Sunday, January 18, 2015

Hukuman Mati Tak Bikin Jera Kejahatan Narkoba



Gita Ayu Pratiwi dari Net TV interview saya soal hukuman mati. Saya tentu mengerti debat soal hukuman mati. Saya punya sikap menolak hukuman mati. Ini juga sejalan dengan sikap Human Rights Watch, organisasi tempat saya bekerja.

Semalaman saya memantau proses eksekusi mati di Pulau Nusa Kambangan bersama beberapa aktivis hak asasi manusia di sebuah restoran Hotel Gran Melia. Sedih tahu betapa kerja pemerintahan Jokowi praktis tanpa misi selain bikin infrastruktur, kelautan dan pangan. Saya terkejut sekali dengan keputusan Jokowi untuk menolak semua permintaan ampun dari terpidana mati kasus narkoba.

Ada setidaknya lima alasan mengapa hukuman mati ditolak mayoritas negara dunia. Pertama, hak hidup tak bisa dirampas siapa pun termasuk negara. Kenapa? Karena belum ada satu orang pun bisa menciptakan kehidupan. Jangan rampas kehidupan. Hukuman mati sering disebut sebagai state murder.

Kedua, sistem hukum bisa salah. Kalau sudah dihukum mati bagaimana kalau ternyata terpidana tak salah? Bagaimana kalau terbukti hakim-hakimnya bisa disuap? Artinya, orang yang tak menyuap yang dihukum. Tingkat kepercayaan masyarakat terhadap hukum di Indonesia belum tinggi. Mereka sangat mungkin bisa tidak adil, bisa salah.

Ketiga, seorang terhukum mati sebenarnya sudah dihukum lama, misalnya 10 tahun, sebelum dieksekusi. Artinya, dia dihukum dua kali. Buat apa "lembaga pemasyarakatan" bila ada hukuman mati? Kata "pemasyarakatan" artinya mendidik seorang yang pernah berbuat jahat agar bisa kembali jadi anggota masyarakat yang normal.

Keempat, 140 dari 197 negara di dunia tak ada hukuman mati, menurut Amnesty International. UN Office on Drugs and Crimes menolak hukuman mati buat penjahat narkoba. Ia tak dianggap bikin jera pedagang narkoba. Secara internasional, hukuman mati hanya dibatasi pada terpidana dgn niat bikin kematian. Narkoba bukan bikin kematian langsung.

Kelima, sebuah negara yang jalankan hukuman mati sulit buat lindungi warganya bila dihukum mati di negara lain. Ada sekitar 300 warga Indonesia sedang tunggu hukuman mati di negara-negara Teluk dan Malaysia. Bagaimana mau bela mereka tanpa dituduh double standard?

Thursday, January 15, 2015

Akankah Indonesia ter-Pakistanisasi sehingga menjadi Indonistan?


Pengamat Khawatir Indonesia Jadi “Indonistan”

JAKARTA, ICRP – Menguatnya kekerasan terhadap kelompok-kelompok minoritas di tanah air diduga serupa dengan proses yang terjadi di Pakistan. Kondisi tersebut disinggung oleh kedua pembicara dalam diskusi “kekerasan Charlie Hebdo : Antara Kebebasan Pers dan Toleransi Kehidupan Umat Beragama” di Jalan Kemiri, Cikini Jakarta Pusat, Kamis (15/1).

Direktur Eksekutif IndoStrategi Andar Nubowo mendesak pemerintah untuk serius menghadapi fenomena penyerangan yang terjadi di Paris terhadap kantor majalah Charlie Hebdo. Menurutnya, Indonesia tengah mengalami gejala yang tidak berbeda jauh dengan di Pakistan.

“Indonesia jangan sampai menjadi Indonistan,” imbuh Andar sembari tersenyum. Indonistan merupakan istilah yang cukup populer di media sosial sebagai bentuk sindiran pada niat kelompok intoleran yang ingin menyeragamkan Indonesia.

Lulusan EHESS Paris ini berharap pemerintah tidak membiarkan terus menerus terjadinya persekusi terhadap minoritas di tanah air.

Hal senada pun dilontarkan peneliti Human Right Watch, Andreas Harsono. “Di Indonesia ada kecenderungan mengarah seperti Pakistanisasi,” ucap Andreas.

Dalam kasus Pakistan, Andreas memaparkan, ada tiga kelompok yang disasar kelompok intoleran. Pertama adalah Ahmadiyah dan Syiah dan mazhab-mazhab lainnya dalam Islam. Modusnya, menurut Andreas, kelompok-kelompok ini dipaksa untuk keluar dari Islam atau kembali membaca syahadat.

“Di tanah air, juga ada kelompok-kelompok yang ingin menjadikan Ahmadiyah agama tersendiri demi menghindari konflik. Tapi, kenyataannya di Pakistan Ahmadiyah tetap menjadi objek kekerasan,” imbuh Andreas.

Sementara itu, kelompok kedua yang bisa dipastikan mengalami kekerasan, lanjut pendiri Yayasan Pantau ini, adalah Kristen. “Sama seperti dengan di Indonesia, di Pakistan, permasalahan izin pembangunan rumah ibadah sering kali dijadikan alasan untuk menghalau adanya warga beragama kristiani,” ujar Andreas.

Yang ketiga, sambung Andreas, adalah para penganut agama tradisional.

Kemiripan adanya gejala yang sama antara Indonesia dan Pakistan, menurut Andreas bukan hal yang ia dan Andar sendiri khawatirkan. Andreas mengakui beberapa peneliti di Pakistan pun cemas dengan kondisi di Indonesia hari ini. Sebagaimana diketahui bersama, kelompok intoleran semakin gencar melakukan aksi-aksi kekerasan terhadap apa yang mereka anggap “sesat”.

Akankah Indonesia ter-Pakistanisasi sehingga menjadi Indonistan?

Belajar Jurnalisme, Belajar Media


"Journalism is the closest thing I have to a religion because I believe deeply in the role and responsibility the journalists have to the people of a self-governing community"

-- Bill Kovach

• • •

PADA 1993, saya mulai bekerja sebagai wartawan dan ikut gerakan wartawan melawan sensor rezim Presiden Soeharto. Ia membuat saya mengerti pentingnya kebebasan media. Ketika Soeharto mundur Mei 1998, saya pikir kelonggaran ini seyogyanya diimbangi dengan peningkatan mutu jurnalisme. Pada 1999, saya belajar jurnalisme dengan asuhan guru wartawan Bill Kovach di Universitas Harvard.

Bill Kovach di London Agustus 2006
Pulang dari Harvard, saya menyunting majalah Pantau, soal media dan jurnalisme. Ini pekerjaan sangat berat. Tidak mudah melancarkan kritik terhadap sesama wartawan. Saya mulai menulis soal media dan jurnalisme.

Majalah Pantau tutup pada 2003 dan cita-cita kami guna meningkatkan mutu jurnalisme disalurkan lewat Yayasan Pantau. Saya mengajar jurnalisme lewat Yayasan Pantau. Saya biasa bagi pelatihan soal jurnalisme dalam empat kategori:

Laku Wartawan
"Agama Saya adalah Jurnalisme"
Apakah Wartawan Perlu Dipidanakan?
Bagaimana Cara Rekrut Wartawan?
Beasiswa untuk Wartawan
Belajar Disain Berita

Benarkah Bila Wartawan Dekat Pejabat?
Diskusi Kurikulum Sekolah Wartawan
Diskusi Pendidikan Jurnalisme di Pulau Jawa
Independensi Bill Kovach
Elemen ke-10: Internet, Verifikasi dan Jurnalisme

Kapan Wartawan Mencuri?
Model Pelatihan Wartawan Mahasiswa
Pagar Api Desain Suratkabar
Sembilan Elemen Jurnalisme
Wartawan atau Politikus?

Meliput
Apa Itu Investigative Reporting?
Bagaimana Meliput Pontianak?
Quo Vadis Jurnalisme Islami?
Sexism, Racism and Sectarianism
Tujuh Kriteria Sumber Anonim

Menulis
Belajar Menulis Bahasa Inggris
Byline dan Tagline
Feature: Ibarat Menggoreng Telur Mata Sapi
Narasi: Ibarat Kawan Lama Datang Bercerita
Menulis Perlu Tahu dan Berani

Dinamika Ruang Redaksi 
Adakah Kebebasan Pers Pasca-Soeharto?
Blok M: Media Bawah Tanah
Resensi: Cermin Jakarta, Cermin New York
Jatuhnya Gus Dur: Kecepatan, Ketepatan, Perdebatan
Kupas Tuntas Media Palmerah

Kebebasan Pers Bersama Andreas Harsono
Jurnalisme Warga (Gereja)
Seharusnya Pers Mahasiswa Menjadi Media Mahasiswa
Tidak Ada Jurnalisme Independen di Papua

Berkunjung ke The New York Times di Manhattan Februari 2014.

Saya juga beberapa kali menulis soal keadaan media di Indonesia dalam bahasa Inggris. Biasanya, saya cerita soal tantangan media dan wartawan di Indonesia. Mungkin menarik melihat Indonesia dari kacamata media luar yang minta seorang wartawan Indonesia menuliskannya.

Freedom at the Cross Road
Indonesia: From Mainstream to Alternative Media
Indonesian Journalists on Trial
Indonesian Media at the Crossroads
Indonesian Media Bias in Covering Tsunami in Aceh [pdf]
Narrow Minded Nationalism in Aceh Aid

Monday, January 12, 2015

Papuans Have Heard Jokowi’s Promises, but Is the President Listening?


Addressing the problems in Papua is a matter of political will

Jakarta Globe



In December, President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo promised the long-suffering residents of Indonesia’s easternmost area of Papua something extraordinary: The opportunity to be heard by their government. “I want to listen to the people’s voices, and I’m willing to open dialogue for a better Papua. The people of Papua don’t only need health care, education, the construction of roads and bridges, but they also need to be listened to,” Joko said.

During a Dec. 27-29 visit to the cities of Jayapura, Wamena and Sorong, the president implicitly rejected the government’s unsuccessful and abusive twin-prong governance strategy in Papua of development spending backed by an iron-fisted security presence. Instead, Joko offered a vision of a more responsive and caring government.

Papuans know better than most Indonesians that talk is cheap and political reform rhetoric even cheaper. So Joko ’s first test of more responsive and rights-respecting governance in Papua is his follow-though on his pledge to thoroughly investigate the killing of five peaceful protesters by Indonesian security forces in the town of Enarotali on Dec. 8. Joko should demonstrate his commitment to revealing what happened in Enarotali by supporting a joint investigation by the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM), to ensure that police and rights agency investigators can question military personnel, including members of the 753rd Army battalion, who were present during the incident. Joko can back up that investigation by deploying the official Witness and Victim Protection Agency (LPSK) to Enarotali to protect witnesses, victims, and victims’ families from possible security force reprisals for cooperating with investigators.

The president told Papuans on Dec. 27 that he wanted the circumstances behind the shooting “solved immediately so it won’t ever happen again in the future … as well as to find the root of the problems.” For Joko’s convenience, the “root of the problems” in Papua is already well-documented. If his government is serious about tackling the chronic human rights abuses and impunity that have defined life in Papua for five decades, there are four immediate steps his government can take that will have serious impact in addressing such violations.

First, the president should lift official restrictions on access to Papua for independent observers, including international journalists, donor agencies and human rights organizations. Journalists and international nongovernmental organizations seeking official permission to visit Papua currently require the sign-off of 18 separate government agencies which meet weekly at the so-called clearing house at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Those agencies, which include the State Intelligence Agency (BIN) and the military intelligence body, carefully vet all applications. Official approval for Papua visits requires all 18 agencies to be in unanimous agreement, an extremely rare occurrence. Joko’s business background should teach him that any bureaucracy that demands 18 signatures for a single approval is as ludicrous as it is inefficient. That application and approval process once prompted an ambassador to Jakarta to joke that, “Even Jesus Christ cannot get the permit to go to Papua.”

Second, Joko should put an end to the impunity that Indonesian security forces have enjoyed in Papua for decades. The routinely heavy-handed response by security forces to Papuans who exercise their rights of association and peaceful expression has bred deep resentment among the local population. Although the ongoing low-level armed conflict with the small and poorly organized Free Papua Organization (OPM) places responsibilities on the government to ensure security for the population, far too often Indonesian security forces have abused the rights of Papuans with impunity.

On Sept. 23, 2013, Indonesian security forces fired on a rock-throwing crowd in the town of Waghete, killing a 17-year-old high school student and wounding at least three others. The government failed to investigate the circumstances for that apparently excessive use of force. In at least one case, personnel of the same 753rd battalion convicted of abuses against Papuans were later promoted after serving short jail terms. Second Lt. Cosmos, one of seven soldiers convicted in 2010 by a Jayapura military tribunal of torture that involved sexual mutilation of a Papuan farmer, was subsequently promoted to first lieutenant after his seven-month jail term.

Benny Giay gave Filep Karma's book
As If We're Half Animals to Jokowi.
Papuan theologian Benny Giay told Joko last month that his challenge was to accomplish what all previous Indonesian presidents had failed to do: Win “the hearts and minds of Papuans.” Joko could go a long way toward that goal by releasing the 65 Papuan political prisoners currently imprisoned on charges of “treason.” They include Filep Karma, a civil servant who is serving 15 years for raising the Morning Star flag — a West Papua independence symbol — in December 2004. Human Rights Watch takes no position on the right to self-determination, but opposes imprisonment of people who peacefully express support for self-determination. By releasing Filep, Joko would be honoring the request made in 2011 by the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention calling for his immediate and unconditional release.

Finally, Joko’s administration should order the Indonesian Military (TNI), including the Special Forces (Kopassus), to cease the unlawful surveillance of peaceful activists, politicians, and clergy immediately, and to ensure that civilian authorities in Papua retain responsibility for basic law enforcement. That requires Joko to address the chronic paranoia among military, intelligence and police officers in Papua. A trove of official documents leaked to the public in 2011 revealed that Kopassus deploys a vast network of Papuan informants to spy on a broad swathe of Papuan political, traditional, and religious leaders, and civil society groups. That surveillance is fueled by official fears that nongovernmental organizations primarily work to discredit the Indonesian government and the armed forces by using the “human rights issue” to garner international condemnation of Indonesia’s military presence in Papua and to promote Papuan independence. Joko needs to make it clear that such paranoia and its related abuses are an unwanted throwback to Indonesia’s authoritarian past that he won’t tolerate.

The good news is that addressing the problems in Papua isn’t a matter of rocket science. It’s a matter of political will and a commitment by his government to protect the rights and freedoms of Papuans enshrined in Indonesia’s constitution and international law.

Papuans have heard Joko’s promises. Now they’re waiting to see if he’s really listening.


Andreas Harsono is a Human Rights Watch researcher based in Jakarta.