Indonesia has passed periodic monitoring of the promotion of Human Rights in the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, on 9 November 2022. The Civil Society Coalition for UPR Reporting, consisting of: Amnesty International Indonesia, ASEAN SOGIE Caucus, KontraS , KIKA, the Indonesian FreeToBeMe (FTBM) Coalition, SAFEnet, and Transmen Indonesia, held an agenda to watch the session live together to monitor the report of the Government of the Republic of Indonesia in the session.

During the 4th round of the UPR session, the Indonesian Government reported on Indonesia's achievements in fulfilling human rights, including the success in passing the Omnibus Law on the Job Creation Law, passing the Sexual Violence Crime Law (TP-KS), infrastructure development and increasing the budget for autonomy areas in Papua, as well as the successful handling of COVID-19. However, the coalition considers that what is conveyed by the Indonesian Government is in contrast to the actual situation, which has also been reported by Indonesian civil society through an alternative report sent in March 2022.

Regarding the issue of Business and Human Rights as well as its relation to environmental justice and development, the Government of the Republic of Indonesia mentions the Omnibus Law of the Job Creation Law as an achievement in stabilizing business by paying attention to human rights and the environment. In addition, the government acknowledged that it had followed the United Nations Guiding Principles (UNGP) on Business and Human Rights and was a pioneer in holding meetings related to BHR issues. In fact, KontraS noted that Indonesia still often ignores the standards in the UNGP. In carrying out development, Indonesia does not heed the interests of the people affected by development, often intimidating local residents and damaging the surrounding environment.

Regarding human rights defenders and freedom of expression, the Indonesian Government responds that Indonesia always cooperates with human rights defenders, civil society organizations, journalists, and other civil elements in the context of protecting human rights. However, Fatia Maulidiyanti, Coordinator of KontraS stated that “Human rights defenders in Indonesia face various attacks, in which they or their families are followed, monitored, subjected to criminal charges, and public defamation”. So KontraS emphasizes that there must be comprehensive protection of human rights defenders and freedom of expression in law.

On the issue of impunity, the Indonesian Government emphasizes the provision of reparations for victims and that non-judicial mechanisms are complementary to judicial mechanisms. In addition, the Indonesian Government responded that it would properly investigate past gross human rights violations. However, KontraS in its alternative report considers that the government often seeks peace by providing monetary assistance without an effective judicial process and reparations through the Presidential Working Unit for Handling Incidents of Serious Human Rights Violations and the Integrated Team for Handling Alleged Human Rights Violations.

Regarding the issue of torture, the Indonesian Government emphasized the existence of security training and efforts to adopt the OP-CAT which has not yet been ratified. Unfortunately, until now several community groups are still the targets of acts of torture. The absence of OP-CAT ratification is also a domino effect of the ongoing acts of torture in Indonesia. Indonesia has also not drafted and implemented a specific law on torture and ill-treatment. "There is also a need for comprehensive police reform as the dominant actor in the practice of torture," said Fatia.

The Indonesian Government also received many notes and recommendations to immediately abolish the death penalty and a moratorium on the death penalty through the ratification of the 2nd ICCPR optional protocol on the Abolition of the Death Penalty. However, the Indonesian Government responded that the death penalty will remain one of the side sentences in the RKUHP by taking into account the applicable human rights standards and still giving death convicts the possibility of commuting. "The rampant practice of unfair trials in law enforcement and the war against narcotics agenda exacerbates the legitimacy of the practice of the death penalty in Indonesia," said Charlie Albajili, Head of Advocacy at LBH Jakarta.

Nurina Savitri, campaign manager for Amnesty International Indonesia, criticized the Indonesian government for not providing complete information on the human rights situation in Indonesia during the UPR session. One example is the claim that the Indonesian government is improving its legal instruments through the RKUHP, which in fact contains problematic articles that have the potential to violate human rights.

“The article on defamation, the article on insulting the President and the Vice President, the article on insulting the government, the article on treason, these are articles that have been used to silence those who are critical of state policies, to repress those who have different political views. And those articles are preserved in the latest draft of the RKUHP. Whereas these rights are guaranteed in international legal instruments ratified by Indonesia in the form of laws, "explained Nurina.

Claims regarding the involvement of civil society also do not reflect the actual situation regarding attacks experienced by human rights defenders in recent years. According to Amnesty's records, during the 2019-2022 period, there were 328 cases of physical and digital attacks against civilians with 834 victims.

Regarding the issue of Papua and the human rights situation there, the Indonesian Government stated that most cases of violence in Papua have been investigated and the perpetrators have been punished, but in reality there are no cases involving security forces in Papua, including extrajudicial killings. which had previously been successfully investigated and tried in an independent court.

"In the report, the government only conveys the situation in Papua from the perspective of infrastructure development and welfare, even though at the same time violence continues. Of course, it is unfair to answer all this violence only with the jargon of infrastructure development," said Nurina.

In addition, the Coalition also highlighted the repeated violations of Papuans' right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, as well as the government's tendency to strengthen its security approach in Papua.

"The Indonesian government states that the international world must be able to distinguish between human rights issues in Papua and law enforcement actions. The question is, has the Indonesian government been able to tell the difference?"  said Nurina, "Extrajudicial killings, silencing expressions against Papuan civil society are not law enforcement actions, they are clearly human rights violations."

ASEAN SOGIE Caucus, the FTBM Coalition and Transmen Indonesia highlighted issues regarding human rights related to sexual orientation, gender identity & expression and sex characteristics (SOGIESC) which were not at all addressed by the Government in both the report and the response during the session. In a joint report with LGBTQIA+ organizations in Indonesia, it is noted that Indonesia has not shown improvement in the fulfillment of LGBTQIA+ rights. On the contrary, massive and structured discrimination continues to occur and has led to violations of basic rights such as the right to freedom of expression, the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and the right to a decent life as well as freedom and security. The rise of discriminatory local bylaws such as the Regulation on the Prevention and Control of Sexual Deviant Behavior (P4S) 2021 in Bogor City, and the year before the enaction of the similar bylaws in Cianjur Regency is evidence of structured restrictions on the human rights of LGBTQIA+ groups.

During the session, the Government was silent on the remarks and recommendations that specifically mentioned the issue of human rights violations experienced by LGBTQIA+ groups. We noted that Indonesia received 3 questions in advance, 13 recommendations and 7 remarks from 17 states regarding the elimination of discrimination against LGBTQIA+ people and the fulfillment of their rights. The recommendations came from Mexico, Brazil, Ireland, Peru, Montenegro, Sweden, Australia and others, among others.

Lini Zurlia, Advocacy Officer at the ASEAN SOGIE Caucus, deeply regrets the silence of the Government regarding the issues. 'It is certain that almost all remarks and recommendations submitted by the 107 countries participating in the session were responded to by the Government, except those relating to LGBTQIA+. This indicates that there is no recognition of the human rights of LGBTQIA+ people in Indonesia, let alone the intention to protect and fulfill," Lini said.

SAFEnet in its report noted that digital rights in Indonesia are also being repressed. For example, the government used bandwidth restrictions and internet blackouts in Papua and West Papua in 2019. The ITE Law is also often used to silence the voices of civil society that are opposed to the regime. Throughout 2020-2021, there were at least 340 digital attacks against human rights defenders, activists, journalists, and other civil society. Cases of online gender-based violence against women during the Covid-19 pandemic increased to 510 cases in 2021, of which many of the targeted cases were women human rights defenders.

The Government does not mention about the digital repression experienced by civil society, including the people in Papua and West Papua and is committed to improving governance and protection mechanisms to ensure the right to a sense of security and freedom of expression. Although it was mentioned about the improvement of the revision of the Criminal Code, it was not explained what exactly is the improvement and protection for the people and human rights defenders in the criminal code which is said to be passed at the end of this year. Similarly, it is related to the obligation of the government to clarify what forms of protection for women in the digital sphere.

Damar Juniarto, Executive Director of SAFEnet assessed that there was a stuttering of the Government in recognizing the importance of fulfilling the digital rights of citizens. "We regret that the protection from lawsuits and attacks experiences by human rights defenders and citizens, both physically and online, is not seen as part of improving human rights in Indonesia."

On the issue of academic freedom, which the Government has little response to in its report, KIKA highlighted pressure from the goverment and university actors who punish and silence free speech and academic expression. Academics are victims of criminalization, including under the ITE Law, simply because they express criticism towards the government, become an expert witnesses in court proceedings, and speak up about research findings in public spaces. Meanwhile, students who express criticism attain disciplinary action by the university for asking seemingly controversial questions and ideas.

"We condemn the attacks on scholars and students and call on the international community to join forces with us in defending academic freedom in Indonesia," said Dhia Al Uyun, Chairperson of KIKA who is a lecturer at Universitas Brawijaya.

For media inquiry please contact: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. / This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. / This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. / This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Laporan UPR Pemerintah Indonesia: Bertentangan dengan Realita Lapangan

Indonesia telah melewati pemantauan berkala pemajuan Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) dalam sidang Universal Periodic Review (UPR) Dewan HAM PBB di Geneva, kemarin 9 November 2022. Koalisi Masyarakat Sipil untuk Pelaporan UPR yang terdiri dari: Amnesty International Indonesia, ASEAN SOGIE Caucus, KontraS, KIKA, Koalisi FreeToBeMe (FTBM) Indonesia, SAFEnet, Transmen Indonesia melangsungkan agenda nonton bareng guna memantau laporan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia (PemRI) dalam sidang tersebut.

Dalam sidang UPR putaran ke-4, PemRI melaporkan capaian-capaian Indonesia dalam pemenuhan HAM, antara lain, kesuksesan dalam mengesahkan Omnibus Law UU Cipta Lapangan Kerja, mengesahkan UU Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Seksual (TP-KS), pembangunan infrastruktur dan penambahan anggaran untuk otonomi daerah di Papua, serta keberhasilan penanganan COVID-19. Namun, koalisi menilai bahwa apa yang disampaikan oleh PemRI berbanding terbalik dengan situasi yang sebenarnya, yang juga telah dilaporkan oleh masyarakat sipil Indonesia melalui alternatif laporan yang dikirimkan pada bulan Maret 2022.

Mengenai isu Bisnis dan HAM serta kaitannya dengan keadilan lingkungan dan pembangunan, PemRI menyebut Omnibus Law UU Cipta Kerja sebagai capaian dalam menstabilkan bisnis dengan memperhatikan HAM dan lingkungan. Selain itu, pemerintah mengakui sudah mengikuti United Nations Guiding Principles (UNGP) on Business and Human Rights dan menjadi pelopor dalam mengadakan pertemuan terkait isu BHR. Kenyataannya, KontraS mencatat bahwa Indonesia masih sering tidak mengindahkan standar-standar dalam UNGP. Dalam melakukan pembangunan, Indonesia tidak mengindahkan kepentingan penduduk yang terdampak pembangunan, sering mengintimidasi penduduk lokal dan merusak lingkungan sekitar.

Terkait pembela HAM dan kebebasan berpendapat, PemRI merespon bahwa Indonesia selalu bekerja sama dengan pembela HAM, organisasi masyarakat sipil, jurnalis, dan elemen sipil lainnya dalam rangka perlindungan HAM. Namun, Fatia Maulidiyanti, Koordinator KontraS menyatakan bahwa “Pembela HAM di Indonesia menghadapi berbagai serangan, di mana mereka atau keluarga mereka dibuntuti, diawasi, menjadi sasaran tuntutan pidana, dan pencemaran nama baik di depan umum”. Sehingga KontraS menekankan harus adanya perlindungan pembela HAM dan kebebasan berpendapat secara komprehensif dalam hukum.

Dalam isu impunitas, PemRI menekankan pemberian reparasi untuk korban dan bahwa mekanisme non-yudisial merupakan pelengkap untuk mekanisme yudisial. Selain itu, PemRI merespon akan menginvestigasi dengan baik pelanggaran HAM berat masa lalu. Namun, KontraS dalam laporan alternatifnya menilai bahwa pemerintah sering mengusahakan adanya perdamaian dengan memberi bantuan moneter tanpa adanya proses peradilan dan reparasi yang efektif melalui Unit Kerja Presiden untuk Penanganan Peristiwa Pelanggaran Hak Asasi Manusia yang Berat dan Tim Terpadu Penanganan Dugaan Pelanggaran HAM.

Terkait isu penyiksaan, PemRI menekankan adanya security training dan upaya mengadopsi OP-CAT yang hingga saat ini belum juga diratifikasi. Sayangnya, hingga saat ini beberapa kelompok masyarakat masih menjadi sasaran tindakan penyiksaan. Ketiadaan ratifikasi OP-CAT juga merupakan efek domino dari tindakan penyiksaan yang terus berlangsung di Indonesia. Indonesia juga belum menyusun dan menerapkan undang-undang khusus tentang penyiksaan dan penganiayaan. “Perlu juga adanya reformasi kepolisian yang menyeluruh sebagai aktor dominan dari praktek penyiksaan.”, ucap Fatia.

PemRI juga menerima banyak catatan dan rekomendasi untuk segera melakukan penghapusan hukuman mati dan moratorium hukuman mati melalui ratifikasi optional protocol ICCPR yang ke-2 tentang Penghapusan Hukuman Mati. Namun, PemRi merespon bahwa hukuman mati akan tetap menjadi salah satu hukuman sampingan dalam RKUHP dengan memperhatikan standar HAM yang berlaku serta tetap memberi terpidana mati kemungkinan komutasi. “Maraknya praktik unfair trial dalam penegakan hukum dan agenda perang melawan narkotika memperparah legitimasi atas praktik hukuman mati di Indonesia” ucap Charlie Albajili, Kepala Advokasi LBH Jakarta

Nurina Savitri, manajer kampanye Amnesty International Indonesia, mengkritisi pemerintah Indonesia yang tidak memberikan informasi utuh mengenai situasi HAM di Indonesia dalam sesi UPR. Salah satu contohnya adalah klaim bahwa pemerintah Indonesia tengah melakukan perbaikan instrumen hukum melalui RKUHP, yang kenyataannya memiliki pasal-pasal bermasalah yang berpotensi melanggar HAM.

“Pasal pencemaran nama baik, pasal penghinaan Presiden dan Wakil Presiden, pasal penghinaan pemerintah, pasal makar, ini adalah pasal-pasal yang selama ini digunakan untuk membungkam mereka yang kritis terhadap kebijakan negara, merepresi mereka yang memiliki pandangan politik yang berbeda. Dan pasal-pasal itu dipertahankan di dalam draft terbaru RKUHP. Padahal hak-hak tersebut dijamin di dalam instrumen hukum internasional yang diratifikasi Indonesia dalam bentuk Undang-Undang,” jelas Nurina.

Klaim mengenai pelibatan masyarakat sipil juga tidak mencerminkan situasi sebenarnya mengenai serangan yang dialami pembela HAM dalam beberapa tahun terakhir. Dalam catatan Amnesty, selama periode 2019-2022, ada 328 kasus serangan fisik maupun digital terhadap masyarakat sipil dengan 834 korban.

Terkait isu Papua dan situasi hak asasi manusia di sana, PemRI menyampaikan bahwa sebagian besar kasus-kasus kekerasan di Papua telah diselidiki dan pelakunya telah diberi hukuman, namun kenyataannya tidak ada kasus-kasus yang melibatkan aparat keamanan di Papua, termasuk pembunuhan di luar hukum, yang sebelumnya berhasil diusut tuntas dan diadili di pengadilan yang independen.

“Di dalam laporan, pemerintah hanya menyampaikan situasi di Papua dari perspektif pembangunan infrastruktur, kesejahteraan, padahal di saat yang bersamaan kekerasan berlanjut. Tentu tidak adil menjawab segala kekerasan ini hanya dengan jargon pembangunan infrastruktur,” sebut Nurina.

Selain itu, Koalisi juga menyoroti berulangnya pelanggaran terhadap hak masyarakat Papua atas kebebasan berekspresi dan berkumpul secara damai, serta kecenderungan pemerintah untuk menguatkan pendekatan keamanan di Papua.

"Pemerintah Indonesia menyatakan bahwa dunia internasional harus bisa membedakan antara persoalan HAM di Papua dengan tindakan penegakan hukum yang sah. Pertanyaannya, apakah pemerintah Indonesia sudah bisa membedakannya?" ujar Nurina, "Pembunuhan di luar hukum, pembungkaman ekspresi, terhadap masyarakat sipil Papua bukanlah tindakan penegakan hukum, itu jelas pelanggaran HAM."

ASEAN SOGIE Caucus, Koalisi FTBM dan Transmen Indonesia menyoroti isu mengenai HAM berkaitan dengan orientasi seksual, identitas & ekspresi gender dan sex karateristik (SOGIESC) yang sama sekali tidak digubris oleh PemRI baik dalam laporan maupun respon di masa sidang. Dalam laporan bersama dengan organisasi LGBTQIA+ di Indonesia mencatat bahwa Indonesia belum menunjukkan perbaikan dalam pemenuhan hak-hak LGBTQIA+. Sebaliknya, diskriminasi masif dan terstruktur terus terjadi dan telah menyebabkan pelanggaran hak-hak dasar seperti hak atas kebebasan berekspresi, hak atas kebebasan berkumpul dengan damai dan hak untuk hidup layak serta kebebasan dan keamanan. Maraknya peraturan daerah yang diskriminatif seperti Peraturan Daerah tentang Pencegahan dan Penanggulangan Perilaku Penyimpangan Seksual (P4S) 2021 di Kota Bogor, dan setahun sebelummnya perda yang serupa di Kabupaten Cianjur adalah bukti pembatasan HAM kelompok LGBTQIA+ yang terstruktur.

Semasa sidang, PemRI bungkam atas banyaknya catatan dan rekomendasi yang secara spesifik menyebutkan isu pelanggaran HAM yang dialami kelompok LGBTQIA+. Kami mencatat setidaknya Indonesia menerima 2 pertanyaan pemantik, 13 rekomendasi dan 7 catatan dari 16 negara spesifik mengenai penghapusan diskriminasi terhadap kelompok LGBTQIA+ serta pemenuhan haknya. Catatan dan rekomendasi tersebut datang antara lain dari Mexico, Brazil, Irlandia, Peru, Montenegro, Swedia, Australia dan lainnya.

Lini Zurlia, Advocacy Officer di ASEAN SOGIE Caucus sangat menyesali bungkam dan diamnya Pemri terkait isu pemenuhan HAM berbasis SOGI ini. ‘Dapat dipastikan hampir semua catatan dan rekomendasi yang disampaikan oleh 107 negara-negara peserta sidang direspon oleh PemRI, kecuali yang berkaitan dengan LGBTQIA+. Ini menandakan bahwa tidak ada rekognisi atas hak asasi manusia kelompok LGBTQIA+ di Indonesia, apalagi itikad untuk melindungi dan memenuhi’ kata Lini.  

SAFEnet dalam laporannya mencatat bahwa hak-hak digital di Indonesia juga direpresi. Sebagai contoh, pemerintah menggunakan pembatasan bandwidth dan pemadaman internet di Papua dan Papua Barat pada 2019. UU ITE juga kerap digunakan untuk membungkam suara masyarakat sipil yang bertentangan dengan rezim. Sepanjang 2020-2021, terjadi setidaknya 340 serangan digital terhadap pembela HAM, aktivis, jurnalis, dan masyarakat sipil lainnya. Kasus kekerasan berbasis gender online (KBGO) terhadap perempuan selama pandemi Covid-19 melonjak menjadi 510 kasus KBGO pada tahun 2021, yang banyak kasus yang ditargetkan adalah perempuan pembela HAM.

PemRI tidak menyinggung sama sekali tentang represi digital yang dialami oleh masyarakat sipil, termasuk juga warga di Papua dan Papua Barat dan berkomitmen untuk memperbaiki tata kelola dan mekanisme perlindungan untuk menjamin hak atas rasa aman dan kemerdekaan berekspresi. Sekalipun sempat disinggung tentang perbaikan revisi KUHP, namun tidak dijelaskan apa sebenarnya perbaikan dan pelindungan bagi masyarakat  dan pembela HAM di dalam RKUHP yang dikatakan akan disahkan pada akhir tahun ini. Begitu pula terkait dengan kewajiban pemRI untuk memperjelas apa bentuk perlindungan bagi perempuan di ranah digital.

Damar Juniarto selaku Direktur Eksekutif SAFEnet menilai ada kegagapan PemRI dalam mengenali pentingnya pemenuhan hak-hak digital warga. “Kami menyesalkan pelindungan dari tuntutan hukum dan serangan-serangan yang dialami pembela HAM dan warga, baik secara fisik maupun daring, tidak dipandang sebagai bagian perbaikan HAM di Indonesia.”

Mengenai isu kebebasan akademik, yang minim direspon oleh PemRI dalam laporannya, KIKA menyoroti tekanan dari aktor negara dan universitas yang menghukum dan membungkam kebebasan berpendapat serta ekspresi akademis. Akademisi menjadi korban kriminalisasi, termasuk di bawah UU ITE, hanya karena berekspresi kritis terhadap pemerintah, menjadi saksi ahli dalam proses persidangan, dan berbicara tentang temuan hasil riset di ruang publik. Sementara itu, mahasiswa yang mengekspresikan kritik mendapatkan tindakan pendisiplinan oleh universitas karena mengajukan pertanyaan dan gagasan yang tampaknya kontroversial.

“Kami mengutuk serangan terhadap para sarjana dan mahasiswa dan menyerukan kepada masyarakat internasional untuk bergabung dengan kami bergandengan tangan dalam membela kebebasan akademik di Indonesia,” kata Dhia Al Uyun, Ketua KIKA yang berasal dari dosen  Universitas Brawijaya.

Narahubung: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. / This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. / This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. / This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.