Letters

Testimony to Precedents and Presidents

The court session for the Bulog case that presented former President B.J.Habibie as a witness was something usual. For important investigations in court, anyone can be called to be a witness. Basically, everyone has equality before the law.

Becoming a controversy, however, is the process of witness investigation that utilized long-distance technology, with a media teleconference. Based on the Court of Justice, the court in South Jakarta, through their decision, saw the need for hearing the witness information in connection with the investigation on the Bulog case it was handling.

The Bulog case entered into criminal law. Because of that, the court was trying to search for the truth through testimony so it could formulate its judgment. The controversial matter is: does information from a witness using a teleconference actually qualify as legal testimony and fulfill legality principles? Besides that, should the law still follow static dogma, or prioritize to develop the use of technology?

The answer for that can be found by reverting to the attitudes of the law institution. But basic awareness for the judges or law institutions is a duty that is their burden. They must search and discover societies' values regarding law in order to reflect truth and justice. Utilizing technology for court for easier communication because of great distances is not a mistake as long as everyone using the courts has the chance to benefit (without discrimination). I wonder if the Supreme Court considers this case to be a precedent.

H. RADYA BAHAR, S.H.
Jakarta

Indonesians, Not Cows

The House of Representatives (DPR) plenary session on July 1, 2002 has failed to form a special committee for the case of Bulog II. After DPR Deputy Speaker Soetardjo Soerjogoeritno knocked the gavel three times as a sign that the session was closed, every citizen just felt sad and helpless while praying: “Dear God! Our hope of making this country free from corruption, collusion and nepotism has been wiped out."

From nine factions in the DPR, only two factions are consistent in wanting to create a special committee for Bulog II. These are the Reform faction (37 votes) and the Indonesian National Unity faction (8 votes). Seven other factions had three dominant attitudes which are:

1. The attitude that people have come down with “ghost night fever." When sleeping together they always want to be in the middle, afraid of the right and left. The importance is soundness of sleep and feeling safe.

2. The attitude of the champion of cowards. In the beginning, unified to fight in the arena, but when the time came, their clothes hadn't been washed and the daggers hadn't been sharpened. Cruelly letting friends fight the powerful and great numbers of the enemy.

3. The attitude of commander to the king: “Hail, Milord!" Even though it's a public secret that Milord stole 40 cows from the people, he's the slave that will protect Milord in spite of losing his soul.

So these are the type of national representatives that we voted for during the last general election in 1999. To Mr. Amien Rais and Mr. Edi Sudrajat, we'd like to say “bravo!" Only the two of you hold the people's support and hope. Especially Mr. Amien Rais as a locomotive of reformation, continue being consistent fighting for justice and truth.

In truth, the Indonesian people are not a herd of cows that are easily driven everywhere. Now they know what is gold and what is brass.

H. SYAIFUL IRSYAD
Jalan Koramil 1, Rumbai
Pekanbaru, Riau 23861

Kidnapped

I'm a mother with four children, and Muntu Jacobus Winowatan's wife, one of four kidnap victims (besides Julkifli, Pieter Lerrich, and Ferdinand Joel) taken in the southern Philippines on June 17, 2002. I wrote this letter because I don't know where else to go to ask for help and news of my husband and his colleagues.

I've made some efforts in order that my husband and his colleagues can be saved, such as:

1. On June 20, 2002, I wrote a letter to the chairman of Office for Protection of Citizens and the Corporate Bodies of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at Jalan Pejompongan 6, Jakarta. From this office I received an answer that the Indonesian Government through the KBRI (Indonesian Embassy) in Manila and KJRI (Indonesian Consulate General) in Davao City had begun coordination and cooperation with appropriate governmental agencies and local security. They also actively approached society figures who have influence in the southern Philippines to strive for negotiations and intensive dialogues with the kidnappers.

2. On July 12, 2002, I wrote a letter to Mr. Kumareen in The Singapore Maritime Officers' Union (SMOU), Singapore, a place where my husband was a member. On July 16, 2002, I received clarification that SMOU would still try to access information about my husband and his colleague's condition.

3. On July 18, 2002, I wrote a letter to President Megawati Sukarnoputri passing through the State Secretariat's Office and until now I'm waiting and hoping for help form the government.

4. On July 19, 2002, I sent a facsimile to radio El Shinta, Jakarta, so that everyone who can set my husband and his colleagues free can hear this news.

5. On July 22, 2002, I once more wrote a letter to the chairman of the Office for Protection of Citizens and Corporate Bodies at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but as yet I have not received an answer.

6. On July 24, 2002, I sent a facsimile to KBRI in Manila and up to now I'm waiting for an answer.

Until July 23 2002, my husband had communicated 12 times by phone with me. The essence of every conversation is asking for help in order that I should call the company where my husband and his colleagues work (Labroy Group of Companies) in Singapore and also the Indonesian and Philippines government for help to set them free. Based on these calls, my husband and his colleagues are facing being tortured and killed if US$5 million isn't transferred for the kidnappers.

I have no hidden meaning with this letter, to offend or force others to help. Only the deep longing of a kidnap victim's family to be reunited with Mr Muntu Jacobus Winowatan.

NY. RACHMAWATI
Jalan Anggrek IV Blok AS/13
Jati Sampurna, Pondok Gede
Bekasi, West Java 17433

Amendment to the 1945 Constitution

The 1945 Constitution is a ‘guideline of state principles' that was produced by the founding fathers. This orientation book, after 50 years, has been forbidden. Can the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) now guarantee that after amendments, the new ‘guideline' won't be forbidden just like before? If there's no guarantee, can it be concluded that amendment to the 1945 Constitution isn't really urgent? The national confusion isn't because of the book, but because of the Indonesian people's attitude. Because of that, the true urgency is in fixing the people's attitude. It's better for MPR to make changing attitudes a national priority while amending the 1945 constitution can be ensured gradually over time.

NANANG S. SOETADJI
Jalan Kemang Dalam VI/E-18
Jakarta 12730
sutadji@mweb.co.id

Tendentious TEMPO

In the investigation about the Ma'had Al-Zaytun mystery in TEMPO's July 15 edition there is a report which is negative and unfriendly. TEMPO should straighten out this case.

1. On page 39, in the second column (The Two Faces of Al-Zaytun) is written: “TEMPO sources say Umar has an ulterior motive and refer to his past association with Jemaah Imron, a controversial movement .... Imron, leader of the group, and several of his men were captured and executed by the government. No graves, however, were found, giving rise to charges that the group was a creation of the Indonesian intelligence to discredit Islam." In the same column, TEMPO criticized my book as documentation that has not been properly verified: “TEMPO found... strongly objected to the charge. Mursalin Dahlan, one of the persons named by Abduh..."

2. Whereas my explanations about the purpose, method, and background of our investigation with the team from SIKAT (Solidarity of Islam for NII's victim and Deviated Ideology) against the NII movement and Al-Zaytun to TEMPO's investigation team was complete and clear. Our meetings, organized at TEMPO, took place on four occasions and the journalist conducted three interviews.

3. I've warned TEMPO many times to stop creating political stigma through the Imran movement. TEMPO is for the first time at the forefront of stigmatization, reporting about the Imran movement being military henchman. Nowadays, I think TEMPO has a new face, stands on ethics, truth, and human rights, but apparently is still tendentious, leaning toward the negative.

For that reason, I must set straight these mistakes as follows:

1. As a former member of the Imran movement, I'd like to clarify the slander and stigmatization that was developed by agencies that said the Imran movement is one of the creations of Indonesian intelligence. This is untrue, slander and a big lie!

2. It's true when Imran and his colleagues were in Saudi Arabia, around 1979, Ali Moertopo had come to him. Ali talked about his reluctance to go to Indonesia and offered a scholarship to America. But, Imran and his colleagues rejected the offer or any request from Ali Moertopo. Ali Moertopo's background of coming to Imran and his colleagues was because Ali had destroyed the office of Islam Jama'ah which was headed by Nurhasanah Ubaidillah in the Azziziyah area Makkah al-Mukaromah.

3. Ali Moertopo is a military intelligence and Golkar figure from the era of protecting and raising and also totally supporting the existence of Islam Jama'ah, which legally was declared forbidden by the Attorney General RI in 1971. Likewise with the NII movement (TEMPO can verify this case with K.H. Bambang Hafiluddin and K.H. Hasyim Riva'i). Because of this, Ali Moertopo visited and attempted to persuade Imran.

4. Actually any movement nowadays is absolutely under intelligence control (coordination) and also military influence.

5. Changes and games of the military intelligence here does not meant that the Imran movement is financed, protected, and raised by Ali Moertopo or Benny Moerdani and Suharto. Because, in practice and fact, physical and mental mistreatment and also robbery of property of members of the Imran movement cannot be compared to what has been received by other movements.

6. If our movement, at that time, was controlled and coordinated by military intelligence, why did the hijacking happen to the Imran movement which has not been charged as a military agent? Why were our colleagues in that incident killed?

7. We admitted that there are at least two of our former members who have now become intelligence at the State Intelligence Agency. However, with two former colleagues, can the Imran movement be called the creation of Indonesian intelligence?

8. TEMPO sentenced Imran and his Jama'ah movement as a creation of Indonesian intelligence just because they can't find Imran's corpse after execution. Until now, a prisoner's corpse who has been executed can't be taken away by their family! Since Kartosuwiryo until Kusni Kasdut and the others, the corpse's locations remain unknown. With that fact known, is it proper to be suspicious and pass judgment as a creation of Indonesian intelligence?

9. The principle of verification used by TEMPO seemed to indicate that I must get permission or confirmation as writer of Al-Zaytun for those I named as NII figures. For this case, to which argument of law did TEMPO actually reconcile? I, as a writer, had actual time living with NII figures.

10. It would be fitting if TEMPO could act fairly and wisely with our investigation data, as well as accepting and following up other investigation data. If TEMPO could be fair with the Al-Zaytun, why couldn't it do the same with one Umar Abduh?

UMAR ABDUH
Jakarta

Thank you for your explanation. We wrote our investigation in accordance with known journalistic procedures and standards, although the results may not necessarily be to everyone's satisfaction. However, we can assure you that we have no intention whatsoever to discredit you.-Ed.

"Nikmati tulisan lengkap artikel ini pada versi cetak dan versi digital majalah Tempo" Silahkan hubungi customer service kami untuk berlangganan edisi cetak di 021-5360409 ext 9. Silahkan hubungi Pusat Data Analisa Tempo untuk mendapatkan versi arsip dalam bentuk PDF, di 021-7255624 ext 486

Download versi digitalnya :
1. iPad : melalui aplikasi Tempo Media Apps. Klik disini
2. Samsung Galaxy Tab melalui aplikasi Samsung E Reader. Klik disini
3. Huawei Ideos S7 melalui aplikasi XL-Baca. Klik disini

Terima Kasih.