pencoblosan, kakak saya bertanya pada nenek, “Mbah, mau iso nyoblos sing ono nomere loro, to?” Nenek masih diam. “Mau nyoblos Jokowi sing nok sisih tengen, to?” Tanya kakak saya lagi. “Iyo, Nang. Aku yo nyoblos nomer loro, ah…”. “Sing tak coblos mau kok uwonge lemu yo Nang… putih, lemu…” Kakak saya mulai cemas, “Nanging fotone nok sisih tengan, to Mbah?!” “Yo iyo, ah… wonge lemu ngono kok…”. Kakak saya lemas karena yang dicoblos nenek kami orangnya berkulit putih dan gemuk. Padahal, Jokowi tidak gemuk, tidak pula putih, karena ia suka kerja keras, di lapangan… Mungkin nenek kami nyoblos Jusuf Kalla. Mungkin juga, karena ia kelihatan agak gemuk dan juga agak putih di kartu pemilihan itu.
Semoga saja, nenek kami tidak mencoblos orang gemuk dan berkulit putih yang ada di gambar bernomor satu. Tetapi kalaupun nenek kami nyoblos nomer satu, tentu karena ia tak mengerti. Tentu ia tak ada niat nyoblos Prabowo, apalagi memenangkannya jadi Presiden Indonesia. Nenek kami tahu betul, salah satu cucunya pada bulan Maret 1998 pernah diculik, disekap dan disiksa oleh segerombolan orang yang diperintah oleh Prabowo, capres nomor satu itu.
Tetapi kami juga tidak terlalu khawatir dengan nenek kami yang mungkin mencoblos gambar capres yang “gemuk” dan “putih”, karena pada kenyataannya, hasil Pilpres di desa kami memenangkan Jokowi dengan 75% suara. Padahal pada masa Suharto, 99,9 persen hasil setiap pemilu di desa kami selalu dimenangkan oleh Golkar!
Kami tertawa terbahak-bahak mendengar cerita tentang nenek kami, tentang usaha memenangkan Jokowi dalam bingkai besar menjadikan Indonesia yang lebih baik, bukan Indonesia seperti jaman Orde Baru Suharto.
Kami bisa bisa tertawa terbahak-bahak, berkumpul bersama keluarga besar dalam suasana lebaran karena KPU telah mengumumkan Jokowi dan Jusuf Kalla adalah pemenang Pilpres dan karenanya mereka akan menjadi Presiden dan Wakil Presiden kita untuk 5 tahun yang akan datang.
Kalau yang memang adalah Capres #1, entah apa jadinya…
Cerita kami akhiri dengan makan opor ayam, masakan bersama keluarga besar kami di kampung yang hening tapi mulai panas, di desa kecil yang pasti akan digusur paksa pemerintah bila Prabowo – Hatta menang Pilpres, karena desa kami berada dalam radius 10km dari rencana pembangunan PLTN Bukit Muria.
Nenek; Pilpres dan Jokowi
Dikabarkan terdapat ribuan Golput-ers di kawasan perkotaan yang 9 Juli lalu gagal menjadi dirinya. Mereka dikalahan oleh keharusan untuk mencoblos Jokowi agar fasisme, fundamentalisme dan militerisme bisa dicegah untuk kembali menguasai Indonesia.
Di kampungku, sebuah desa kecil di tengah hutan jati dan perkebunan karet di daerah pantura Jawa Tengah, ratusan pengangguran, buruh kebun dan buruh tani juga gagal menjadi #Golput. Kalau selama 25 tahun terakhir mereka bisa tidak peduli pada setiap Pemilu, kali ini tidak. Saat berjumpa mereka minggu lalu, mereka bilang, "Capres nomer siji medeni, Mas. Mengko uwong-uwong do diculik koyo kowe, Mas.. Nik dibalekno si ijik lumayan. Lha nik koyo Wiji Thukul, terus kepiye??!!"
Hebat, orang-orang kebanyakan ini bisa melafalkan nama Wiji Thukul dengan fasih, seperti menyebut nama temannya sendiri. Mereka juga kelihatan tahu betul kasusnya. Kata mereka, mereka sering nonton berita di TV, jadi tahu Wiji Thukul, Jokowi dan Prabowo. "Nanging wong nok kene orak nonton Tivi Wan, Mas. Nontone Metro Tivi, luwih adhem"
Nah, kembali ke hari coblosan 9 Juli. Kakak tertua saya, termasuk orang yang sangat resah dengan Capres No 1. Karena itu, ia memaksa menjadikan dirinya relawan aktif, berkampanye untuk Jokowi di desa kami. Hal yang tak pernah ia lakukan sejak pemilu tahun 77, 82 sampai 2009 yang lalu.
"Jokowi kudu dimenangno, To" begitu ia memanggilku, "To" dari "Yanto". "Indonesia kudu nduwe Presiden sing merakyat, peduli karo wong cilik, tur resik" kata kakakku meyakinkanku mengapa harus memenangkan Jokowi. "Lha nik Prabowo, ben ngadepi Komnas HAM lan Pengadilan HAM wae" saran kakakku. Kakakku yang ini pernah datang ke Jakarta, dan bersama keluarga korban penculikan aktivis yang lain mendatangi Jaksa Agung, minta supaya Jaksa Agung menyidik dan mengadili penculik aktivis. Jadi ia lumayan update dengan kasus penculikan dan keterlibatan Prabowo.
Tanggal 9 Juli pagi hari, kakak saya bergegas mendatangi satu-satunya nenek kami, mungkin orang paling tua di kampong kami, yang kami simpulkan lahir sekitar tahun 1920, yang saat itu sedang menyapu halaman!
Kakak saya bilang, “Mbah, mengko melu nyoblos ya. Nyoblos Jokowi. Nyoblos nomer loro” kata kakakku sambil menunjukkan jari telunjuk dan jari tengahnya pada nenek. “Ojo salah, nomer loro nok sisih tengen”. Kakak saya terus menjelaskan ke nenek sambil agak berteriak, karena pendengaran nenek sudah jauh berkurang. Setelah itu, nenek dengan percaya diri menjawab, “Iyo, mengko tak nyoblos nomer loro”
Sehabis pencoblosan, kakak saya bertanya pada nenek, “Mbah, mau iso nyoblos sing ono nomere loro, to?” Nenek masih diam. “Mau nyoblos Jokowi sing nok sisih tengen, to?” Tanya kakak saya lagi. “Iyo, Nang. Aku yo nyoblos nomer loro, ah…”. “Sing tak coblos mau kok uwonge lemu yo Nang… putih, lemu…” Kakak saya mulai cemas, “Nanging fotone nok sisih tengan, to Mbah?!” “Yo iyo, ah… wonge lemu ngono kok…”. Kakak saya lemas karena yang dicoblos nenek kami orangnya berkulit putih dan gemuk. Padahal, Jokowi tidak gemuk, tidak pula putih, karena ia suka kerja keras, di lapangan… Mungkin nenek kami nyoblos Jusuf Kalla. Mungkin juga, karena ia kelihatan agak gemuk dan juga agak putih di kartu pemilihan itu.
Semoga saja, nenek kami tidak mencoblos orang gemuk dan berkulit putih yang ada di gambar bernomor satu. Tetapi kalaupun nenek kami nyoblos nomer satu, tentu karena ia tak mengerti. Tentu ia tak ada niat nyoblos Prabowo, apalagi memenangkannya jadi Presiden Indonesia. Nenek kami tahu betul, salah satu cucunya pada bulan Maret 1998 pernah diculik, disekap dan disiksa oleh segerombolan orang yang diperintah oleh Prabowo, capres nomor satu itu.
Tetapi kami juga tidak terlalu khawatir dengan nenek kami yang mungkin mencoblos gambar capres yang “gemuk” dan “putih”, karena pada kenyataannya, hasil Pilpres di desa kami memenangkan Jokowi dengan 75% suara. Padahal pada masa Suharto, 99,9 persen hasil setiap pemilu di desa kami selalu dimenangkan oleh Golkar!
Kami tertawa terbahak-bahak mendengar cerita tentang nenek kami, tentang usaha memenangkan Jokowi dalam bingkai besar menjadikan Indonesia yang lebih baik, bukan Indonesia seperti jaman Orde Baru Suharto.
Kami bisa bisa tertawa terbahak-bahak, berkumpul bersama keluarga besar dalam suasana lebaran karena KPU telah mengumumkan Jokowi dan Jusuf Kalla adalah pemenang Pilpres dan karenanya mereka akan menjadi Presiden dan Wakil Presiden kita untuk 5 tahun yang akan datang.
Kalau yang memang adalah Capres #1, entah apa jadinya…
Cerita kami akhiri dengan makan opor ayam, masakan bersama keluarga besar kami di kampung yang hening tapi mulai panas, di desa kecil yang pasti akan digusur paksa pemerintah bila Prabowo – Hatta menang Pilpres, karena desa kami berada dalam radius 10km dari rencana pembangunan PLTN Bukit Muria.
Saturday, May 31, 2014
Abuse claims cloud ex-general's run for Indonesia presidency
Posted at :2014-05-30 03:37:25
Posted by : Angela Dewan
Source: http://www.centnews.com/Politics/Abuse-claims-cloud-ex-general-s-run-for-Indonesia-presidency/S-2014-05-30/69500.html#.U4hVeTKXG0s.twitter
Indonesia - Mugiyanto recalls the horror of being abducted by soldiers, blindfolded, beaten and electrocuted as a student activist fighting to end the long rule of Indonesian dictator Suharto.
Sixteen years on, he can't believe the man who ordered his capture could be the country's next president.
Former general Prabowo Subianto is trying to erase human rights violations from his image as he pursues the presidency in the world's third-largest democracy.
But the voices demanding he be brought to justice are growing louder as the July 9 poll approaches.
Twenty-three activists were kidnapped in the months before the three-decade rule of Suharto was brought to an end in May 1998, when the Asian financial crisis sparked violent protests as it tore through Indonesia.
As head of the army's special forces in early 1998, Prabowo admitted to ordering some of the abductions, including Mugiyanto's. He was discharged from the military following Suharto's downfall for "exceeding orders".
But the former general denies ordering the torture.
The 62-year-old, who used to be married to Suharto's daughter, has never faced a civilian court. He also denies accusations he was involved in the disappearance of 13 activists, whose fates remain unknown.
Mugiyanto, who like many Indonesians goes by one name, hopes that by telling the story of his three-day interrogation he can educate those who know little about the ex-general's past.
"The most painful part was when I heard my friends being tortured," Mugiyanto told AFP, his voice quavering as he recalled sobbing uncontrollably when he heard their screams.
"I thought they were going to kill me," the 41-year-old said.
- 'Dirty games' -
Most Indonesians are in the dark about Prabowo's past. A poll by the Indonesian Survey Institute found that less than 30 percent of respondents knew about the abductions or that Prabowo was discharged from the military.
At a recent pro-Prabowo demonstration, supporters described the ex-general as "honest", and one man said the allegations against him were all "lies".
"His rivals are just playing dirty games. There is no problem. This is just a dirty conspiracy," supporter Binsar Effendi Hutabarat said.
Prabowo still polls a distant second to his only rival -- the popular Joko Widodo, who rose to fame in his stint as Jakarta governor -- but he has narrowed the gap dramatically in recent months.
His Gerindra Party has a strong "pro-poor" platform that appeals to the masses -- half of Indonesia's 250 million people live below or hover around the poverty line of $2 a day.
And his militaristic past is seen as a plus by millions who yearn for a strong leader to follow outgoing President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, widely criticised for his indecision.
- 'Hot-tempered' -
While activists are demanding Prabowo's past be discussed, rights have taken a back seat in the local media's election coverage.
Prabowo has barked at local reporters venomously when asked about rights. His brother and senior advisor, Hashim Djojohadikusumo, says Prabowo has been "hot-tempered" since he was a boy, and that he was unlikely to change.
Prabowo has kept most foreign journalists at arm's length ahead of the elections, refusing AFP's repeated requests for an interview in recent months.
When asked about his rights record during a talk with foreign correspondents last year, Prabowo snapped: "Do you come to us and tell us that 250 million Indonesians are all stupid?"
"Let the Indonesian people decide. Let them scrutinise the past. Let them decide who will be their elected leaders," he said.
There have been attempts to haul Prabowo before courts in the past, but they have all failed.
Last week a group of lawyers filed a suit calling for an ad hoc human rights court to be established to try Prabowo and others allegedly involved in the abductions, in line with a 2009 recommendation by parliament.
A push for Prabowo to be tried has also come from neighbouring East Timor, where he is accused of atrocities, including the massacre of hundreds in 1983, during Indonesia's occupation. Prabowo denies those allegations as well.
A Prabowo victory could prove awkward for the United States, an ally of Indonesia. He was denied a visa to the country in 2000, reportedly because of his rights record, although US officials have indicated they will work with whomever is elected.
While the masses may not consider rights as they cast their votes, the families of those missing hope the election will bring greater attention to their cause.
Yan Siahaan, whose son was one of the 13 students who disappeared, has protested every May for the past 16 years in the "Against Forgetting" campaign.
"We want the public to know who Prabowo is," he said at a demonstration among a sea of banners branding the ex-general a "kidnapper, murderer and rights violator".
prm-ad/sr/st/jit
Posted by : Angela Dewan
Source: http://www.centnews.com/Politics/Abuse-claims-cloud-ex-general-s-run-for-Indonesia-presidency/S-2014-05-30/69500.html#.U4hVeTKXG0s.twitter
Indonesia - Mugiyanto recalls the horror of being abducted by soldiers, blindfolded, beaten and electrocuted as a student activist fighting to end the long rule of Indonesian dictator Suharto.
Sixteen years on, he can't believe the man who ordered his capture could be the country's next president.
Former general Prabowo Subianto is trying to erase human rights violations from his image as he pursues the presidency in the world's third-largest democracy.
But the voices demanding he be brought to justice are growing louder as the July 9 poll approaches.
Twenty-three activists were kidnapped in the months before the three-decade rule of Suharto was brought to an end in May 1998, when the Asian financial crisis sparked violent protests as it tore through Indonesia.
As head of the army's special forces in early 1998, Prabowo admitted to ordering some of the abductions, including Mugiyanto's. He was discharged from the military following Suharto's downfall for "exceeding orders".
But the former general denies ordering the torture.
The 62-year-old, who used to be married to Suharto's daughter, has never faced a civilian court. He also denies accusations he was involved in the disappearance of 13 activists, whose fates remain unknown.
Mugiyanto, who like many Indonesians goes by one name, hopes that by telling the story of his three-day interrogation he can educate those who know little about the ex-general's past.
"The most painful part was when I heard my friends being tortured," Mugiyanto told AFP, his voice quavering as he recalled sobbing uncontrollably when he heard their screams.
"I thought they were going to kill me," the 41-year-old said.
- 'Dirty games' -
Most Indonesians are in the dark about Prabowo's past. A poll by the Indonesian Survey Institute found that less than 30 percent of respondents knew about the abductions or that Prabowo was discharged from the military.
At a recent pro-Prabowo demonstration, supporters described the ex-general as "honest", and one man said the allegations against him were all "lies".
"His rivals are just playing dirty games. There is no problem. This is just a dirty conspiracy," supporter Binsar Effendi Hutabarat said.
Prabowo still polls a distant second to his only rival -- the popular Joko Widodo, who rose to fame in his stint as Jakarta governor -- but he has narrowed the gap dramatically in recent months.
His Gerindra Party has a strong "pro-poor" platform that appeals to the masses -- half of Indonesia's 250 million people live below or hover around the poverty line of $2 a day.
And his militaristic past is seen as a plus by millions who yearn for a strong leader to follow outgoing President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, widely criticised for his indecision.
- 'Hot-tempered' -
While activists are demanding Prabowo's past be discussed, rights have taken a back seat in the local media's election coverage.
Prabowo has barked at local reporters venomously when asked about rights. His brother and senior advisor, Hashim Djojohadikusumo, says Prabowo has been "hot-tempered" since he was a boy, and that he was unlikely to change.
Prabowo has kept most foreign journalists at arm's length ahead of the elections, refusing AFP's repeated requests for an interview in recent months.
When asked about his rights record during a talk with foreign correspondents last year, Prabowo snapped: "Do you come to us and tell us that 250 million Indonesians are all stupid?"
"Let the Indonesian people decide. Let them scrutinise the past. Let them decide who will be their elected leaders," he said.
There have been attempts to haul Prabowo before courts in the past, but they have all failed.
Last week a group of lawyers filed a suit calling for an ad hoc human rights court to be established to try Prabowo and others allegedly involved in the abductions, in line with a 2009 recommendation by parliament.
A push for Prabowo to be tried has also come from neighbouring East Timor, where he is accused of atrocities, including the massacre of hundreds in 1983, during Indonesia's occupation. Prabowo denies those allegations as well.
A Prabowo victory could prove awkward for the United States, an ally of Indonesia. He was denied a visa to the country in 2000, reportedly because of his rights record, although US officials have indicated they will work with whomever is elected.
While the masses may not consider rights as they cast their votes, the families of those missing hope the election will bring greater attention to their cause.
Yan Siahaan, whose son was one of the 13 students who disappeared, has protested every May for the past 16 years in the "Against Forgetting" campaign.
"We want the public to know who Prabowo is," he said at a demonstration among a sea of banners branding the ex-general a "kidnapper, murderer and rights violator".
prm-ad/sr/st/jit
Thursday, May 29, 2014
Justice still eludes Indonesia torture victims
Despite pressure, government apathy means little hope of change
Ryan Dagur,
Jakarta Indonesia
May 29, 2014
In the turbulent final years of Suharto’s reign as strongman of Indonesia, Mugiyanto – like many in the country, he goes by only one name – took shelter in what he thought was a “safe house”.
Mugiyanto and his colleagues from the Indonesian Students Solidarity for Democracy had used the house as a base of operations for their protests against Suharto. On March 13, 1998, a group of soldiers raided the house in East Jakarta and took him into custody.
“I was blindfolded and taken to several places including the District Military Command in East Jakarta. Then I was taken to another place, which I learned years later was the headquarters of the Army Special Forces [Kopassus] in Cijantung,” Mugiyanto said.
“I just wore my underwear during interrogations. With blindfolded eyes, I was electrocuted and tortured again and again.”
Mugiyanto, was one of nine activists abducted and tortured by a special Kopassus unit called the Rose Team, which was under the command of then Lt Gen Prabowo Subianto. They were later released, but more than a dozen others who were also abducted between 1997-98 met a different fate. One was found dead, and the others remain missing.
After his release, Mugiyanto and several other victims of kidnapping and forced disappearance, along with some family members, established the Indonesian Association of Families of the Disappeared. Under pressure from activists, a military court in 1999 found 11 members of the Rose Team guilty of kidnapping nine activists. Prabowo, who admitted to ordering the kidnapping, was dismissed from his position but never faced a civilian court.
Following the military trial, NGOs and rights groups including the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS) urged the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas) to investigate the kidnappings. In 2003, Komnas reviewed the case and recommended a full investigation. Three years later, the commission issued a report stating that the abductions constituted a gross violation of human rights and that Prabowo was directly responsible for some of the human rights violations which occurred during the 1998 riots that preceded the fall of Suharto’s regime. The pursuit of justice for the victims seemed to gain momentum after the report was submitted to the Attorney-General’s Office.
In 2009, parliament recommended that an ad hoc court should be formed to further investigate and prosecute the perpetrators of the abductions. But that is where the path to justice ended. The court has yet to be established.
“Recommendations are already there. Still, the government hasn’t moved yet. The government doesn’t have the political will,” Mugiyanto said.
In an April 2014 report titled “Setting the Agenda: Human Rights Priorities for the New Government”, Amnesty International said there had been a lack of progress during President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s administration in delivering justice for past human rights violations. Specifically, the report stated that Yudhoyono failed to act on parliament’s recommendations to conduct an immediate search for activists who had disappeared and to provide rehabilitation and compensation to their families.
Widyo Pramono, a junior attorney-general for special crimes, said the commission’s report must be completed.
“The [case] papers must be complete. For example, information from certain witnesses needs to be collected. The Attorney General’s office won’t send the papers to court if they are not complete,” Pramono said.
Haris Azhar of KontraS said the ad hoc court recommended by parliament could be a good barometer for the government’s commitment to providing justice to human rights abuse victims.
“If the government remains silent, this means that the government allows impunity for perpetrators,” Azhar said. The reluctance on the part of the government to seek justice for its past crimes has left Novridaniar Dinis Puspahati in limbo. When she was two years old, soldiers abducted her father Yadin Muhidin, and his whereabouts remain a mystery.
“I don’t know whether my father is still alive or already dead. I have lived with this question for more than 16 years,” she said.
Earlier this month Kivlan Zen, the former chief of staff of the Army Strategic Reserves Command, said in a televised debate that he knew the whereabouts of the missing activists, though he did not say whether they were alive or dead.
In response, rights organizations and NGOs demanded the formation of a special court after a meeting with a presidential advisory board member with the aim of summoning Kivlan to testify formally. However, Kivlan refused to testify. And so, Puspahati continues to wait for justice.
“Where is this state’s legal wisdom? Where is this state’s hard work and political will to get back my father and the other missing activists?” she said. “I want this case to be dealt with properly. No families of the victims of kidnapping and forced disappearance want to live with a big question for more than 16 years.”
Compounding the pain of not knowing the fate of their family members or receiving justice for the suffering they endured is the fact that Prabowo, who had previously admitted to ordering the abductions, is currently a presidential candidate in elections scheduled for July 9. Prabowo, who founded the Great Indonesia Movement, has gained widespread support from a coalition of other political parties in the run-up to the vote. “If he becomes president, I’m sure our fight for justice will be harder,” said Mugiyanto.
In its report this year, Amnesty International recommended that the new president review all information currently in the possession of the Attorney General’s office about past violations of international law and ensure thorough investigations. When sufficient admissible evidence exists, the report further notes, all suspects in such crimes should be prosecuted before national courts in proceedings that meet international standards for fair trials.
For the victims and their families, this is what they have been seeking for the better part of two decades.
“I can still feel the trauma. Perpetrators must tell us clearly why they did what they did. They must be taken to court,” Mugiyanto said.
Read more at: http://www.ucanews.com/news/justice-still-eludes-indonesia-torture-victims/71041
Ryan Dagur,
Jakarta Indonesia
May 29, 2014
In the turbulent final years of Suharto’s reign as strongman of Indonesia, Mugiyanto – like many in the country, he goes by only one name – took shelter in what he thought was a “safe house”.
Mugiyanto and his colleagues from the Indonesian Students Solidarity for Democracy had used the house as a base of operations for their protests against Suharto. On March 13, 1998, a group of soldiers raided the house in East Jakarta and took him into custody.
“I was blindfolded and taken to several places including the District Military Command in East Jakarta. Then I was taken to another place, which I learned years later was the headquarters of the Army Special Forces [Kopassus] in Cijantung,” Mugiyanto said.
“I just wore my underwear during interrogations. With blindfolded eyes, I was electrocuted and tortured again and again.”
Mugiyanto, was one of nine activists abducted and tortured by a special Kopassus unit called the Rose Team, which was under the command of then Lt Gen Prabowo Subianto. They were later released, but more than a dozen others who were also abducted between 1997-98 met a different fate. One was found dead, and the others remain missing.
After his release, Mugiyanto and several other victims of kidnapping and forced disappearance, along with some family members, established the Indonesian Association of Families of the Disappeared. Under pressure from activists, a military court in 1999 found 11 members of the Rose Team guilty of kidnapping nine activists. Prabowo, who admitted to ordering the kidnapping, was dismissed from his position but never faced a civilian court.
Following the military trial, NGOs and rights groups including the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS) urged the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas) to investigate the kidnappings. In 2003, Komnas reviewed the case and recommended a full investigation. Three years later, the commission issued a report stating that the abductions constituted a gross violation of human rights and that Prabowo was directly responsible for some of the human rights violations which occurred during the 1998 riots that preceded the fall of Suharto’s regime. The pursuit of justice for the victims seemed to gain momentum after the report was submitted to the Attorney-General’s Office.
In 2009, parliament recommended that an ad hoc court should be formed to further investigate and prosecute the perpetrators of the abductions. But that is where the path to justice ended. The court has yet to be established.
“Recommendations are already there. Still, the government hasn’t moved yet. The government doesn’t have the political will,” Mugiyanto said.
In an April 2014 report titled “Setting the Agenda: Human Rights Priorities for the New Government”, Amnesty International said there had been a lack of progress during President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s administration in delivering justice for past human rights violations. Specifically, the report stated that Yudhoyono failed to act on parliament’s recommendations to conduct an immediate search for activists who had disappeared and to provide rehabilitation and compensation to their families.
Widyo Pramono, a junior attorney-general for special crimes, said the commission’s report must be completed.
“The [case] papers must be complete. For example, information from certain witnesses needs to be collected. The Attorney General’s office won’t send the papers to court if they are not complete,” Pramono said.
Haris Azhar of KontraS said the ad hoc court recommended by parliament could be a good barometer for the government’s commitment to providing justice to human rights abuse victims.
“If the government remains silent, this means that the government allows impunity for perpetrators,” Azhar said. The reluctance on the part of the government to seek justice for its past crimes has left Novridaniar Dinis Puspahati in limbo. When she was two years old, soldiers abducted her father Yadin Muhidin, and his whereabouts remain a mystery.
“I don’t know whether my father is still alive or already dead. I have lived with this question for more than 16 years,” she said.
Earlier this month Kivlan Zen, the former chief of staff of the Army Strategic Reserves Command, said in a televised debate that he knew the whereabouts of the missing activists, though he did not say whether they were alive or dead.
In response, rights organizations and NGOs demanded the formation of a special court after a meeting with a presidential advisory board member with the aim of summoning Kivlan to testify formally. However, Kivlan refused to testify. And so, Puspahati continues to wait for justice.
“Where is this state’s legal wisdom? Where is this state’s hard work and political will to get back my father and the other missing activists?” she said. “I want this case to be dealt with properly. No families of the victims of kidnapping and forced disappearance want to live with a big question for more than 16 years.”
Compounding the pain of not knowing the fate of their family members or receiving justice for the suffering they endured is the fact that Prabowo, who had previously admitted to ordering the abductions, is currently a presidential candidate in elections scheduled for July 9. Prabowo, who founded the Great Indonesia Movement, has gained widespread support from a coalition of other political parties in the run-up to the vote. “If he becomes president, I’m sure our fight for justice will be harder,” said Mugiyanto.
In its report this year, Amnesty International recommended that the new president review all information currently in the possession of the Attorney General’s office about past violations of international law and ensure thorough investigations. When sufficient admissible evidence exists, the report further notes, all suspects in such crimes should be prosecuted before national courts in proceedings that meet international standards for fair trials.
For the victims and their families, this is what they have been seeking for the better part of two decades.
“I can still feel the trauma. Perpetrators must tell us clearly why they did what they did. They must be taken to court,” Mugiyanto said.
Read more at: http://www.ucanews.com/news/justice-still-eludes-indonesia-torture-victims/71041
Saturday, May 24, 2014
Kami Yang Menunggu Keadilan
Oleh MUGIYANTO, Penyintas Penculikan Aktivis 1998, Ketua IKOHI
(Artikel OPINI Harian Kompas, Sabtu, 24 Mei 2014)
HAMPIR selama sebulan terakhir, wacana di media mengenai calon presiden untuk Pemilu Presiden 2014 sangat kental diwarnai isu pelanggaran HAM, khususnya terkait kasus penculikan dan penghilangan paksa aktivis pro demokrasi tahun 1997-1998.
Ada tiga alasan yang melatarbelakangi hal ini. Pertama, salah satu capres potensial, Prabowo Subianto, diduga kuat terlibat dalam beberapa pelanggaran hak asasi manusia pada masa Orde Baru, terutama kasus penculikan dan penghilangan paksa aktivis.
Kedua, saat ini adalah bulan Mei yang 16 tahun lalu ditandai momentum-momentum sejarah kebangsaan: penembakan mahasiswa di kampus Universitas Trisakti pada 12 Mei 1998 dan peristiwa kerusuhan 13-15 Mei yang mengorbankan lebih dari 1.000 jiwa, disertai turunnya Soeharto sebagai Presiden RI pada 21 Mei.
Ketiga, dan ini yang menjadi pemicu utama, adalah pernyataan Mayjen (Purn) Kivlan Zen dalam acara ”Debat” TV One pada 28 April 2014 mengenai penculikan aktivis 1997-1998. Pada acara yang disaksikan jutaan pemirsa di seluruh Tanah Air itu, Kivlan Zen yang pada 1998 menjabat sebagai Kepala Staf Kostrad, dengan nada bangga dan berapi-api, mengatakan, ”Yang menculik dan hilang, tempatnya saya tahu di mana, ditembak, dibuang….”
Pengakuan yang otoritatif
Saya adalah salah satu dari sembilan orang yang selamat dari penculikan dan usaha penghilangan paksa oleh pasukan Tim Mawar Kopassus tahun 1998 yang sedang dibicarakan oleh Kivlan Zen. Saya mendengar langsung ucapan Kivlan Zen karena—bersama istri—saya sedang duduk di depan televisi. Ada hening di pikiran saya, dengan jantung berdetak hebat.
Istri saya menatap saya dalam diam. Yang muncul di pandangan saya kemudian adalah wajah kawan-kawan terdekat saya yang sampai hari ini masih belum ketahuan kabarnya: Petrus Bimo Anugerah, Wiji Thukul, Herman Hendrawan, dan Suyat. Juga wajah-wajah Yani Afri, Yadin Muhidin, Ucok Siahaan, Noval Alkatiri, Deddy Hamdun, dan wajah-wajah lain yang tiap hari saya lihat dalam poster yang ada di IKOHI, tempat saya beraktivitas.
Saya tidak habis pikir, mengapa orang di TV itu, Kivlan Zen, berbicara tentang penderitaan manusia dengan sedemikian enteng. Saya lebih menganggapnya sebagai perasaan keji. Tak tahukah dia bahwa tiap hari selama lebih dari 16 tahun, segenap keluarga dari 13 aktivis yang masih hilang itu masih sabar menunggu kembalinya orang-orang yang mereka cintai. Bahkan, empat orangtua dari mereka yang hilang meninggal dalam penantian panjang.
Bagi saya, Kivlan tak hanya telah melukai rasa kemanusiaan keluarga korban. Lebih dari itu, yang sedang ia pertontonkan adalah mempermainkan penderitaan keluarga korban dengan menganggap para korban hanya sebagai angka semata. Saya jadi ingat apa yang pernah dikatakan diktator Uni Soviet, Joseph Stalin, ”Satu orang mati adalah sebuah tragedi, satu juta orang mati adalah sebuah statistik.”
Apa yang disampaikan Kivlan Zen adalah sesuatu yang penting. Sebab, saat peristiwa penculikan dan penghilangan paksa terjadi, jabatannya adalah Kepala Staf Kostrad. Dengan jabatan yang melekat pada dirinya, pernyataan Kivlan Zen adalah pengakuan yang otoritatif dan memiliki konsekuensi hukum. Hal ini diatur dalam Pasal 165 KUHP yang mengharuskan setiap orang yang mengetahui atau memiliki informasi tentang tindak pidana kejahatan harus melaporkannya kepada aparat penegak hukum.
Pernyataan Kivlan Zen juga merupakan sebuah pengakuan bahwa tindakan penghilangan paksa terhadap 13 orang yang masih hilang adalah benar adanya. Sejauh mana Kivlan Zen sendiri terlibat, siapa pelaku, korban, bagaimana peristiwa dan tempat kejadian adalah informasi penting yang harus ditindaklanjuti oleh penegak hukum, dalam hal ini Komnas HAM dan Kejaksaan Agung.
Menanggapi perkembangan tersebut, keputusan Rapat Paripurna Komnas HAM tanggal 7-8 Mei 2014 untuk membentuk tim dan melakukan pemanggilan terhadap Kivlan Zen harus diapresiasi. Namun, untuk mempercepat proses pengungkapan kasus dan memberikan kepastian hukum tidak hanya kepada korban, tetapi juga pelaku harus ditindaklanjuti.
Pemanggilan Prabowo oleh Komnas HAM sangat penting dilakukan. Terutama untuk mendalami pernyataannya selama ini bahwa ia hanya bertanggung jawab atas ”pengamanan” terhadap sembilan aktivis, yang semua sudah ”dibebaskan”, serta membantah bertanggung jawab atas 13 aktivis lain yang masih hilang. Bantahan ini sebenarnya telah dimentahkan oleh kesaksian beberapa korban yang selamat, antara lain Faisol Riza dan Rahardja Waluya Jati—bahkan Pius Lustrilanang dan Desmon J Mahesa—yang mengatakan, saat berada di tempat penyekapan, mereka sempat berkomunikasi dengan Herman Hendrawan, Yani Afri, Sony, Deddy Hamdun, dan lain-lain. Ini berarti, antara mereka yang telah dilepaskan dan yang masih hilang pernah disekap di tempat yang sama.
Perjuangan sepanjang usia
Dalam berbagai kesempatan, Fadli Zon mengatakan bahwa usaha keluarga korban dan aktivis HAM untuk menuntut penyelesaian kasus ini adalah kampanye lima tahunan yang ditujukan untuk menjegal Prabowo Subianto menjadi capres. Fadli Zon tampaknya menutup mata, tidak mau melihat, bahwa sejak hari pertama keluarga korban tahu anak dan suami mereka hilang, mereka telah berjuang dengan melakukan berbagai pencarian.
Waktu 16 tahun bukanlah pendek. Selama itu pula perjuangan keluarga korban telah melalui berbagai milestone, misalnya penyelidikan oleh Komnas HAM (2005-2006), penyerahan hasil penyelidikan kepada Jaksa Agung (2006), rekomendasi DPR kepada Presiden (2009), pemberian Surat Keterangan Keluarga Korban Penghilangan Paksa dari Komnas HAM (2011), serta rekomendasi Ombudsman kepada Presiden (2013).
Keluarga korban penghilangan paksa tak berutang apa pun pada partai politik yang saat ini sedang berkontestasi melalui pemilu. Sebaliknya, partai politik yang ada hari ini memiliki utang sejarah kepada mereka yang telah jadi martir dalam perjuangan menentang otoritarianisme Orde Baru. Perjuangan kami untuk kebenaran dan keadilan melampaui politik elektoral yang menjemukan hari ini. Perjuangan kami adalah perjuangan sepanjang usia, kecuali kebenaran dan keadilan bisa kami raih lebih cepat sebelum ajal menjemput.
Satu hal yang sekarang masih kami tunggu dan perjuangkan adalah tindakan presiden yang kami anggap sebagai ultimum remedium untuk kasus ini (Djisman Samosir, 2011). Ultimum remedium adalah upaya terakhir dalam penegakan hukum manakala sanksi-sanksi lain sudah tidak berdaya. Presiden SBY kami anggap pihak yang turut bertanggung jawab atas penundaan dan pengingkaran hak dan keadilan bagi korban sehingga kasus ini menjadi kelihatan rumit dan penuh politisasi.
Karena itulah, Presiden SBY pulalah yang harus memberikan ultimum remedium untuk kasus ini dengan cara mengimplementasikan rekomendasi DPR yang meliputi: (1) pembentukan Pengadilan HAM Ad Hoc; (2) pencarian 13 orang yang masih hilang; (3) pemberian kompensasi dan rehabilitasi kepada keluarga korban; dan (4) ratifikasi Konvensi Anti Penghilangan Paksa.
Kami sadar, waktu yang tersisa bagi SBY tidak mungkin lagi cukup untuk memenuhi semua harapan korban. Tetapi, setidaknya SBY bisa meletakkan landasan bagi ultimum remedium bagi pemerintah selanjutnya untuk menyelesaikan kasus ini, dan pada saat yang sama Presiden SBY bisa melakukan graceful exit yang akan dikenang generasi mendatang. ●
(Artikel OPINI Harian Kompas, Sabtu, 24 Mei 2014)
HAMPIR selama sebulan terakhir, wacana di media mengenai calon presiden untuk Pemilu Presiden 2014 sangat kental diwarnai isu pelanggaran HAM, khususnya terkait kasus penculikan dan penghilangan paksa aktivis pro demokrasi tahun 1997-1998.
Ada tiga alasan yang melatarbelakangi hal ini. Pertama, salah satu capres potensial, Prabowo Subianto, diduga kuat terlibat dalam beberapa pelanggaran hak asasi manusia pada masa Orde Baru, terutama kasus penculikan dan penghilangan paksa aktivis.
Kedua, saat ini adalah bulan Mei yang 16 tahun lalu ditandai momentum-momentum sejarah kebangsaan: penembakan mahasiswa di kampus Universitas Trisakti pada 12 Mei 1998 dan peristiwa kerusuhan 13-15 Mei yang mengorbankan lebih dari 1.000 jiwa, disertai turunnya Soeharto sebagai Presiden RI pada 21 Mei.
Ketiga, dan ini yang menjadi pemicu utama, adalah pernyataan Mayjen (Purn) Kivlan Zen dalam acara ”Debat” TV One pada 28 April 2014 mengenai penculikan aktivis 1997-1998. Pada acara yang disaksikan jutaan pemirsa di seluruh Tanah Air itu, Kivlan Zen yang pada 1998 menjabat sebagai Kepala Staf Kostrad, dengan nada bangga dan berapi-api, mengatakan, ”Yang menculik dan hilang, tempatnya saya tahu di mana, ditembak, dibuang….”
Pengakuan yang otoritatif
Saya adalah salah satu dari sembilan orang yang selamat dari penculikan dan usaha penghilangan paksa oleh pasukan Tim Mawar Kopassus tahun 1998 yang sedang dibicarakan oleh Kivlan Zen. Saya mendengar langsung ucapan Kivlan Zen karena—bersama istri—saya sedang duduk di depan televisi. Ada hening di pikiran saya, dengan jantung berdetak hebat.
Istri saya menatap saya dalam diam. Yang muncul di pandangan saya kemudian adalah wajah kawan-kawan terdekat saya yang sampai hari ini masih belum ketahuan kabarnya: Petrus Bimo Anugerah, Wiji Thukul, Herman Hendrawan, dan Suyat. Juga wajah-wajah Yani Afri, Yadin Muhidin, Ucok Siahaan, Noval Alkatiri, Deddy Hamdun, dan wajah-wajah lain yang tiap hari saya lihat dalam poster yang ada di IKOHI, tempat saya beraktivitas.
Saya tidak habis pikir, mengapa orang di TV itu, Kivlan Zen, berbicara tentang penderitaan manusia dengan sedemikian enteng. Saya lebih menganggapnya sebagai perasaan keji. Tak tahukah dia bahwa tiap hari selama lebih dari 16 tahun, segenap keluarga dari 13 aktivis yang masih hilang itu masih sabar menunggu kembalinya orang-orang yang mereka cintai. Bahkan, empat orangtua dari mereka yang hilang meninggal dalam penantian panjang.
Bagi saya, Kivlan tak hanya telah melukai rasa kemanusiaan keluarga korban. Lebih dari itu, yang sedang ia pertontonkan adalah mempermainkan penderitaan keluarga korban dengan menganggap para korban hanya sebagai angka semata. Saya jadi ingat apa yang pernah dikatakan diktator Uni Soviet, Joseph Stalin, ”Satu orang mati adalah sebuah tragedi, satu juta orang mati adalah sebuah statistik.”
Apa yang disampaikan Kivlan Zen adalah sesuatu yang penting. Sebab, saat peristiwa penculikan dan penghilangan paksa terjadi, jabatannya adalah Kepala Staf Kostrad. Dengan jabatan yang melekat pada dirinya, pernyataan Kivlan Zen adalah pengakuan yang otoritatif dan memiliki konsekuensi hukum. Hal ini diatur dalam Pasal 165 KUHP yang mengharuskan setiap orang yang mengetahui atau memiliki informasi tentang tindak pidana kejahatan harus melaporkannya kepada aparat penegak hukum.
Pernyataan Kivlan Zen juga merupakan sebuah pengakuan bahwa tindakan penghilangan paksa terhadap 13 orang yang masih hilang adalah benar adanya. Sejauh mana Kivlan Zen sendiri terlibat, siapa pelaku, korban, bagaimana peristiwa dan tempat kejadian adalah informasi penting yang harus ditindaklanjuti oleh penegak hukum, dalam hal ini Komnas HAM dan Kejaksaan Agung.
Menanggapi perkembangan tersebut, keputusan Rapat Paripurna Komnas HAM tanggal 7-8 Mei 2014 untuk membentuk tim dan melakukan pemanggilan terhadap Kivlan Zen harus diapresiasi. Namun, untuk mempercepat proses pengungkapan kasus dan memberikan kepastian hukum tidak hanya kepada korban, tetapi juga pelaku harus ditindaklanjuti.
Pemanggilan Prabowo oleh Komnas HAM sangat penting dilakukan. Terutama untuk mendalami pernyataannya selama ini bahwa ia hanya bertanggung jawab atas ”pengamanan” terhadap sembilan aktivis, yang semua sudah ”dibebaskan”, serta membantah bertanggung jawab atas 13 aktivis lain yang masih hilang. Bantahan ini sebenarnya telah dimentahkan oleh kesaksian beberapa korban yang selamat, antara lain Faisol Riza dan Rahardja Waluya Jati—bahkan Pius Lustrilanang dan Desmon J Mahesa—yang mengatakan, saat berada di tempat penyekapan, mereka sempat berkomunikasi dengan Herman Hendrawan, Yani Afri, Sony, Deddy Hamdun, dan lain-lain. Ini berarti, antara mereka yang telah dilepaskan dan yang masih hilang pernah disekap di tempat yang sama.
Perjuangan sepanjang usia
Dalam berbagai kesempatan, Fadli Zon mengatakan bahwa usaha keluarga korban dan aktivis HAM untuk menuntut penyelesaian kasus ini adalah kampanye lima tahunan yang ditujukan untuk menjegal Prabowo Subianto menjadi capres. Fadli Zon tampaknya menutup mata, tidak mau melihat, bahwa sejak hari pertama keluarga korban tahu anak dan suami mereka hilang, mereka telah berjuang dengan melakukan berbagai pencarian.
Waktu 16 tahun bukanlah pendek. Selama itu pula perjuangan keluarga korban telah melalui berbagai milestone, misalnya penyelidikan oleh Komnas HAM (2005-2006), penyerahan hasil penyelidikan kepada Jaksa Agung (2006), rekomendasi DPR kepada Presiden (2009), pemberian Surat Keterangan Keluarga Korban Penghilangan Paksa dari Komnas HAM (2011), serta rekomendasi Ombudsman kepada Presiden (2013).
Keluarga korban penghilangan paksa tak berutang apa pun pada partai politik yang saat ini sedang berkontestasi melalui pemilu. Sebaliknya, partai politik yang ada hari ini memiliki utang sejarah kepada mereka yang telah jadi martir dalam perjuangan menentang otoritarianisme Orde Baru. Perjuangan kami untuk kebenaran dan keadilan melampaui politik elektoral yang menjemukan hari ini. Perjuangan kami adalah perjuangan sepanjang usia, kecuali kebenaran dan keadilan bisa kami raih lebih cepat sebelum ajal menjemput.
Satu hal yang sekarang masih kami tunggu dan perjuangkan adalah tindakan presiden yang kami anggap sebagai ultimum remedium untuk kasus ini (Djisman Samosir, 2011). Ultimum remedium adalah upaya terakhir dalam penegakan hukum manakala sanksi-sanksi lain sudah tidak berdaya. Presiden SBY kami anggap pihak yang turut bertanggung jawab atas penundaan dan pengingkaran hak dan keadilan bagi korban sehingga kasus ini menjadi kelihatan rumit dan penuh politisasi.
Karena itulah, Presiden SBY pulalah yang harus memberikan ultimum remedium untuk kasus ini dengan cara mengimplementasikan rekomendasi DPR yang meliputi: (1) pembentukan Pengadilan HAM Ad Hoc; (2) pencarian 13 orang yang masih hilang; (3) pemberian kompensasi dan rehabilitasi kepada keluarga korban; dan (4) ratifikasi Konvensi Anti Penghilangan Paksa.
Kami sadar, waktu yang tersisa bagi SBY tidak mungkin lagi cukup untuk memenuhi semua harapan korban. Tetapi, setidaknya SBY bisa meletakkan landasan bagi ultimum remedium bagi pemerintah selanjutnya untuk menyelesaikan kasus ini, dan pada saat yang sama Presiden SBY bisa melakukan graceful exit yang akan dikenang generasi mendatang. ●
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
Activist on Being Tortured by the Man Who Could Be Indonesia's Next President
By Rizky Hartono
May 13, 2014 | 12:20 am
Nothing piques your interest in a presidential election than having been abducted by one of the candidates.
This is the predicament of Mugiyanto, an Indonesian pro-democracy activist who was kidnapped and tortured by Indonesian special forces (Kopassus) in 1998 during the final months of the Suharto regime.
General Suharto took power in 1966 on the back of a communist genocide which claimed the lives of an estimated 500,000 civilians. Suharto successfully embezzled $35 billion of state money over his 32 year rule and is rated the world's most corrupt dictator of all time by Transparency International.
Anyway, Suharto may be long gone but his former son-in-law, former Kopassus commander Prabowo Subianto, is one of the frontrunners in this year's presidential race. And more importantly to Mugiyanto, he's the man responsible for his kidnapping along with 22 other pro-democracy activists in 1998. Nine survived, one was found dead, and 13 were never seen again. Prabowo is also suspected of involvement in multiple human rights atrocities in East Timor, something he denies.
During an investigation into the kidnappings which lasted until 2002, Indonesia’s National Commission on Human Rights tried to interview Prabowo, but he consistently refused to show up. But recently, a senior army official has come forward to say he knows where the missing 13 bodies are, so the case is being reopened. The Human Rights Commission has said that they have to interview Prabaowo this time, but it's unlikely that it will happen before the July 9 election.
In 1998, Mugiyanto had been working with the Indonesian People's Democratic Party (PRD), an organization that had been banned by the government and scapegoated for anti-Suharto riots in 1996. Over the ensuing two years the PRD's leadership were jailed and tortured and its members slowly hunted down by Prabowo's troops and the military police.
Mugiyanto was in Jakarta to meet with other pro-democracy activists to organize protests against the government when he was taken on March 13, 1998. VICE News caught up with him outside the Kopassus headquarters.
VICE: So how did you get caught?
Mugiyanto: I had just come back to our safe house where I was meant to meet the others (fellow rights activists Nezar and Aan). There was a hot drink still sitting out, still hot, so I assumed that they had just left.
I called Nezar’s pager, but got no response. I felt that something could be wrong, so I packed my documents and passport and waited. When I looked out the window I saw the house was suddenly surrounded by men. That's when I thought, I'm going to die.
Where did they take you?
I got packed into a car, told to take off my shirt, and then they blindfolded me with the shirt. Then they put something to my head, and they told me to be careful or I would get “this,” whatever it was, I think it was a gun. But they didn’t interrogate me. It was a long trip. I only heard them debating about the traffic. They were arguing about “we should go this way” or “we should go that way.”
Suddenly the car stopped. I walked only about three or four steps and I felt it was cold, very breezy or windy. And I heard water flowing, and I could hear a whipping sound “tch-taa, tch-taa.” I was thinking, I’m in a rice field, and I’m going to be killed there.
Years later we worked out that it was the Kopassus headquarters that I had been taken to.
They asked me, what is your name and my other details. And from then on whenever they didn’t like my answer they would beat me. My face, my body — they kicked me, and they asked me to stand up again, and then beat me again.
My lips were broken. I managed not to tell them much, but they already knew. This welcome beating went on for about five or ten minutes.
That was just five or ten minutes? What did they do with you the rest of the two days?
They asked me to take off my clothes and shoes so I was wearing only my underpants. And after that they asked me to lay down on my back on a bed, and they tied my hands and feet to the bed. I had no idea where I was, I still sort of thought I was in a rice field somewhere.
And then they continued asking me about my friends. “You know Nezar” they would say. That was also the time that I realized that whip the sound “tch-taa, tch-taa” was not a whip, but electric shocks — because they used it on my leg and on my head.
Then they stopped torturing me and stopped interrogating me, and I heard there was another person there, also being beaten, being electrocuted, shouting, crying and I realized that it was Nezar.
So I thought Oh my God, Nezar is here because I’d paged him when I got home and the pager was already with Kopassus. It turns out Nezar was taken one hour earlier than me.
He was being tortured very severely. And when they stopped torturing him, there was also another person there, crying, shouting and screaming. It was Aan Rusdianto, our other friend. So there were three of us that were the target of this torture, of this interrogation. Three of us separated by about 5 meters between each of us.
What was the worst part of the torture?
The most painful part was not when I was being tortured, because I can express myself, I can express my pain. The most difficult part was when my friend was being tortured, and they start screaming and I had to listen to them. That’s the most painful part.
The hardest part is protecting your friends. Because that’s what we agreed — when we are arrested, we have to protect our friends. But of course there is a point where you cannot stand anymore — so I told them some information where it was necessary, about the party programs, but still protected my comrades.
Why do you think they didn't kill you?
I think the three of us were released because when I was taken from the house there had been many military units involved, and I became like the object of competition. There were different military factions who wanted to keep me to get the credit. And because I was taken to two military offices before being taken to Kopassus. Some activists were taken directly to Kopassus, but not in my case. And because of that many people knew about me being taken, the public knew (the head of the community had been there when he was taken) and so, for their security — so they couldn’t be accused of killing us — we were then handed back to the police. I was very lucky.
Prabowo has admitted being the officer responsible for the operation but denies knowledge of the torture or the killing. Has he apologized for what happened? There has been no expression of regret for what he did in the past. What he said, what he has expressed is his pride for what he did in the past. His pride. For example securing nine of the survivors, me and the other eight. For setting us free. He’s said that these nine activists should thank me. Ha. Fuck you.
Looking at Indonesia now, do you think that it was worth all the shit that you had to go through?
Yeah I think so. I mean, yeah we have changed. We contributed to this change, so yes I think it’s worth it. Something needed to be sacrificed.
Would a Prabowo presidency reverse all that progress?
Yes it would be a setback. Prabowo belongs to the past. Prabowo is a problem of the past. Because the ideas that he brings, is to bring us back — to roll back the democracy and freedom that we have achieved. So for sure, to have Prabowo as the president — I cannot imagine that this kind of person, who is so bloodied, who has such a history, can become the president. He’s at the forefront of those defending his father-in-law Suharto, and can that sort of person be the President of Indonesia 16 years later? No, I don’t think so.
Source: Source: https://news.vice.com/article/activist-on-being-tortured-by-the-man-who-could-be-indonesias-next-president
May 13, 2014 | 12:20 am
Nothing piques your interest in a presidential election than having been abducted by one of the candidates.
This is the predicament of Mugiyanto, an Indonesian pro-democracy activist who was kidnapped and tortured by Indonesian special forces (Kopassus) in 1998 during the final months of the Suharto regime.
General Suharto took power in 1966 on the back of a communist genocide which claimed the lives of an estimated 500,000 civilians. Suharto successfully embezzled $35 billion of state money over his 32 year rule and is rated the world's most corrupt dictator of all time by Transparency International.
Anyway, Suharto may be long gone but his former son-in-law, former Kopassus commander Prabowo Subianto, is one of the frontrunners in this year's presidential race. And more importantly to Mugiyanto, he's the man responsible for his kidnapping along with 22 other pro-democracy activists in 1998. Nine survived, one was found dead, and 13 were never seen again. Prabowo is also suspected of involvement in multiple human rights atrocities in East Timor, something he denies.
During an investigation into the kidnappings which lasted until 2002, Indonesia’s National Commission on Human Rights tried to interview Prabowo, but he consistently refused to show up. But recently, a senior army official has come forward to say he knows where the missing 13 bodies are, so the case is being reopened. The Human Rights Commission has said that they have to interview Prabaowo this time, but it's unlikely that it will happen before the July 9 election.
In 1998, Mugiyanto had been working with the Indonesian People's Democratic Party (PRD), an organization that had been banned by the government and scapegoated for anti-Suharto riots in 1996. Over the ensuing two years the PRD's leadership were jailed and tortured and its members slowly hunted down by Prabowo's troops and the military police.
Mugiyanto was in Jakarta to meet with other pro-democracy activists to organize protests against the government when he was taken on March 13, 1998. VICE News caught up with him outside the Kopassus headquarters.
VICE: So how did you get caught?
Mugiyanto: I had just come back to our safe house where I was meant to meet the others (fellow rights activists Nezar and Aan). There was a hot drink still sitting out, still hot, so I assumed that they had just left.
I called Nezar’s pager, but got no response. I felt that something could be wrong, so I packed my documents and passport and waited. When I looked out the window I saw the house was suddenly surrounded by men. That's when I thought, I'm going to die.
Where did they take you?
I got packed into a car, told to take off my shirt, and then they blindfolded me with the shirt. Then they put something to my head, and they told me to be careful or I would get “this,” whatever it was, I think it was a gun. But they didn’t interrogate me. It was a long trip. I only heard them debating about the traffic. They were arguing about “we should go this way” or “we should go that way.”
Suddenly the car stopped. I walked only about three or four steps and I felt it was cold, very breezy or windy. And I heard water flowing, and I could hear a whipping sound “tch-taa, tch-taa.” I was thinking, I’m in a rice field, and I’m going to be killed there.
Years later we worked out that it was the Kopassus headquarters that I had been taken to.
They asked me, what is your name and my other details. And from then on whenever they didn’t like my answer they would beat me. My face, my body — they kicked me, and they asked me to stand up again, and then beat me again.
My lips were broken. I managed not to tell them much, but they already knew. This welcome beating went on for about five or ten minutes.
That was just five or ten minutes? What did they do with you the rest of the two days?
They asked me to take off my clothes and shoes so I was wearing only my underpants. And after that they asked me to lay down on my back on a bed, and they tied my hands and feet to the bed. I had no idea where I was, I still sort of thought I was in a rice field somewhere.
And then they continued asking me about my friends. “You know Nezar” they would say. That was also the time that I realized that whip the sound “tch-taa, tch-taa” was not a whip, but electric shocks — because they used it on my leg and on my head.
Then they stopped torturing me and stopped interrogating me, and I heard there was another person there, also being beaten, being electrocuted, shouting, crying and I realized that it was Nezar.
So I thought Oh my God, Nezar is here because I’d paged him when I got home and the pager was already with Kopassus. It turns out Nezar was taken one hour earlier than me.
He was being tortured very severely. And when they stopped torturing him, there was also another person there, crying, shouting and screaming. It was Aan Rusdianto, our other friend. So there were three of us that were the target of this torture, of this interrogation. Three of us separated by about 5 meters between each of us.
What was the worst part of the torture?
The most painful part was not when I was being tortured, because I can express myself, I can express my pain. The most difficult part was when my friend was being tortured, and they start screaming and I had to listen to them. That’s the most painful part.
The hardest part is protecting your friends. Because that’s what we agreed — when we are arrested, we have to protect our friends. But of course there is a point where you cannot stand anymore — so I told them some information where it was necessary, about the party programs, but still protected my comrades.
Why do you think they didn't kill you?
I think the three of us were released because when I was taken from the house there had been many military units involved, and I became like the object of competition. There were different military factions who wanted to keep me to get the credit. And because I was taken to two military offices before being taken to Kopassus. Some activists were taken directly to Kopassus, but not in my case. And because of that many people knew about me being taken, the public knew (the head of the community had been there when he was taken) and so, for their security — so they couldn’t be accused of killing us — we were then handed back to the police. I was very lucky.
Prabowo has admitted being the officer responsible for the operation but denies knowledge of the torture or the killing. Has he apologized for what happened? There has been no expression of regret for what he did in the past. What he said, what he has expressed is his pride for what he did in the past. His pride. For example securing nine of the survivors, me and the other eight. For setting us free. He’s said that these nine activists should thank me. Ha. Fuck you.
Looking at Indonesia now, do you think that it was worth all the shit that you had to go through?
Yeah I think so. I mean, yeah we have changed. We contributed to this change, so yes I think it’s worth it. Something needed to be sacrificed.
Would a Prabowo presidency reverse all that progress?
Yes it would be a setback. Prabowo belongs to the past. Prabowo is a problem of the past. Because the ideas that he brings, is to bring us back — to roll back the democracy and freedom that we have achieved. So for sure, to have Prabowo as the president — I cannot imagine that this kind of person, who is so bloodied, who has such a history, can become the president. He’s at the forefront of those defending his father-in-law Suharto, and can that sort of person be the President of Indonesia 16 years later? No, I don’t think so.
Source: Source: https://news.vice.com/article/activist-on-being-tortured-by-the-man-who-could-be-indonesias-next-president
Wednesday, April 30, 2014
Komnas HAM, Segera Periksa Mayjen Kivlan Zen!
Mayjen. Kivlan Zen mengatakan dalam Debat di TV One, bahwa ia mengetahui 13 aktivis yang hilang diculik Kopassus yang selama 16 tahun kita perjuangkan. Bagi beberapa orang, mungkin ini bukan berita baru. Tapi IKOHI menganggap, informasi ini penting karena Kivlan Zen adalah pejabat militer (ABRI) ketika peristiwa terjadi. Ia punya otoritas sebagai representasi alat negara. Oleh karena itu, pengakuan Kivlan Zen yang disaksikan jutaan pasang mata harus ditindaklanjuti.
Memang KOMNAS HAM sudah selesai melakukan penyelidikan untuk kasus penghilangan paksa periode tahun 1997-1998 ini sejak November 2006. Namun, karena berkas penyelidikan ini masih disengketakan oleh Komnas HAM dan Kejaksaan Agung, dimana Jaksa Agung menganggap belum lengkap, yang karenanya kasus ini tidak segera disidik dan dituntut di Pengadilan HAM, maka adalah kami memandang KOMNAS HAM punya kewajiban untuk menindaklanjuti pernyataan Kivlan Zen.
IKOHI, yang merupakan wadah keluarga korban penghilangan paksa 1997-1998 dan korban pelanggaran HAM lainnya mendesak KOMNAS HAM untuk segera memanggil Mayjen Kivlan Zen untuk dimintai keterangannya.
Sebagai penegasan, informasi mengenai keberadaan para korban ini merupakan hal utama yang menjadi tuntutan keluarga korban selama 16 tahun berjuang.
Oleh karena itu, kami menganggap bagwa pengabaian atas informasi penting ini adalah pengingkaran hak atas kebenaran bagi korban dan keluarga korban.
Desakan ini kami tujukan kepada Ketua Komnas HAM, Hafid Abbas, jajaran pimpinan dan segenap Komisioner KOMNAS HAM Republik Indonesia.
Lihat Debat di TV One di sini: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3mGPrwB6kg&feature=youtu.be
Memang KOMNAS HAM sudah selesai melakukan penyelidikan untuk kasus penghilangan paksa periode tahun 1997-1998 ini sejak November 2006. Namun, karena berkas penyelidikan ini masih disengketakan oleh Komnas HAM dan Kejaksaan Agung, dimana Jaksa Agung menganggap belum lengkap, yang karenanya kasus ini tidak segera disidik dan dituntut di Pengadilan HAM, maka adalah kami memandang KOMNAS HAM punya kewajiban untuk menindaklanjuti pernyataan Kivlan Zen.
IKOHI, yang merupakan wadah keluarga korban penghilangan paksa 1997-1998 dan korban pelanggaran HAM lainnya mendesak KOMNAS HAM untuk segera memanggil Mayjen Kivlan Zen untuk dimintai keterangannya.
Sebagai penegasan, informasi mengenai keberadaan para korban ini merupakan hal utama yang menjadi tuntutan keluarga korban selama 16 tahun berjuang.
Oleh karena itu, kami menganggap bagwa pengabaian atas informasi penting ini adalah pengingkaran hak atas kebenaran bagi korban dan keluarga korban.
Desakan ini kami tujukan kepada Ketua Komnas HAM, Hafid Abbas, jajaran pimpinan dan segenap Komisioner KOMNAS HAM Republik Indonesia.
Lihat Debat di TV One di sini: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3mGPrwB6kg&feature=youtu.be
Tuesday, April 22, 2014
Untuk seorang sahabat, Caleg Gerindra 2014
Kembali ke Khitah*
Berbeda dengan Ak Supriyanto, saya berharap Faris (Dhohir Farisi) tidak lagi terpilih menjadi anggota DPR dari GERINDRA, 5 tahun sudah cukup. Lebih dari cukup malah. Selanjutnya, kembali saja ke khitah, sebagaimana diajarkan Almarhum Gus Dur (Mertuamu), Ibu Makrufah (Ibumu) dan Faisol Riza (Kakakmu), dan jalan yang pernah Faris sendiri tempuh; membela kaum lemah, kaum yang dizalimi.
Untuk Faris, maaf aku menuliskan ini:
Saya kenal Faris sejak sekitar 1996, karena kakaknya, Riza adalah kawan sangat dekat saya di Fakultas Sastra UGM. Faris kemudian juga menjadi seperti adik dan kawan bagi saya. Ketika saat itu kami (sebagai aktivis pergerakan mahasiswa SMID/PRD) sedang diburu akibat peristiwa 27 Juli 1996. Faris adalah orang yang sering bawa saya pindah dari satu tempat ke tempat lain untuk sembunyi. Karena kedekatan itulah, saya bersama Faris sering ngumpul, nongkrong, makan minum dan jalan bersama. Bahkan ketika tidak ada makan dan minum!
Pada sekitar September - Desember 1997, pada akhir masa studi, saya menempuh KKN di sebuah gunung di Desa Klumprit, sebelah selatan Candi Prambanan, Sleman Jogjakarta. Hebatnya perkawanan dan kedekatan kami; tiap akhir pekan, setiap hari Sabtu, ketika saya tidak ada pekerjaan "mengabdi pada masyarakat", Faris menjemput saya dengan motornya, motor Kaze Kawasaki (kalau tidak salah ini motor pinjaman, dari man Ris?). Untuk bisa menjemput saya di basecamp KKN, di rumah seorang warga, dengan motor yang agak butut Faris harus mendaki jalan terjal dengan batu-batu besar yang ketinggiannya melebihi 45 derajat. Hanya orang gila yang mau datang ke tempat itu. Kalau tidak, pasti ia punya motivasi kuat semisal mengunjungi pacar atau yang lain. Tetapi Faris tetap datang ke Gunung Klumprit, hampir setiap akhir pekan, selama beberapa bulan. Sedekat itu persahabatan kami waktu itu.
Setelah KKN, pada awal 1998, situasi politik tidak makin baik. Budiman Sudjatmiko dkk tetap dipenjara, tetapi gerakan harus tetap berjalan. Sayapun kemudian diminta ke Jakarta. Dan bulan Maret 1998, terjadilah peristiwa itu. 12 Maret Herman, Jati, Riza diculik! Selanjutnya 13 Maret, Nezar, Aan dan saya yang mendapat giliran.
Pada akhir Maret - April 1998, dari rumah tahanan isolasi di Polda Metro Jaya, kami membaca berita koran tentang semakin memanasnya dan radikalnya gerakan mahasiswa. Dari Jogja, saya mendengar kabar, intelijen polisi, berbagai satuan militer termasuk Kopassus melakukan perburuan para aktivis SMID/PRD. Salah satu wilayah perburuan mereka adalah kampus UGM Bulaksumur. Beberapa nama menjadi target operasi mereka. Orang-orang tak dikenal berusaha masuk kampus dan mendekati pusat-pusat kumpulan aktivis seperti di sekretariat Majalah Pijar Fak Filsafat, Sintesa di FISIPOL dan Dian Budaya di Fakultas Sastra UGM, dll. Berita yang sampai ke kami (Nezar, Aan dan saya) di tahanan Polda Metrojaya, kawan-kawan dengan gagah berani menghalau para agen intelijen dan polisi/militer ini untuk tidak masuk ke kampus. Meraka menghalau secara fisik. Dan salah satu yang paling menonjol, karena paling berani dalam menghadapi agen-agen represi Orde Baru ini, sebagaimana saya dengar adalah Faris, Dhohir Farizi, sahabat dan kawan dekat saya.
Saya menduga, keberanian Faris menjadi berlipat ganda karena kemarahan pada pelaku penculikan kakaknya, Faisol Riza dan kawan-kawannya. Saya yakin itu. Karena kemarahan itu juga kemudian tumpah ruah di mana-mana, termasuk saat ada demontrasi besar di Gedung Pusat UGM dimana para intel yang ketahuan, dihajar massa, bahkan kalau tidak salah ada yang sampai meninggal. Sayangnya, demontrasi untuk penumbangan Orde Baru oleh kawan-kawan Jogja di UGM waktu itu coba dimoderasi oleh si reformis oportunis, Amin Rais. Untungnya, ia gagal.
Sampai saat itu, Faris adalah sahabat dan kawan yang sangat hebat, dan saya sangat bangga padanya. Sama dengan bangga saya pada kakaknya, Faisol Riza dan Ibu Makrufah yang sangat saya hormati. Oh ya, Ibu Makrufah masih terus berjuang bersama Ibu/Bapak/Istri yang anak-anaknya masih hilang, walau anak kesayangannya Faisol Riza sudah bebas dan segar bugar.
Lama setelah itu saya tidak pernah bertemu Faris, apalagi ngobrol seperti dulu. Selanjutnya yang terjadi adalah kekagetan, ketika pada tahun 2009, ketika saya tidak berada di Indonesia, mendengar kabar bahwa Faris bergabung dan menjadi Caleg Gerindra. Shock. Kaget tak terkira. Apa yang terjadi? Saya tidak tahu, dan tidak bisa minta klarifikasi.
Ada apa dengan Faris? Sampai saat ini, saya tidak pernah mendapat penjelasannya. Dan mungkin memang tidak penting.
Karena itulah, membaca berita bahwa Faris mungkin tidak terpilih menjadi anggota DPR dari Gerindra pada tahun 2014 ini, saya senang. Bukan karena Faris kemudian akan kehilangan kesempatan untuk menikmati previlege menjadi anggota dewan, karena previlege seperti itu pasti juga bisa dia dapatkan dengan mudah sekarang. Yang membuat saya senang adalah bahwa kemudian Faris tidak perlu lagi mengabdi pada partai politik (Gerindra) yang dewan pembinanya (pemiliknya) adalah orang yang ia lawan dengan sangat keras, dengan gagah berani, bahkan dengan mempertaruhkan nyawa, bukan hanya dirinya, tetapi juga kakaknya. Faris tidak perlu lagi secara formal mendukung langkah-langkah politik Gerindra dalam menghalangi agenda-genda HAM di DPR.
Saya yakin, keberanian Faris yang telah dibuktikannya pada tahun 1996-1998 dan segala potensi yang dimilikinya hari ini lebih bisa digunakan untuk membantu dan membela yang lemah, yang dizalimi, yang diabaikan, yang dihinakan, yang nota bene adalah keluarga dari kawan-kawannya sendiri, keluarga korban penghilangan paksa aktivis 1997-1998.
Demikian, Faris.
Kapan kita ke Klumprit lagi, minum teh poci di kaki gunung dan nongkrong sebentar di pajeksan?
Semoga baik-baik saja!
Mugi
* Tulisan (di Facebook) dipicu oleh berita ini: http://www.tempo.co/read/news/2014/04/21/078572076/Menantu-Gus-Dur-Kalah-di-Jember-Lumajang **
Berbeda dengan Ak Supriyanto, saya berharap Faris (Dhohir Farisi) tidak lagi terpilih menjadi anggota DPR dari GERINDRA, 5 tahun sudah cukup. Lebih dari cukup malah. Selanjutnya, kembali saja ke khitah, sebagaimana diajarkan Almarhum Gus Dur (Mertuamu), Ibu Makrufah (Ibumu) dan Faisol Riza (Kakakmu), dan jalan yang pernah Faris sendiri tempuh; membela kaum lemah, kaum yang dizalimi.
Untuk Faris, maaf aku menuliskan ini:
Saya kenal Faris sejak sekitar 1996, karena kakaknya, Riza adalah kawan sangat dekat saya di Fakultas Sastra UGM. Faris kemudian juga menjadi seperti adik dan kawan bagi saya. Ketika saat itu kami (sebagai aktivis pergerakan mahasiswa SMID/PRD) sedang diburu akibat peristiwa 27 Juli 1996. Faris adalah orang yang sering bawa saya pindah dari satu tempat ke tempat lain untuk sembunyi. Karena kedekatan itulah, saya bersama Faris sering ngumpul, nongkrong, makan minum dan jalan bersama. Bahkan ketika tidak ada makan dan minum!
Pada sekitar September - Desember 1997, pada akhir masa studi, saya menempuh KKN di sebuah gunung di Desa Klumprit, sebelah selatan Candi Prambanan, Sleman Jogjakarta. Hebatnya perkawanan dan kedekatan kami; tiap akhir pekan, setiap hari Sabtu, ketika saya tidak ada pekerjaan "mengabdi pada masyarakat", Faris menjemput saya dengan motornya, motor Kaze Kawasaki (kalau tidak salah ini motor pinjaman, dari man Ris?). Untuk bisa menjemput saya di basecamp KKN, di rumah seorang warga, dengan motor yang agak butut Faris harus mendaki jalan terjal dengan batu-batu besar yang ketinggiannya melebihi 45 derajat. Hanya orang gila yang mau datang ke tempat itu. Kalau tidak, pasti ia punya motivasi kuat semisal mengunjungi pacar atau yang lain. Tetapi Faris tetap datang ke Gunung Klumprit, hampir setiap akhir pekan, selama beberapa bulan. Sedekat itu persahabatan kami waktu itu.
Setelah KKN, pada awal 1998, situasi politik tidak makin baik. Budiman Sudjatmiko dkk tetap dipenjara, tetapi gerakan harus tetap berjalan. Sayapun kemudian diminta ke Jakarta. Dan bulan Maret 1998, terjadilah peristiwa itu. 12 Maret Herman, Jati, Riza diculik! Selanjutnya 13 Maret, Nezar, Aan dan saya yang mendapat giliran.
Pada akhir Maret - April 1998, dari rumah tahanan isolasi di Polda Metro Jaya, kami membaca berita koran tentang semakin memanasnya dan radikalnya gerakan mahasiswa. Dari Jogja, saya mendengar kabar, intelijen polisi, berbagai satuan militer termasuk Kopassus melakukan perburuan para aktivis SMID/PRD. Salah satu wilayah perburuan mereka adalah kampus UGM Bulaksumur. Beberapa nama menjadi target operasi mereka. Orang-orang tak dikenal berusaha masuk kampus dan mendekati pusat-pusat kumpulan aktivis seperti di sekretariat Majalah Pijar Fak Filsafat, Sintesa di FISIPOL dan Dian Budaya di Fakultas Sastra UGM, dll. Berita yang sampai ke kami (Nezar, Aan dan saya) di tahanan Polda Metrojaya, kawan-kawan dengan gagah berani menghalau para agen intelijen dan polisi/militer ini untuk tidak masuk ke kampus. Meraka menghalau secara fisik. Dan salah satu yang paling menonjol, karena paling berani dalam menghadapi agen-agen represi Orde Baru ini, sebagaimana saya dengar adalah Faris, Dhohir Farizi, sahabat dan kawan dekat saya.
Saya menduga, keberanian Faris menjadi berlipat ganda karena kemarahan pada pelaku penculikan kakaknya, Faisol Riza dan kawan-kawannya. Saya yakin itu. Karena kemarahan itu juga kemudian tumpah ruah di mana-mana, termasuk saat ada demontrasi besar di Gedung Pusat UGM dimana para intel yang ketahuan, dihajar massa, bahkan kalau tidak salah ada yang sampai meninggal. Sayangnya, demontrasi untuk penumbangan Orde Baru oleh kawan-kawan Jogja di UGM waktu itu coba dimoderasi oleh si reformis oportunis, Amin Rais. Untungnya, ia gagal.
Sampai saat itu, Faris adalah sahabat dan kawan yang sangat hebat, dan saya sangat bangga padanya. Sama dengan bangga saya pada kakaknya, Faisol Riza dan Ibu Makrufah yang sangat saya hormati. Oh ya, Ibu Makrufah masih terus berjuang bersama Ibu/Bapak/Istri yang anak-anaknya masih hilang, walau anak kesayangannya Faisol Riza sudah bebas dan segar bugar.
Lama setelah itu saya tidak pernah bertemu Faris, apalagi ngobrol seperti dulu. Selanjutnya yang terjadi adalah kekagetan, ketika pada tahun 2009, ketika saya tidak berada di Indonesia, mendengar kabar bahwa Faris bergabung dan menjadi Caleg Gerindra. Shock. Kaget tak terkira. Apa yang terjadi? Saya tidak tahu, dan tidak bisa minta klarifikasi.
Ada apa dengan Faris? Sampai saat ini, saya tidak pernah mendapat penjelasannya. Dan mungkin memang tidak penting.
Karena itulah, membaca berita bahwa Faris mungkin tidak terpilih menjadi anggota DPR dari Gerindra pada tahun 2014 ini, saya senang. Bukan karena Faris kemudian akan kehilangan kesempatan untuk menikmati previlege menjadi anggota dewan, karena previlege seperti itu pasti juga bisa dia dapatkan dengan mudah sekarang. Yang membuat saya senang adalah bahwa kemudian Faris tidak perlu lagi mengabdi pada partai politik (Gerindra) yang dewan pembinanya (pemiliknya) adalah orang yang ia lawan dengan sangat keras, dengan gagah berani, bahkan dengan mempertaruhkan nyawa, bukan hanya dirinya, tetapi juga kakaknya. Faris tidak perlu lagi secara formal mendukung langkah-langkah politik Gerindra dalam menghalangi agenda-genda HAM di DPR.
Saya yakin, keberanian Faris yang telah dibuktikannya pada tahun 1996-1998 dan segala potensi yang dimilikinya hari ini lebih bisa digunakan untuk membantu dan membela yang lemah, yang dizalimi, yang diabaikan, yang dihinakan, yang nota bene adalah keluarga dari kawan-kawannya sendiri, keluarga korban penghilangan paksa aktivis 1997-1998.
Demikian, Faris.
Kapan kita ke Klumprit lagi, minum teh poci di kaki gunung dan nongkrong sebentar di pajeksan?
Semoga baik-baik saja!
Mugi
* Tulisan (di Facebook) dipicu oleh berita ini: http://www.tempo.co/read/news/2014/04/21/078572076/Menantu-Gus-Dur-Kalah-di-Jember-Lumajang **
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Lionel Messi dan Penghilangan Paksa; Penalty Kick dan Red Card!
Argentina memang banyak mengajarkan kita tentang Hak Asasi Manusia. Pun Lionel Messi yang memberi contoh dengan sangat jelas apa yang dimaksud dengan "Continuing Crime" atau kejahatan yang berkelanjutan pada penghilangan paksa.
Beruntunglah Anda yang menyaksikan pertandingan Liga Champions Eropa antara Manchester City melawan Barcelona di Etihad Stadium, Manchester, 19 Februari 2014 WIB. Pertandingan tersebut melahirkan kontroversi bagi sejumlah orang, terutama pendukung Manchester City. Mereka bilang, harusnya tidak ada penalty kick karena pelanggaran Demichelis terjadi di luar kotak penalti. Benarkah?
Kita beruntung karena mantan wasit Liga Primer Inggris (BPL) Graham Poll memberi penjelasan yang sangat jelas dan valid hingga sulit dibantah. Graham Poll bilang, sebagaimana dikutip portal detik.com,
"Yang jadi pertanyaan adalah posisi di mana pelanggaran itu terjadi. Saya diberitahu bahwa seorang bek berpengalaman akan melakukan upaya tekel terakhir begitu tahu mereka ada di luar kotak penalti."
"Namun demikian, saya berpendapat bahwa kontak antara keduanya berlanjut sampai di garis kotak penalti atau lebih dari itu. Ini artinya penalti itu tepat."
Hal tersebut memang diatur dalam Law of The Game yang dikeluarkan FIFA yang menyebutkan, "if a defender starts holding an attacker outside the penalty area but continues holding inside the penalty area, the referee shall award a penalty kick."
Tindak pelanggaran (offense) yang dilakukan oleh Demichelis pada Messi ini seperti praktik penghilangan paksa, dan merupakan "Continuing Offense". Memang benar dilakukan di luar kotak penalti, tapi masih terus terjadi sampai melintasi garis penalti. Hukumannya jelas, harus keras; Penalty Kick yang dilakukan Lionel Messi dan Red Card untuk Martin Demichelis. Messi mencetak gol dari kotak penalti, dan Demichelis diusir keluar lapangan pertandingan.
Demikian juga pada praktik tindakan penghilangan paksa. Memang benar, tindakan penghilangan paksanya mulai dilakukan pada masa lalu, bisa 1965 atau 1998. Tapi sampai hari ini, praktik menghilangkan orang ini masih terus terjadi sampai hari ini, tahun 2014. Ini yang disebut sebagai "Continuing Crime" dalam kasus penghilangan paksa. Sama dengan kasus Messi vs Demichelis, kita tidak bisa mengatakan bahwa penghilangan paksa itu adalah kasus masa lalu. Memang benar mulai terjadi di masa lalu, tapi karena sampai kini tidak ketahuan kabar korban masih hidup atau meninggak, maka kejahatannya dianggap masih berlangsung hingga hari ini.
Kalau FIFA mengeluarkan Law of The Game seperti dikutip di atas, Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa juga mengeluarkan United Nations Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance yang pada Pasal 17 ayat 1 menyebutkan:
“Acts constituting enforced disappearance shall be considered a continuing offence as long as perpetrators continue to conceal the fate and whereabouts of persons who have disappeared.”
Oleh karena itu, sama dengan Demichelis, penalty kick harus dilakukan atas tindakan penghilangan paksa ini dengan digelarnya Pengadilan HAM (bukan Ad Hoc), serta pelakunya di hukum berat, dikartu merah, diskualifikasi dari kontestasi politik yang tengah berlangsung. Sama dengan Demichelis yang diusir dari lapangan pertandingan. Tidak ada yang mustahil.
…***…
Messi memang luar biasa. Pantas saja ada yang bilang “saya sebelumnya tidak percaya pada Tuhan, hingga saya melihat Messi!”
Terima kasih Messi. Aku sudah titip salam padamu melalui Patricia Isasa yang juga tinggal di Rosario, Santa Fe!
Friday, February 07, 2014
Ibukku Membunuh Bapakku
Tanggal 5 Februari 2014, Fajar Merah menyampaikan kabar mengagetkan melalui akun twitter-nya @FajarMerah_. Dalam kicauannya yang hanya tiga baris itu ia bilang bahwa Ibunya, yang tak lain adalah Dyah Sujirah atau yang biasa dipanggil Sipon, membunuh Bapaknya, Wiji Thukul,seniman rakyat yang dihilangkan oleh penguasa Orde Baru pada tahun 1998.
@FajarMerah_: Ibuku membunuh Bapakku agar bisa dapat pinjaman dari Bank untuk modal usaha
@FajarMerah_: Ibukku sedang mengurus surat kematian Bapakku. Padahal Bapakku entah hidup/mati
@FajarMerah_: Karena status "Dihilangkan Negara" tidak membantu cairnya dana pinjaman
Orang mungkin mengira bahwa Fajar Merah sedang bercanda, atau sengaja mengirimkan kabar bohong untuk mencari perhatian seperti yang dilakukan oleh para Caleg atau Capres. Tapi Fajar Merah menyampaikan kebenaran, Ibunya memang sedang mematikan Bapaknya. Karena bila tidak, tidak ada lagi yang mau atau mampu membantu menyambung kehidupan ekonomi keluarga. Tetapi Ibunya tidak melakukan itu karena ia ingin melakukannya. Sipon HARUS membunuh Thukul karena Negara memaksanya melakukan hal yang demikian. Selama lebih dari 16 tahun, hampir sepanjang usia Fajar Merah, Sipon dipojokkan oleh negara hingga ia tidak punya pilihan pada hari ini. Sipon HARUS membunuh Thukul!
Bagi negara, status Wiji Thukul adalah sebuah anomali dari sistem kependudukan yang super aneh. Karena negara hanya mengenal dan mengakui warga negaranya bila mereka tercatat sebagai orang yang pernah dilahirkan, hidup, lalu mati. Makanya kita hanya punya Akte Kelahiran, lalu berbagai piagam atau sertifikat yang menunjukkan bahwa kita pernah hidup, kemudian Akte Kematian atau Surat Keterangan Kematian. Sistem kependudukan NKRI belum mengenal adanya orang yang urutan catatan kependudukannya Dilahirkan, Hidup, lalu Dihilangkan seperti Wiji Thukul. Dengan anomali status seperti yang terjadi pada Wiji Thukul, sayangnya negara belum mempunyai sistem yang memadai. Berbeda dengan di Argentina dan negara-negara lain yang bisa mengeluarkan akta yang menjelaskan bahwa "seseorang itu tidak ada karena dihilangkan".
Karena itulah, Sipon tidak bisa mendapatkan pelayanan negara sebagaimana warga negara yang lain. Sipon mengalami diskriminasi karena status suaminya. Padahal Negaralah yang menjadikan suaminya memiliki status seperti itu; Hilang, karena Dihilangkan (oleh Negara!). Tragisnya, Negara hanya memberi satu kupon kepada Sipon untuk bisa mendapatkan layanan publik yang disediakan negara untuk bertahan hidup; Mematikan Suaminya, Wiji Thukul.
Negara harus tahu hal ini. Dan negara sebenarnya sudah tahu. Tetapi negara memilih pura-pura tidak tahu. Karena kalau masyarakat tahu bahwa negara tahu, Negara akan dituntut untuk bertanggung jawab. Dan sampai hari ini, tanggung jawab itulah yang selalu dihindari oleh negara. Negara juga sudah tahu, bahwa Wiji Thukul tidak sendirian. Ada ratusan bahkan ribuan orang yang memiliki status seperti Wiji Thukul.
Sampai kapan Negara akan terus memaksa kita "Membunuh" korban penghilangan paksa???
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
Don't Delay the Ratification!
Ensuring no one disappears again
Mugiyanto, Jakarta | Mon, 01/20/2014 8:12 AM | Opinion
The meeting of the House of Representatives’ Commission I with the Foreign Ministry on Dec. 4, 2013 on the ratification of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances (Anti-Disappearance Convention) was an anticlimax. Human rights NGOs and human rights defenders, particularly the victims, have long been expecting the meeting to end up with a unanimous decision to ratify said convention. It would have been a nice year-end closing gong that would see President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono applauded not only by the country’s human rights champions, but also by the international community. The ratification of the Anti-Disappearance Convention could have become one of the President’s legacies in law and human rights. Several political parties, however, wanted to delay the ratification. Lawmakers said that there were still some parts of the draft law on the ratification that still “needed to be discussed”.
Just like the famous quote: “Justice delayed is justice denied,” such an expression in Indonesia is a euphemism for refusal.
It is very easy to guess what political parties wanted to delay the ratification: Political parties run by former military generals during the repressive New Order make it easy for people to point to the Great Indonesia Movement (Gerindra) Party, whose chief patron is Prabowo Subianto; and People’s Conscience (Hanura) Party, whose chairperson is Wiranto. Both parties have consistently argued that further discussion was needed on parts of the draft law and the convention itself. The Golkar Party, the main supporter of the Soeharto government and the Islamic Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) supported the two parties’ position. The National Mandate Party (PAN) was absent during the meeting, leaving the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), Democratic Party (PD), National Awakening Party (PKB) and United Development Party (PPP) to unite in favor of the ratification. With such a split position, further internal discussion in Commission I, which deals with politics and foreign affairs, is to be held.
The willingness to ratify the Anti-Disappearance Convention was indicated by the government. Indonesia was one of the sponsors of the adoption of the Convention by the UN General Assembly in 2006. In March 2007, then minister of law and human rights Hamid Awaludin addressed the UN Human Rights Council, saying that Indonesia would ratify it. Then in September 2009, Indonesia signed the Convention. The final step to comply with the legally binding international human rights instrument on enforced disappearance was initiated in June 2013 when the government submitted the draft law of ratification to the House for adoption.
Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa is correct in saying that the final ratification of the convention would be a manifestation of Indonesia’s commitment to protect human rights as mandated by the Constitution, “a manifestation of the country’s responsibility to guarantee that all people in the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI) are free from enforced disappearance.”
The basis of some political parties for requesting “more time to discuss some parts of the draft law”, reflects their lack of understanding on the nature of the convention, its spirit and its contents. Unlike Law No. 26/2000 on the human rights court and the Rome Statute on International Criminal Courts (ICC), which cover human rights and criminal courts, the Anti-Disappearance Convention is not a court mechanism, but an international human rights treaty or agreement. The spirit of the convention, as expressed by representatives of UN member states, invited NGOs and victims’ groups, one which I represented in the negotiations from 2003-2006 at the UN Office in Geneva, is largely to protect the rights of every person and to prevent further cases of disappearance.
This is due to the bitter experiences of most countries that the practices of disappearing people has resulted in unimaginable suffering and damage to human history, leading many to say “Never Again!” or “Nunca Mas!” or “Chega!” to this heinous practice.
Many of the provisions to the Anti-Disappearance Convention are mechanisms of prevention, such as the right of every person to not vanish is a non-derogable right (Article 1); as a preventive measure, no one shall be held in secret detention (Article 17); the families and persons working against disappearances should be protected (Article 23); and the families are also considered victims and have the right to know the truth. One important element in the convention is the monitoring body under the UN, the Committee on Enforced Disappearances which comprises 10 independent experts. But again, their mandate is also to ensure the protection of every person and to prevent enforced disappearances.
It has not only been the commitment of civil society, but the obligation of the state, primarily the government, to protect, promote and fulfill the human rights of its people as enshrined in our Constitution. As far as the Anti-Disappearance Convention is concerned, the ratification will provide the foundation of its realization.
The current administration of President Yudhoyono has shown its willingness by asking the House to adopt the draft law on ratification.
The Indonesian Military (TNI) and the National Police (Polri) have also expressed their support for the convention’s ratification.
We are now closely monitoring the political parties contesting in this year’s general election regarding their commitment to human rights. If they do not even agree to protect human rights and provide a mechanism of prevention from its violation, what else can we expect? In this particular “game”, the ball is with the political parties.
The writer chairs the Indonesian Association of Families of Missing Persons (Ikatan Keluarga Orang Hilang Indonesia, IKOHI).
Source: http://m.thejakartapost.com/news/2014/01/20/ensuring-no-one-disappears-again.html
Mugiyanto, Jakarta | Mon, 01/20/2014 8:12 AM | Opinion
The meeting of the House of Representatives’ Commission I with the Foreign Ministry on Dec. 4, 2013 on the ratification of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances (Anti-Disappearance Convention) was an anticlimax. Human rights NGOs and human rights defenders, particularly the victims, have long been expecting the meeting to end up with a unanimous decision to ratify said convention. It would have been a nice year-end closing gong that would see President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono applauded not only by the country’s human rights champions, but also by the international community. The ratification of the Anti-Disappearance Convention could have become one of the President’s legacies in law and human rights. Several political parties, however, wanted to delay the ratification. Lawmakers said that there were still some parts of the draft law on the ratification that still “needed to be discussed”.
Just like the famous quote: “Justice delayed is justice denied,” such an expression in Indonesia is a euphemism for refusal.
It is very easy to guess what political parties wanted to delay the ratification: Political parties run by former military generals during the repressive New Order make it easy for people to point to the Great Indonesia Movement (Gerindra) Party, whose chief patron is Prabowo Subianto; and People’s Conscience (Hanura) Party, whose chairperson is Wiranto. Both parties have consistently argued that further discussion was needed on parts of the draft law and the convention itself. The Golkar Party, the main supporter of the Soeharto government and the Islamic Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) supported the two parties’ position. The National Mandate Party (PAN) was absent during the meeting, leaving the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), Democratic Party (PD), National Awakening Party (PKB) and United Development Party (PPP) to unite in favor of the ratification. With such a split position, further internal discussion in Commission I, which deals with politics and foreign affairs, is to be held.
The willingness to ratify the Anti-Disappearance Convention was indicated by the government. Indonesia was one of the sponsors of the adoption of the Convention by the UN General Assembly in 2006. In March 2007, then minister of law and human rights Hamid Awaludin addressed the UN Human Rights Council, saying that Indonesia would ratify it. Then in September 2009, Indonesia signed the Convention. The final step to comply with the legally binding international human rights instrument on enforced disappearance was initiated in June 2013 when the government submitted the draft law of ratification to the House for adoption.
Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa is correct in saying that the final ratification of the convention would be a manifestation of Indonesia’s commitment to protect human rights as mandated by the Constitution, “a manifestation of the country’s responsibility to guarantee that all people in the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI) are free from enforced disappearance.”
The basis of some political parties for requesting “more time to discuss some parts of the draft law”, reflects their lack of understanding on the nature of the convention, its spirit and its contents. Unlike Law No. 26/2000 on the human rights court and the Rome Statute on International Criminal Courts (ICC), which cover human rights and criminal courts, the Anti-Disappearance Convention is not a court mechanism, but an international human rights treaty or agreement. The spirit of the convention, as expressed by representatives of UN member states, invited NGOs and victims’ groups, one which I represented in the negotiations from 2003-2006 at the UN Office in Geneva, is largely to protect the rights of every person and to prevent further cases of disappearance.
This is due to the bitter experiences of most countries that the practices of disappearing people has resulted in unimaginable suffering and damage to human history, leading many to say “Never Again!” or “Nunca Mas!” or “Chega!” to this heinous practice.
Many of the provisions to the Anti-Disappearance Convention are mechanisms of prevention, such as the right of every person to not vanish is a non-derogable right (Article 1); as a preventive measure, no one shall be held in secret detention (Article 17); the families and persons working against disappearances should be protected (Article 23); and the families are also considered victims and have the right to know the truth. One important element in the convention is the monitoring body under the UN, the Committee on Enforced Disappearances which comprises 10 independent experts. But again, their mandate is also to ensure the protection of every person and to prevent enforced disappearances.
It has not only been the commitment of civil society, but the obligation of the state, primarily the government, to protect, promote and fulfill the human rights of its people as enshrined in our Constitution. As far as the Anti-Disappearance Convention is concerned, the ratification will provide the foundation of its realization.
The current administration of President Yudhoyono has shown its willingness by asking the House to adopt the draft law on ratification.
The Indonesian Military (TNI) and the National Police (Polri) have also expressed their support for the convention’s ratification.
We are now closely monitoring the political parties contesting in this year’s general election regarding their commitment to human rights. If they do not even agree to protect human rights and provide a mechanism of prevention from its violation, what else can we expect? In this particular “game”, the ball is with the political parties.
The writer chairs the Indonesian Association of Families of Missing Persons (Ikatan Keluarga Orang Hilang Indonesia, IKOHI).
Source: http://m.thejakartapost.com/news/2014/01/20/ensuring-no-one-disappears-again.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)