ELSAM, Jakarta –Any efforts to settle past gross human rights violations cases have already been carried out. Victims, academicians and civil society have worked together to establish a way to return the former justice already been taken away during the violence period of New Order. However, during the reform until today, there is no certainty where the road might lead to. Will it lead to the justice and democracy or it only circles to carry us to the uncertain future of gross human rights violations settlement?
The question was again reflected in the discussion held by the Institute for Policy Research and Advocacy (ELSAM) entitled “Merangkai Peta Jalan Indonesia untuk Penyelesaian Pelanggaran HAM Berat di Masa Lalu (Arranging Indonesian Roadmap to Settle Gross Human Rights Violations in the Past)” on 18 April 2016. There were a number of important figures who have long engaged in the discourse on the settlement of gross human rights violations in Indonesia, namely, Marzuki Darusman, Kamala Chandrakirana, Hajriyanto, Abdul Hakim Garuda Nusantara, Ifdhal Kasim, Imam Azis dan Abdul Haris Semendawai attending the discussion.
Marzuki Darusman stated that the discourse on the settlement of gross human rights violations has to begin to look for a focus on the event and possibilities of international society involvement in accelerating the settlement of gross human rights violations in Indonesia.
“I think we need to take half step behind to look our business as a whole,” he stated. Marzuki Darusman also criticized that the Symposium 1965 event which was held by government was irrelevant with the context of the development of the discourse on the 1965 massacre this time.
Meanwhile, Abdul Hakim Garuda Nusantara evaluated that all this time the movement of settlement of past gross human rights violations has never clearly mapped what the government desired. Abdul Hakim considered that the discourse needs to obtain public material legitimacy in order to become national agenda.
“First is constitutional legitimacy, second is sociology legitimacy and third is moral legitimacy. If those three are not fulfilled, any of government decision on the settlement of past gross human rights violations will always become a controversy,” he said.
The efforts conducted by civil society until today have been at the point where there is no a way back. What is currently needed this time is the foundation of which institution and function are important to settle the cases of past gross human rights violations. Meanwhile, Kamala Chandrakirana reminded that there is still a momentum available in the international world which makes it important to discuss the issue to the public. She also stated the importance of highlighting the dynamics occurring in the local government.
“Any initiatives from local government have been and are currently implemented. Such an effort should be provided a national stage so that there will be an acknowledgement that regions have already had the settlement mechanism,” she said.
The discussion will be a valuable input for the development of discourse on the settlement of past gross human rights violations. Currently ELSAM formulates a policy framework on the settlement of past gross human rights violations which points out at the operationalization of Constitution as a perspective in the policy making of settlement of past gross human rights violations.