Indonesian Civil Society Organizations submitted the 3rd Cycle of the UPR Alternative Reports

Indonesian Civil Society Organizations has been submitted the alternative reports of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) for the 3rd cycle. Indonesia will be reviewed on the 27th Session of the UN Human Rights Council (April – May 2017). On September 22, 2016, was the deadline submission for the Indonesian Civil Society Organizations to submit their alternative reports. In this matter, Human Rights Working Group (HRWG) as one of the civil society organizations in Indonesia which were coordinating a joint report addressed to the UN Human Rights Council, has submitted the Joint Submission in response to the recommendations of the 2nd Cycle of UPR in 2012, as well as the Individual Reports which based on more than 20s of the thematic issues.

The previous recommendations accepted by Indonesia Government in 2012 could be downloaded:

  1. Report of the Working Group (5 July 2012)
  2. Addendum of the Report of UPR Working Group (5 September 2012)
  3. Decision of the Outcome (12 October 2012)

See the Summary of recommendations for Indonesia (accepted and rejected) by UPR-Info at UPR-Info

The Reports of Indonesian CSOs on the implementation of 2012 UPR Recommendations, submitted to the UPR Working Group on 22 September 2017:

  1. UPR Joint Submission (General report responding all of issues in the UPR 2012 Recommendation, submitted by Indonesian NGOs Coalition)
  2. UPR Joint Stakeholders Submission on the rights of the persons with disabilities
  3. UPR Joint Stakeholders Submission on Indonesia women and children issue
  4. UPR Joint Stakeholders Submission on issues relating to the death penalty
  5. UPR Joint Stakeholders Submission on the situation of human rights of indigenous peoples in Indonesia
  6. UPR Joint Stakeholders Submission on the situation of Human Rights Defenders in Indonesia
  7. UPR Joint Stakeholders Submission on the situation of freedom of religion and belief in Indonesia
  8. UPR Joint Stakeholders Submission on the situation of freedom of religion and belief violation in Indonesia : Case of Millah Abraham/Gafatar
  9. UPR Joint Stakeholders Submission on the situation of the right to a clean and healthy environment and rights to land and housing in Indonesia
  10. UPR Joint Stakeholders Submission on the situation of LGBT people in Indonesia
  11. UPR Joint Stakeholders Submission on the situation of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and of association in Indonesia
  12. UPR Joint Stakeholders Submission on Reproductive Health (including child and women) 
  13. UPR Joint Stakeholders Submission on the Sexual and Reproductive Health 
  14. UPR Joint Stakeholders Submission on the situation of Indonesia Women and Children Issues
  15. UPR Joint Witness Statement on Human Rights and Drug Policy (LBH Masyarakat, Reprieve, International Centre on Human Rights and Drug Policy)

Kindly check the calendar of reviews for the 3rd UPR cycle (2017-2021) is now available here.

Indonesia will be reviewed by the UPR Working Group on the 3rd of May, 2017 (UPR 27th Timetable), find the list of Troikas of Indonesia UPR 27 Troikas.

Local and International groups express solidarity for the families of executed prisoners in Singapore

We, the undersigned organisations, condemn the shameful execution of a Nigerian national, Chijioke Stephen Obioha, and a Malaysian national, Devendran a/l Supramaniam in Singapore on 18 November 2016, which runs counter to global trends towards abolition of capital punishment. Around the same time, at the 50th and 51st meeting of the UN General Assembly's Third Committee’s 71 st session proceedings, the Singapore representative introduced amendments, undermining the spirit of the draft resolution calling for a moratorium on the death penalty, supported by states such as Syria, Egypt and Bangladesh.

We remain appalled that Singapore continues to execute people in contravention of international law and standards. The two men were sentenced to mandatory death penalty, after being convicted of drug trafficking, which does not meet the threshold of the “most serious crimes”.

In July 2011, during its first Universal Periodic Review (UPR), Singapore accepted a recommendation that called on the government to make available statistics and other factual information on the use of the death penalty (A/HRC/18/11, para. 95.15). The lack of transparency in relation to the scheduled executions, therefore, remains deeply concerning and prevents informed and meaningful debates in the country on the retention of this punishment.

We would like to express our regret and share in the disappointment of the families of the executed men. We oppose the use of capital punishment in all circumstances, as a violation of human rights which can never be justified under the flawed assumption that it has a unique deterrent effect.

 

Signatories:

Singapore

Function 8

Humanitarian Organization for Migration Economics (HOME)

Project X

Singapore Anti-Death Penalty Campaign (SADPC)

Think Centre

We Believe in Second Chances

 

Malaysia

Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM)

Malaysians Against Death Penalty & Torture (MADPET)

 

Indonesia

Human Rights Working Group (HRWG)

 

International Groups and Networks

Amnesty International (AI)

Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)

Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN)

Coalition for the Abolition of the Death Penalty in ASEAN (CADPA)

Ensemble contre la peine de mort (ECPM)

Franciscans International (FI)

Human Rights Watch (HRW)

International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)

International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)

World Coalition Against the Death Penalty (WCADP)

For further information please contact Think Centre.

Email: thinkcentre@hotmail.com Tel: +65 94791906

Indonesia Harus Tegas Mendesak Myanmar untuk Hentikan dan Selesaikan Persoalan Rohingya

[Jakarta, 24 November 2016] HRWG mendukung upaya pemerintah Indonesia untuk membantu penyelesaian Rohingya saat ini. Penyelesaian kasus Rohingya saat ini selain menghentikan kekerasan terhadap warga sipil di sana, juga harus menuju pada upaya rekonsilasi, perdamaian dan reformasi di tubuh keamanan di Myanmar di bawah pemerintahan NLD.

Data yang didapatkan oleh HRWG dari jaringan NGO advokasi Rohingya di Myanmar, hingga saat ini, masih terdapat sekitar 37 ribu pengungsi internal (IDPs) kelompok minoritas Rohingya yang menyebar di sejumlah wilayah Myanmar. Hal ini menunjukkan, Pemerintah Myanmar sendiri belum melakukan upaya konkret untuk menghentikan kekerasan dan situasi konflik yang sedang berlangsung.

Selain itu, per 20 November 2016, HRWG melaui jaringannya mencatat, setidaknya sejumlah pelanggaran HAM telah terjadi selama 2 bulan terakhir di Negara Bagian Rakhine yang menimpa kelompok etnis Rohingya. Tercatat setidaknya 211 orang ditembak mati, 22 orang dibakar, 97 kasus perkosaan dan kekerasan seksual terhadap perempuan, 387 orang yang ditahan secara sewenang-wenang, 135 orang dinyatakan hilang, dan 158 orang yang terluka dan disiksa. Selain itu, berdasarkan informasi yang diterima, tercatat kurang lebih 1688 buah rumah yang terbakar dan hancur.

HRWG menyesalkan penggunaan cara-cara militeristik terhadapa etnis Rohingya yang justru memperburuk keadaan di lapangan. Tugas utama pemerintah Myanmar adalah untuk melindungi setiap orang yang tinggal di Myanmar terbebas dari rasa takut dan tindak kekejaman massal (mass atrocities), termasuk terhadap kelompok Rohingya.

Selain itu, pemerintah Myanmar juga harus berusaha untuk menciptakan suasana kondusif serta mendorong rekonsiliasi dan perdamaian di sana. Pemerintah juga wajib memastikan jaminan pemulangan bagi kelompok Rohingya yang terusir dapat pulang secara aman, serta berani menindak tegas pelaku kerusuhan, penyebar kebencian serta menghapuskan budaya impunitas.

Situasi ini merupakan pelanggaran HAM serius bagi Pemerintah Myanmar, terlebih dalam konteks komunitas ASEAN. Ekskalasi kekerasan tersebut telah menciderai prinsip-prinsip HAM yang tercantum di dalam Piagam ASEAN dan ASEAN Human Rights Declaration.

Dalam konteks regional pula, HRWG mendesak agar Komisi Antarpemerintah HAM ASEAN (AICHR) bersama dengan ASEAN Institute for Peace and Reconciliation (AIPR) segera merespon hal ini guna memastikan situasi saat ini terkendali. Selanjutnya, penting untuk ASEAN melakukan kerjasama untukmenjalankan prinsip-prinsip pencegahan terjadinya kekejaman massal (mass atrocities) agar kesatuan ASEAN sebagai komunitas yang damai dan aman tetap dapat berlangsung.

Dengan ini, HRWG kembali mendorong Pemerintah Indonesia untuk meningkatkan kerjasama bilateral dan regional dengan Myanmar untuk menyelesaikan kekerasan yang baru saja terjadi dan bila diperlukan membentuk Tim Investigasi gabungan independen yang terdiri dari Pemerintah Myanmar dan Indonesia untuk mendata lebih lanjut dampak kekerasan yang terjadi baru-baru ini. Di samping itu, Pemerintah Indonesia harus meyakinkan Myanmar untuk membuka akses ke wilayah Rakhine State, terutama bantuan kemanusiaan terhadap penduduk sipil, perempuan dan anak, serta memastikan kekerasan tidak terjadi lagi.

HRWG: Revisi UU Antiterorisme Berpeluang Melanggar HAM

Sandy Indra Pratama, CNN Indonesia | Kamis, 17/03/2016 10:50 WIB

Jakarta, CNN Indonesia — Kelompok lembaga swadaya masyarakat Human Rights Working Group (HRWG) menilai revisi Undang-Undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2003 tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Terorisme membuka peluang pelanggaran HAM. Terutama dalam hal pemenuhan prinsip-prinsip ‘fair trial’ dan larangan penyiksaan.

“Bukannya memperkuat mekanisme pengawasan dan prosedur penanganan, pasal-pasal revisi justru semakin membuka peluang bagi kesewenang-wenangan aparat dan penegak hukum, jauh dari prinsip penegakan hukum yang adil, akuntabel dan transparan,” kata Direktur Eksekutif HRWG Rafendi Djamin dalam keterangannya yang diterima di Jakarta, Kamis (17/3).

HRWG mendukung upaya pemerintah untuk memberantas segala bentuk teror yang harus berada dalam konteks perlindungan hak rasa aman setiap orang dan pemberantasannya tidak serta merta dapat menabrak prinsip-prinsip penegakan hukum.

Sebaliknya, pemberantasan terorisme harus tetap memperhatikan rambu-rambu hak asasi manusia.

HRWG menilai bahwa penanganan terorisme masih sangat memprihatinkan bila dilihat dari perspektif HAM, terutama dalam kasus terakhir ketika seorang terduga teroris, Siyono (34), warga Kabupaten Klaten, yang diketahui meninggal setelah ditangkap oleh Densus 88.

Siyono ditangkap oleh pasukan Densus Antiteror Mabes Polri di rumahnya di Dukuh Brengkungan, Desa Pogung, Kecamatan Cawas, Kabupaten Klaten, Jawa Tengah, Rabu (9/3). Pasukan Densus 88 yang didukung anggota Polres Klaten kemudian melakukan penggeledahan di rumah Siyono, pada Kamis (10/3) siang.

“Meski ada proses penyelidikan yang dilakukan oleh Polri, namun hal ini tidak cukup menjadi alasan untuk menghilangkan nyawa seseorang, apalagi diketahui telah terjadi prosedur dalam pengawalan. Sayangnya, pentingnya prosedur tetap dan transparan ini justru tidak dimasukkan dalam RUU revisi yang memadai dan baik untuk menekan pelanggaran HAM, termasuk pula upaya dialog yang lebih utama dalam menyelesaikan permasalahan radikalisme dan terorisme,” kata Rafendi.

Menurut HRWG, tidak memadainya revisi dapat dilihat dari sejumlah pasal di dalam RUU, di antaranya perpanjangan masa tahanan, tuntutan dan proses peradilan (Pasal 25 RUU), penghapusan izin penyadapan dari Pengadilan Negeri dan tidak adanya prosedur pengawasan (Pasal 31 RUU), penempatan terduga teroris di tempat tertentu (Pasal 34A) yang justru bertentangan dengan semangat penghukuman dan anti-penyiksaan.

“Kecenderungan yang ada, bukannya mekanisme kontrol dan pengawasan yang diperkuat, tapi sebaliknya mengarah pada penegakan hukum yang sewenang-wenang dan tidak transparan,” ujar Rafendi.Kemudian, adanya potensi mengembalikan peranan TNI dalam pemberantasan terorisme (Pasal 43B) yang justru bertentangan dengan semangat reformasi, serta beberapa pasal yang masih kabur dan memunculkan multitafsir.

HRWG mendesak DPR dan Pemerintah untuk melakukan evaluasi komprehensif terhadap penanganan terorisme selama ini, mulai dari pencegahan, deradikalisasi hingga penindakan, untuk menemukan celah pelanggaran HAM dan membuat mekanisme pengawasan yang lebih baik.

Di level internasional, HRWG mengingatkan bahwa PBB telah menyepakati sejumlah resolusi yang menegaskan pentingnya prinsip-prinsip HAM dalam penanganan terorisme. Pemberantasan terorisme sebagai musuh bersama tidak bisa digunakan sebagai justifikasi untuk melakukan tindakan brutal oleh penegak hukum.

“Sebaliknya, ‘fair trial’ dan prinsip praduga tak bersalah harus dipegang teguh oleh negara. Bukannya meningkatkan prestasi, tindakan brutal aparat penegak hukum sendiri dapat merusak citra Indonesia yang sudah mendapat predikat baik dalam pemberantasan terorisme,” kata Rafendi.

Lembaga Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban (LPSK) menilai bahwa pemerintah perlu memasukkan pasal-pasal tentang hak-hak korban dari aksi terorisme. Revisi undang-undang tersebut dianggap terlalu fokus pada masalah penanganan pelaku dan terduga pelaku tindakan terorisme.Sebelumnya, sejumlah kritik dan masukan terhadap rancangan revisi UU Nomor 15 Tahun 2003 datang dari berbagai lembaga swadaya masyarakat terkait potensi pelanggaran hak asasi manusia dari hasil revisi undang-undang tersebut.

Sementara lembaga demokrasi dan pemerhati perdamaian Setara Institute mengkritisi sejumlah pasal yang berpotensi menjadi tindakan pelanggaran HAM apabila tidak diperjelas ketentuannya.

Beberapa hal yang dikritisi antara lain mengenai keterlibatan TNI dalam operasi penanggulangan teroris, penyadapan, penempatan seorang terduga teroris di suatu tempat dalam jangka waktu enam bulan, serta masa penahanan yang dianggap berlebihan. (Antara/sip)

Source: CNN Indonesia

Business and human rights principles should be aligned: HRWG

Marguerite Afra Sapiie, The Jakarta Post | Jakarta, Tue, January 5, 2016

President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo greets members of NGOs and human rights activists at an event to mark International Human Rights Day at the State Palace on Dec. 11. (Antara/Yudhi Mahatma)

The Human Rights Working Group (HRWG) has called on President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo to uphold human rights and democratic values in line with economic growth, stressing that development should be carried out with respect for human rights.

HRWG executive director Rafendi Djamin said the government’s economic-oriented goals in 2015 had neglected its commitment to upholding human rights, while ideally business and human rights principles should be aligned because they had similar objectives, namely to improve welfare of the people.

“The government needs to be consistent in upholding human rights ahead of boosting economic growth with projects that involve Indonesians,” Rafendi told thejakartapost.com.

Rafendi said that Jokowi’s administration had failed to include human rights principles in its domestic policies that aimed to boost economic and investment growth.

However, HRWG’s program manager for the United Nations and Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Muhammad Hafiz, said in contrast to domestic policy, Indonesia had played a significant role in promoting human rights at the global level through the UN in 2015.

Hafiz said that at the foreign policy level, Indonesia had demonstrated the country’s commitment to upholding democratic values by endorsing a number of UN resolutions related to human rights.

For example, Indonesia pushed for Resolution A/HRC/28/L.4 on combating intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief to be adopted by the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) during its 28th session and contributed to the drafting of Resolution A/HRC/RES/23/9 on the negative impact of corruption on the enjoyment of human rights, which was adopted at the UNHRC’€™s 23rd session, both in 2015.

“Indonesia’s foreign policy in the UN is not in line with its domestic policy. Indonesia pushes other countries to be tolerant and to promote anticorruption efforts, but it’s not the same at the domestic level,” Hafiz said.

According to Hafiz, the government should translate its foreign policy at the domestic level by integrating human rights principles into policies that were made to propel business growth, particularly in investment.

Hafiz said the central government needed to ensure that companies investing in Indonesia respected human rights principles and insist that it be stated in the working contract between companies and their workers.

He also stressed the need for the central government to help local governments that mostly lacked the ability to adopt human rights principles into their policies.

Rafendi said human rights violations would keep happening as long as the government did not align business and human rights principles. (bbn)

Source: Jakarta Post

Dokumen Follow up Rekomendasi Kunci Komite HAM PBB tentang Hak Sipil dan Politik

Komite HAM PBB mengeluarkan rekomendasi terhadap pelaksanaan Kovenan Hak Sipil dan Politik di Indonesia pada tahun 2013. Di antara rekomendasi-rekomendasi tersebut, terdapat 4 rekomendasi kunci yang harus dilaksanakan oleh Pemerintah Indonesia satu tahun pasca rekomendasi dikeluarkan. Tidak hanya itu, pemerintah Indonesia diharuskan untuk menyampaikan laporan terhadap pelaksanaan rekomendasi-rekomendasi kunci tersebut, di samping juga masukan yang dapat disampaikan oleh masyarakat sipil (laporan alternatif).

Berikut ini adalah dokumen-dokumen yang terkait dengan empat rekomendasi kunci Komite HAM PBB dan dokumen update pelaksanaan rekomendasi tersebut dalam masa waktu satu tahun: 

  • Empat rekomendasi-rekomendasi kunci Komite HAM PBB dan jabaran isu yang dicakup; paragraf 8, 10, 12 dan 25 [Klik di sini]  
    1. The State party should, as a matter of urgency, address the impasse between Komnas HAM and the Attorney General. It should expedite the establishment of a court to investigate cases of enforced disappearance committed between 1997 and 1998 as recommended by Komnas HAM and the Indonesian Parliament. Furthermore, the State party should effectively prosecute cases involving past human rights violations, such as the murder of prominent human rights defender Munir Said Thalib on 7 September 2004, and provide adequate redress to victims or members of their families.
    2. The State party should reinstate the de facto moratorium on the death penalty and should consider abolishing the death penalty by ratifying the Second Optional Protocol to the Covenant. Furthermore, it should ensure that, if the death penalty is maintained, it is only for the most serious crimes. In this regard, the Committee recommends that the State party review its legislation to ensure that crimes involving narcotics are not amenable to the death penalty. In this context, the State party should consider commuting all sentences of death imposed on persons convicted for drug crimes.
    3. The State party should repeal Ministry of Health Regulation No. 1636 of 2010, which authorizes the performance of FGM by medical practitioners (medicalization of FGM). In this connection, the State party should enact a law that prohibits any form of FGM and ensure that it provides adequate penalties that reflect the gravity of this offence. Furthermore, the State party should make efforts to prevent and eradicate harmful traditional practices, including FGM, by strengthening its awareness-raising and education programmes. In this regard, the national-level team established to develop a common perception on the issue of FGM should ensure that communities where the practice is widespread are targeted in order to bring a change in mind set.
    4. Notwithstanding the decision of the Constitutional Court upholding Law No. 1 of 1965 on defamation of religion, the Committee is of the view that the said law is inconsistent with the provisions of the Covenant and that it should be repealed forthwith. The Committee reiterates its position as stated in paragraph 48 of general comment No. 34, that: “ Prohibitions of displays of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system, including blasphemy laws, are incompatible with the Covenant, except in the specific circumstances envisaged in article 20, paragraph 2, of the Covenant. … Thus, for instance, it would be impermissible for any such laws to discriminate in favour of or against one or certain religions or belief systems, or their adherents over another, or religious believers over non-believers. Nor would it be permissible for such prohibitions to be used to prevent or punish criticism of religious leaders or commentary on religious doctrine and tenets of faith.” Furthermore, the Committee recommends that the State party provide adequate protection against violence perpetrated against members of religious minorities.
  • Surat yang dikirimkan Komite HAM PBB kepada Pemerintah Indonesia agar mengirimkan laporan pelaksanaan rekomendasi [klik di sini
  • Laporan Follow up yang disampaikan oleh Pemerintah Indonesia kepada Komite HAM PBB atas 4 rekomendasi kunci (CCPR/C/IND/CO/1/Add.1) [klik di sini]
  • Laporan masyarakat sipil tentang pelaksanaan 4 rekomendasi Komite HAM PBB (dikoordinasikan oleh HRWG dan CCPR Centre) [klik di sini]
  • Laporan masyarakat sipil bersama disusun oleh Imparsial, Vivat International dan FI [klik di sini]

Human Rights Committee discusses and adopts reports on follow-up to concluding observations and to views

Human Rights Committee | 30 March 2015

The Human Rights Committee today discussed and adopted a progress report by the Rapporteur on follow-up to concluding observations and a progress report by the Rapporteur on follow-up to views.

The Committee’s procedure for follow-up to its concluding observations issued to States consists of identifying a limited number of its recommendations which require additional information from a State party, within one year from the consideration of the Committee’s review of a State party’s country report.  At every session the Committee Member acting as Rapporteur on follow-up to concluding observations presents an updated progress report to Committee Members.  

Fabian Omar Salvioli, Committee Chairperson and Rapporteur on follow-up to concluding observations, presented the draft report (CCPR/C/113/R.4) and briefed the Committee on the follow-up procedure with nine countries: Jordan, Serbia, Yemen, Lithuania, Germany, the Czech Republic, Finland, Mauritania, and Uruguay.  Anja Seibert-Fohr, Committee Member, briefed the Committee on the procedure on Indonesia. Yuji Iwasawa, Committee Member and Rapporteur on follow-Up to views, presented a progress report on individual communications (CCPR/C/113/R.3), which covered submissions received and processed between June 2014 and January 2015, pertaining to Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cameroon;

Colombia, Denmark, France, Kazakhstan, Lithuania, Nepal, Republic of Korea, Russia, Spain, Uruguay, and Uzbekistan. 

Concerning the follow-up to concluding observations in Jordan, the Committee decided to ask for additional information on the funding and selection of personnel for the National Centre for Human Rights, and to end the practice of administrative detention which was not compliant with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.  The recommendation to abolish the State Security Court was partially implemented.  The Committee agreed to suspend the follow-up procedure on Jordan and to request the additional information to be included in its upcoming periodic reports.

The Committee took note of the measures in Serbia to ensure the independence of the judiciary, such as the strategy for judicial reform and the reform of the courts, and the specific efforts to address the discrimination of Roma, which included developing the National Action Plan 2010-2015, improving access to employment, and ensuring education for Roma children.

Yemen refused to ensure equality between women and men in law, as requested by the Committee, because it was in contrast with Islamic law.  The Committee took note of legislative measures to address torture and enforced disappearances, and the cooperation with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees on refugee determination procedure, and on asylum seekers.

Issues of concern in Lithuania included discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity, and the fight against terrorism.  The Committee took note of the draft law on administrative detention and alternative measures to detention, and requested further information on the issue.

Germany complied with the recommendation to temporarily suspend the transfer of asylum seekers to Greece.  The Committee decided to ask for the suspension of this procedure for as long as conditions in reception centres remained difficult and to also ask Germany to address the use of restraints against persons with disabilities in residential homes.

The Committee noted the efforts of the Czech Republic to ensure the accreditation of the Public Defender of Rights in compliance with the Paris Principles and the legal amendment to further its competence and extend the mandate.  Measures had been undertaken to raise awareness about racial discrimination, particularly against Roma, address hate crimes, and protect the rights of persons with mental disabilities.  The Committee acknowledged the prosecution of the perpetrators of forced sterilization of Roma women and stressed that more needed to be done.

Finland was revising its legislation to comply with the Committee’s recommendation to use alternatives to detention and deprivation of liberty of asylum seekers, but the living conditions in asylum detention centres still needed improvement.  The Sami Parliament Act was being revised and specific measures had been taken to guarantee the right of Sami children to receive education in their own language.

Lack of definition of torture in compliance with international standards, and absence of investigations and prosecutions of cases of torture were among the issues raised with Mauritania.  Training of the police and the military cadets must also include international human rights law, and more information was needed on the draft law on the establishment of a national preventive mechanism.  Some measures were taken to eradicate slavery and prosecute the perpetrators, but it was not enough as the practice persisted and only 26 cases had been prosecuted.

The Committee had raised concern about the lack of appropriate resources for the national human rights institution in Uruguay and its compliance with the Paris Principles.  While taking note of the draft amendment of the Code of Criminal Procedure which aimed to align it with the provisions of the Covenant in the area of presumption of innocence, the Committee wondered whether it would significantly address criminal policies. 

The Committee had not received any information about the establishment of a court to investigate cases of enforced disappearances committed between 1997 and 1998 in Indonesia.  Indonesia considered drug-related crimes as one of the most serious crimes and said that the death penalty for drug-related crimes was important for the nation’s survival.  The Committee regretted that Indonesia had taken measures on this issue contrary to the Committee’s recommendations.  The Committee took positive note of the firm prohibition by the law of female genital mutilation and said that more information on the steps to prevent the practice was needed.  The Committee decided to reiterate its recommendation to repeal the law on defamation of religion.

Yuji Iwasawa, Committee Member and Rapporteur on follow-up to views, presented a follow-up progress report on individual communications (CCPR/C/113/R.3), which covered submissions received and processed between June 2014 and January 2015.  The 31 individual communications contained in the report pertained to Australia (1), Austria (1), Azerbaijan (1), Bosnia and Herzegovina (6), Cameroon (2), Colombia (1), Denmark (1), France (3), Kazakhstan (2), Lithuania (1), Nepal (4), Republic of Korea (1), Russia (1), Spain (1), Uruguay (1), and Uzbekistan (4).  Mr. Iwasawa said that since 1979, but not counting the communications dealt with this session, 908 of the 1,072 views adopted concluded that there had been a violation of the Covenant.

The Committee will next meet in public at 3 p.m. on Thursday, 2 April to discuss its methods of work and announce bureau decisions before it closes its one hundred and thirteenth session.

_________

For use of the information media; not an official record

– See more at: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=15775&LangID=E#sthash.jtyYFIHK.dpuf

UN Human Rights Committee deplores Indonesia’s response to its call to stop executions for drug-related crimes

GENEVA (2 April 2015) – The UN Human Rights Committee has given Indonesia the lowest possible evaluation for its failure to respond to the Committee’s call in 2013 to stop executing prisoners for drug-related crimes.

After a regular review of Indonesia’s human rights record, the Committee in August 2013 urged the State to reinstate the de facto moratorium on the death penalty and to ensure that, if capital punishment was maintained, it was only for the most serious crimes, which do not include drug-related offences. The Committee also called on Indonesia to review its legislation so offences involving narcotics were not punishable by the death penalty.

In a follow-up evaluation of Indonesia this week, Committee members voiced concern at the recent executions in Indonesia and regretted that the State had not amended its legislation as requested. They awarded Indonesia a rare E grade on the scale of A to E, where A is largely satisfactory and E indicates the measures taken go against the Committee’s recommendation.

Indonesia had argued that, given the severe impact and the challenges posed by drug-related crimes to the nation’s survival and its young generation, it considered such offences as among the most serious to which the death penalty may apply.

Article 6* of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Indonesia is a State Party, does allow for the death penalty in certain very restricted cases. The Committee has repeatedly stressed that drug-related offences are not such cases and that capital punishment for drug-related offences does not comply with article 6 of the Covenant.

The Human Rights Committee monitors implementation by States Parties of the ICCPR by means of regular review and, where applicable, a follow-up procedure to analyse a State’s response to the most pressing issues.

The Committee also urges all States to ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the Covenant, which aims at the abolition of the death penalty. In 2013, it called on Indonesia to do so. [ENDS]

For more information and media requests, please contact: Liz Throssell ethrossell@ohchr.org / 41 22 917 9466 / 41 79 752 0488 or Kate Fox kfox@ohchr.org/ 41 22 917 9398 or

Human Rights Committee:http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CCPR/Pages/CCPRIndex.aspx

ICCPR: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CCPR.aspx

Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/2ndOPCCPR.aspx

———————-

*Article 6 of the ICCPR :

  1. Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.
  2. In countries which have not abolished the death penalty, sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes in accordance with the law in force at the time of the commission of the crime and not contrary to the provisions of the present Covenant and to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. This penalty can only be carried out pursuant to a final judgement rendered by a competent court.
  3. When deprivation of life constitutes the crime of genocide, it is understood that nothing in this article shall authorize any State Party to the present Covenant to derogate in any way from any obligation assumed under the provisions of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
  4. Anyone sentenced to death shall have the right to seek pardon or commutation of the sentence. Amnesty, pardon or commutation of the sentence of death may be granted in all cases.
  5. Sentence of death shall not be imposed for crimes committed by persons below eighteen years of age and shall not be carried out on pregnant women.
  6. Nothing in this article shall be invoked to delay or to prevent the abolition of capital punishment by any State Party to the present Covenant.

General Comment on article 6, on the right to life (16th session, 1982): http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=INT%2fCCPR%2fGEC%2f6630&Lang=en

UN Human Rights, follow us on social media:

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/unitednationshumanrights

Twitter: http://twitter.com/UNrightswire

Google+ gplus.to/unitednationshumanrights

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/UNOHCHR

Storify: http://storify.com/UNrightswire

– Source: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=15792&LangID=E#sthash.PvqPbPsV.dpuf

“Mengecam Pernyataan Menkopolhukam tentang Pencari Suaka sebagai Komoditas Diplomatik!”

PRESS RELEASE

“Mengecam Pernyataan Menkopolhukam tentang Pencari Suaka sebagai Komoditas Diplomatik!”

SUAKA, sebuah jaringan masyarakat sipil untuk advokasi hak-hak azasi pengungsi dan pencari suaka, sangat menyesalkan pernyataan Mekopolhukam yang menjadikan pencari suaka politik/pengungsi sebagai dagangan politik di saat ketegangan diplomatik Indonesia dan Australia terjadi terkait masalah penerapan hukuman mati di Indonesia. Dalam sebuah pernyataanna, Menteri KOPOLHUKAM kopolhukam, Tedjo Edhy Purdijatno, mengancam akan melepaskan 10.000 pencari suaka bila Australia terus bersikap tak bersahabat terhadap eksekusi mati terpidana Bali nine.   Sebuah pernyataan publik yang tidak pantas di ucapkan oleh seorang pejabat tertinggi Republik ini yang brtanggung jawab di bidang Politik dan HAM

Dengan pelbagai alasan dan faktor, sepuluh ribu pengungsi/pencari suaka yang ada di Indonesia saat ini adalah orang-orang yang terancam jiwa dan keamanannya di negara asalnya sehingga terpaksa harus mencari perlindungan di negara lain. Selama ini, sejak 1979, Indonesia, sebagai Negara transit,  telah memberikan bantuan kepada pencari suaka/pengungsi secara sementara, di antaranya pula dengan mengizinkan UNHCR (Kantor Urusan Pengungsi PBB) dan IOM (Organisasi Imigrasi Internasional) di Indonesia untuk menangani permasalahan tersebut sembari menunggu solusi jangka panjang.

Untuk itu, SUAKA memandang bahwa pernyataan Menkopolhukam tersebut mencerminkan bahwa Menteri tidak mengerti tentang permasalahan pengungsi internasional, karena pernyataan tersebut bertentangan dengan sikap dan kebijakan pemerintah Indonesia selama ini yang menilai bahwa permasalahan pengungsi adalah masalah dan tanggung jawab dunia, di mana Indonesia harus dan telah berupaya berbagi beban sebagai bagian dari komunitas Internasional. Dan menjadi actor penting dalam kerjasama regional masalah pengungsi dalam konteks “Bali Process”. yang justru di pimpin oleh Indonesia dan Australia. Pernyataan ini jelas memosisikan para pengungsi hanya sebagai komoditas diplomatik untuk mengurangi tuntutan Australia dalam kasus eksekusi hukuman mati di Indonesia, pernyataan yang merendahkan martabat kemanusiaan, padahal pernyataan ini memberikan efek besar pada kerentanan para pengungsi dan berpotensi menempatkan pengungsi internasional dalam bahaya yang lebih besar.

Sebagai champion demokrasi dan HAM di kawasan Asia Tenggara sudah seharusnya Indonesia menunjukan komitmennya dengan melihat isu pengungsi ini dari perspektif HAM, terlebih hak untuk mencari suaka telah diakui di dalam konstitusi Indonesia, UUD 1945.

Dengan ini, SUAKA menyatakan:

1.    Suaka mengecam pernyataan Menkopolhukam tersebut yang – bisa jadi mewakili pandangan pemerintah secara umum – menyebutkan bahwa Indonesia “bisa melepaskan 10 ribu pengungsi tersebut menjadi Tsunami Manusia ke Australia.” Pengungsi adalah kelompok rentan yang membutuhkan perlindungan dan bukan komoditas politik yang dapat dijadikan daya tawar. Penyebutan pengungsi sebagai “Tsunami Manusia” telah merendahkan martabat manusia  yang selayakanya dijaga sebagai bagian dari penegakan HAM.

2.    Meminta Menkopolhukam agar menarik pernyataannya tersebut dan meningkatkan kerjasama regional  antar negara-negara di kawasan Asia Pasifik termasuk Australia, dalam kerangka kerja penanganan permasalahan pengungsi yang mengupayakan perlindungan hak-hak asasi mereka, serta mencarikan solusi yang permanen (durable solution).  

3.    Dengan absennya kerangka hukum di Indonesia dalam perlindungan pengungsi mengakibatkan adanya diskriminasi dan stigmatisasi terhadap pengungsi sebagai imigran gelap (illegal immigrant), di mana mereka dapat ditangkap dan ditahan tanpa proses yang jelas. Padahal, hukum kebiasaan internasional meletakkan pengungsi sebagai subyek hukum yang harus dilindungi dan difasilitasi.

4.    Melepaskan para pengungsi ke laut lepas melalui perahu akan meletakan hidup para pengungsi ke dalam bahaya yang lebih besar. Khususnya, ketika masih berada dalam proses penentuan status sekaligus perlindungan. Suaka menekankan bahwa Indonesia harus menjadi tuan rumah yang baik dalam memberikan perlindungan sementara bagi mereka.

Jakarta, 13 Maret 2015

Febionesta, Chair of Suaka

Rafendi Djamin, Director of HRWG/Suaka Member

Pemerintah Tidak Sadar, Ada 229 WNI Terancam Hukuman Mati di Luar Negeri

Senin, 9 Maret 2015 | 19:41 WIB 

JAKARTA, KOMPAS.com — Peneliti Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR) Erasmus Napitupulu mengatakan, dalam menekankan pelaksanaan eksekusi mati, Pemerintah Indonesia sebenarnya tidak sadar bahwa 229 warga negara Indonesia saat ini terancam untuk dieksekusi mati di negara lain.

“Saat Indonesia menunjukkan kekuatannya terhadap para terpidana, pemerintah tidak sadar ada 229 WNI terancam hukuman mati di negara lain. Apa yang nantinya bisa dikatakan pemerintah saat lakukan pembelaan?” ujar Erasmus saat ditemui di Kantor Human Rights Working Group (HRWG), Jakarta Pusat, Senin (9/3/2015).

Erasmus menjelaskan, dari total warga negara yang terancam hukuman mati, sebanyak 131 orang merupakan terpidana dalam kasus narkotika. Ia mengatakan, dalam hal ini, Presiden Joko Widodo akan kesulitan untuk memberikan bantuan hukum bagi warga negaranya yang terancam hukuman mati. (Baca: Dari 229 WNI yang Terancam Hukuman Mati di Luar Negeri, 57 Persen Terkait Narkoba)

Selain itu, secara spesifik, Erasmus mengomentari pembatasan jumlah pengajuan peninjauan kembali (PK), yang diatur dalam Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung Nomor 7 Tahun 2014. Menurut dia, aturan tersebut menunjukkan bahwa Pemerintah Indonesia tidak memenuhi prinsip fair trial dalam pemenuhan hak sesuai prosedur hukum bagi para terpidana.

“PK tidak boleh lebih dari satu kali membatasi hak warga negara untuk memperoleh keadilan. Fair trial tidak dijamin di Indonesia. Jokowi harus jelaskan bagaimana menyelamatkan WNI di luar negeri yang akan dihukum mati,” kata Erasmus. (Baca: Pemerintah Janji Dampingi 229 WNI yang Terancam Hukuman Mati di Luar Negeri) 

Sumber: Kompas