Penyelesaian Non Yudisial Pelanggaran HAM Berat

METRO TV

23 Jun 202304:29

Summary

TLDRThe transcript discusses serious human rights violations in Indonesia, citing directives from the MPR and specific laws from 1998, 1999, and 2000. It highlights the challenges in proving these violations in court due to technical and political obstacles, such as the formation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (KKR). Despite the Judicial Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) identifying four cases with 35 suspects, all were acquitted due to insufficient evidence. The government's focus is on compensating victims through non-judicial means, without neglecting judicial resolutions, in accordance with the 2000 law. The summary calls for continued efforts to address these issues in the parliament and emphasizes the importance of victim compensation over pursuing perpetrators.

Takeaways

📜 The script discusses serious human rights violations and references specific legal documents, including MPR Decree No. 17 of 1998, Law No. 39 of 1999, and Law No. 26 of 2000.
🔍 It is stated that past serious human rights violations must be investigated by the National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) and resolved through judicial and non-judicial means, including corruption eradication courts (KKN).
🚫 There have been technical and legal challenges in criminal procedure law, particularly in proving the violations, which has led to difficulties in judicial resolution.
🏛️ Despite the challenges, there have been four cases with a total of 35 suspects, all of whom were declared free by the courts due to lack of evidence of serious human rights violations.
📚 The cases mentioned include post-referendum violence in East Timor, the Abepure case, the Tanjung Priok case, and a broadcasting case.
👥 The government is focusing on supporting the victims of these violations rather than dealing with the perpetrators, who are subject to judicial processes.
💡 Non-judicial resolution is emphasized as a way to support victims, which does not negate the ongoing pursuit of judicial resolution in accordance with Law No. 26 of 2000.
🤔 The script highlights a need for further discussion and debate in the House of Representatives (DPR) about the suitability and effectiveness of non-judicial resolutions.
📢 A recent press conference by the Attorney General's Office (Menkopolhuka) discussed non-judicial resolutions of serious human rights violations, indicating a continued focus on this approach.
🔄 The script suggests a shift in focus from the perpetrators, who have been tried in court, to the victims and their needs, emphasizing a victim-centered approach to resolution.

Q & A

What are the two main reasons mentioned for the serious human rights violations?
-The two main reasons are the orders from the MPR Decree No. 17 of 1998 and laws No. 39 of 1999 and No. 26 of 2000, which state that past serious human rights violations must be investigated and determined by the Human Rights Commission and resolved through judicial and non-judicial means.
What does the term 'non-judicial resolution' refer to in the context of the script?
-Non-judicial resolution refers to the handling of serious human rights violations outside the court system, such as through reconciliation or other forms of dispute resolution that do not involve formal legal proceedings.
What are the challenges faced in judicial resolution of serious human rights violations as mentioned in the script?
-The challenges include technical and legal issues in criminal procedure law, such as proof and the entire procedure, and political obstacles in the formation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (KKR).
How many cases and suspects were there where serious human rights violations were determined by the Human Rights Commission?
-There were four cases with a total of 35 suspects determined by the Human Rights Commission.
What was the outcome for the 35 suspects in the cases determined by the Human Rights Commission?
-All 35 suspects were declared free by the court, stating that there was no evidence of serious human rights violations.
What are the four cases mentioned in the script?
-The four cases mentioned are related to post-referendum violence in East Timor, the Abepure case, the Tanjung Priok case, and the broadcasting case.
Why is the government focusing on supporting the victims rather than dealing with the perpetrators?
-The government is focusing on supporting the victims through non-judicial resolution to ensure they are not delayed in receiving assistance, as judicial resolution has proven difficult due to the challenges in proving the violations.
What is the role of the Attorney General's Office in the non-judicial resolution process?
-The Attorney General's Office, along with the Human Rights Commission, is involved in discussing and determining the non-judicial resolution process in accordance with Law No. 26 of 2000.
What is the significance of the discussion in the DPR regarding the suitability of non-judicial resolution?
-The discussion in the DPR is crucial as it will determine the acceptability and effectiveness of non-judicial resolution methods in addressing serious human rights violations.
What was the recent statement made by the Minister of Political, Legal, and Security Affairs regarding non-judicial resolution?
-The Minister of Political, Legal, and Security Affairs recently held a press conference stating that non-judicial resolution is focused on the victims and not the perpetrators, emphasizing that the judicial process has already been conducted for the 35 suspects who were declared free.

Outlines

00:00

🏛️ Human Rights Violations: Legal Challenges and Resolutions

This paragraph discusses the serious human rights violations (HAM) that have occurred in the past and the legal framework established to address them. It references specific laws and regulations, including the MPR decree number 17 of 1998 and laws number 39 of 1999 and 26 of 2000. The paragraph explains the dual approach of judicial and non-judicial resolution, including the role of the Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) and the Supreme Court. It highlights the difficulties in proving these violations in court due to technical and political obstacles, particularly in the establishment of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (KKR). The paragraph also mentions four specific cases with 35 suspects, all of whom were acquitted due to insufficient evidence, emphasizing the challenges in the judicial process for such cases.

Mindmap

Keywords

💡Human Rights Violations

Human Rights Violations refer to the infringement of rights that are considered fundamental to every human being. In the context of the video, it discusses the serious human rights violations that occurred in the past and the need for them to be investigated. The script mentions that these violations are to be addressed by Komnas HAM (National Commission on Human Rights) and through judicial and non-judicial means, indicating the severity and the multi-faceted approach required for their resolution.

💡MPR Decree

MPR Decree refers to a directive issued by the People's Consultative Assembly (Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat), which is a supreme advisory body in Indonesia. The script cites MPR Decree number 17 from 1998 as one of the legal bases for investigating past human rights violations, showing the decree's significance in shaping the country's approach to addressing these issues.

💡Judicial and Non-Judicial Settlements

Judicial and Non-Judicial Settlements are two different methods of resolving disputes or issues. The video discusses the failure of both methods in addressing serious human rights violations. The script mentions that despite the efforts of Komnas HAM and the Attorney General's Office, the judicial process has been unable to conclusively resolve these cases due to technical and political obstacles.

💡Komnas HAM

Komnas HAM stands for National Commission on Human Rights in Indonesia. It is an independent body tasked with the protection and promotion of human rights. The script highlights the role of Komnas HAM in identifying and investigating serious human rights violations and its involvement in the non-judicial settlement process.

💡Corruption Eradication Commission (KPP)

Although not explicitly mentioned in the script, the reference to 'KKR' likely refers to the Corruption Eradication Commission (Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi) in Indonesia. The script mentions political obstacles in the formation of the KPP, which could be related to the broader context of governance and the challenges in addressing human rights violations.

💡Evidence

Evidence is the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid. In the context of the video, the script discusses the difficulty in providing legally acceptable evidence for human rights violations, which has resulted in the acquittal of the accused in the judicial process.

💡Acquittal

Acquittal refers to the legal finding that a person accused of a crime is not guilty. The script mentions that in the cases of human rights violations investigated by Komnas HAM, all the accused were acquitted due to insufficient evidence, highlighting the challenges in securing convictions in such cases.

💡Non-Judicial Settlements

Non-Judicial Settlements are mechanisms for resolving disputes outside of the formal court system. The video discusses the government's approach to compensating victims of human rights violations through non-judicial means, emphasizing the importance of addressing the needs of the victims rather than focusing solely on the perpetrators.

💡Victims and Perpetrators

Victims are individuals who have suffered harm or loss, while perpetrators are those responsible for causing such harm. The script distinguishes between the treatment of victims and perpetrators, with a focus on compensating victims and the judicial process for perpetrators, reflecting the dual approach to addressing human rights violations.

💡Indonesian Legal System

The Indonesian Legal System refers to the framework of laws, regulations, and institutions that govern the country. The script touches upon the complexities and challenges within the Indonesian legal system, particularly in the context of addressing serious human rights violations and the difficulties in securing convictions.

💡Political Obstacles

Political Obstacles refer to the hindrances or barriers that arise due to political factors or influences. The script mentions political obstacles in the formation of the KPP and the challenges in implementing judicial resolutions for human rights violations, indicating the influence of politics on the legal process.

💡Compensation for Victims

Compensation for Victims is the act of providing financial or other forms of reparation to those who have suffered harm. The video discusses the government's commitment to compensating victims of human rights violations as a form of non-judicial settlement, showing the state's responsibility to address the consequences of such violations.

Highlights

Serious human rights violations are mandated to be investigated by MPR Decree No. 17 of 1998 and laws No. 39 of 1999 and No. 26 of 2000.

Violations from the past must be addressed by Komnas HAM through judicial and non-judicial means.

There are technical and political obstacles in the judicial process, specifically in criminal procedure law and the formation of an ad hoc human rights court.

Four cases with 35 suspects have been identified by Komnas HAM, all of whom were acquitted due to the difficulty in providing legal evidence.

The judicial process has been unable to conclusively address serious human rights violations, leading to the release of all 35 suspects.

The government plans to support the victims of human rights violations rather than dealing with the perpetrators.

Non-judicial resolution is a policy to support victims and does not negate the pursuit of judicial resolution.

The non-judicial resolution will continue to be sought in accordance with Law No. 26 of 2000, discussed by Komnas HAM and the Attorney General.

The decision on non-judicial resolution will be presented to the DPR for debate on its feasibility.

The focus of the resolution is on the victims, not the perpetrators, who are subject to judicial review.

There has been a recent press conference by the Minister of Political, Legal, and Security Affairs discussing non-judicial resolution of serious human rights violations.

Among the four cases, there are notable ones related to post-referendum opinions in Timor Timur, the Abeypura case, and the Tanjung Priok case.

The Aceh case is also highlighted as part of the serious human rights violations that have not been proven in court.

The characteristics of all cases determined by Komnas HAM are similar, indicating a pattern in the handling of human rights violations.

The difficulty in providing legal evidence in human rights violation cases often results in the acquittal of suspects by the courts.

The Supreme Court has also released suspects due to the inability to meet the burden of proof in human rights violation cases.

There is an ongoing effort to review and potentially reform the judicial process to better handle serious human rights violations.