Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EDITORIAL

COVER STORY

- Realizing A World Without Desaparecidos

COUNTRY SITUATIONS

- The Making of Nepal’s Anti-disappearance Law

- Disappearances & Fake Encounters

NEWS FEATURES

- Claimants 1081

- Tracing Patterns of Disappearances in Latin America

- For the Want of Peace & Justice

- Probing Deeper into Munir’s Death

- Out of the Shadows

- Reclaiming Stolen Lives

PHOTO ESSAY

INTERNATIONAL SOLIDARITY

- Growing Federation

- At the Heart of Buenos Aires

REPRINT

- Submissions to the Independent Group of Eminent Persons

STATEMENTS

- Exhuming Truth

- Joint Statement of Independent Observers for the GRP - NDF Peace Process

POEM

- Of The Vanished

News Feature

“The Police covering the case of Munir had been cooperative and helpful. Unfortunately, the Police always gave incomplete data, and it should be changed.”

(Philip Alston, Tempo Interaktif, 5 April 2007)

To the surprise and disappointment of many human rights workers, the Indonesian Supreme Court (SC) released in March 2007, Pollycarpus Budihari Priyanto, prime suspect to the death of prominent human rights defender, Munir. Such decision prompted Attorney General Hendarman Supandji to file a motion to appeal the case review before the SC.

Such move, however, has been subject to debate as the Criminal Code only provides rights to appeal casereview to the convicted individual or to his family/relative. Moreover, a decision or charge made by the Supreme Court (SC) is held final and legally binding, hence, it cannot be appealed.

A review, however, of Supreme Court jurisprudence showed that said move is possible, i.e. Case No. 55 PK/Pid/1996. In the event of defendant Muchtar Pakpahan’s release granted by the Court of Appeals, the Attorney General appealed the case on October 25, 1996, before the SC based on “judicial supremacy” provided under Law No. 14 of 1970, Article 21.   The SC approved the appeal.1

Considering this precedent, the Attorney General for Munir remains positive in working on the case. Preparations on the presentation of new evidences, a requirement in appealing a case review, are well under way. New leads and suspects have surfaced shedding a different [and possibly a positive] light on the litigation process.

New leads

In light of the renewed efforts to investigate the case, the police established a new team to collect evidences. NGOs have been invited to help out considering the many problems the police encountered in trying to solve the case.

The Chief of Criminal Body of Police, Komjen Bambang Hendarso Danuri, reported that in April 2007, the police found two new suspects, Indra Setiawan, former Director of Garuda; and Rohainil Aini, Secretary Chief Pilot of Airbus 330. He said that the two individuals have allegedly been involved in the delivery of the falsified letter to Pollycarpus.2

Moreover, witnesses’ testimonies have led the police to look into the possibility that Munir was not poisoned on board Garuda but during his stopover in Changi airport, Singapore. A number of witnesses reported that they had seen Munir standing by a telephone booth near the Coffee Bean restaurant at the said airport.3 The police speculates that Munir had taken tea prior boarding his next flight bound for Amsterdam, The Netherlands.4 Some witnesses said that they saw Pollycarpus and another man later identified as Ongen Latuihamalo, standing next to Munir.

Latuihamalo was soon considered a suspect due to his good connections with the Indonesian military and the National Intelligent Body (BIN). He was a musician from Ambon in the 1980s who sang religious songs. He often introduced himself under a number of aliases such as Raymond, Johan and Anton.    He is also closely linked with Mayor Jenderal (TNI) Nono Sampurno, the Commandant of Security during the Megawati administration.

Another suspect the police identified is Kolonel Bambang Irawan. Similar to Latuihamalo, he is said to be closely associated with the BIN. KASUM, which is the Coalition of Action in Solidarity for Munir, however, asked the police to establish more the involvement of this string of suspects, i.e. whether they were solely involved with the falsification of document or with the actual murder of Munir. The said two new suspects, Setiawan and Aini, have already been identified by the previous Fact-Finding Team. Regarding Latuihamalo, what could have been his motive? The police said that they are looking into: patriotism, Pollycarpus, undermining of Yodhoyono’s popularity, budget for military operations in Aceh, counterfeit money, purchase of The Netherland’s corvet, or personal motives of BIN’s members. 5

The police have already sought permission from Telkom Company to access CCTV records from Changi airport hoping the records would corroborate testimonies from the witnesses. A Memorandum of Understanding had been issued between the said company and the police. Chief of Indonesian Police, however, said that Telkom does not have the record.

Trying to further examine the cause of Munir’s death, sample evidences sent to Seattle for forensic tests found two kinds of arsenic poison in Munir’s body: the third and the fifth kind. To note, the third type of arsenic is the deadliest. The poison can kill a person within 30 to 90 minutes.

Beyond compensation

Regarding the lawsuit filed by Suciwati, Munir’s wife, against the Garuda Airways for its negligence and failure to take appropriate action to protect the life of its passengers, the District Court of Central Jakarta found the three defendants, PT Garuda Indonesia, Setiawan, and Captain Pantum Matondong guilty. The judges specifically pointed out that one major point of negligence on the part of Captain Matondong was his failure to communicate with ground authorities to request an emergency landing when Munir fell seriously ill.

Considering the Warsaw Convention, and the Consumers Protection Law, the judges led by Justice Andriani Nurdin ordered the accused to pay Suciwati Rp 664, 209, 900 (US$ 72,000).

Despite such victory, Suciwati felt disappointed when the judges did not order Garuda to conduct an internal investigation that shall help clarify a number of unresolved matters regarding Pollycarpus. More than just compensation, what Munir’s family and friends ask for is true justice.

(Footnotes)

1 Paper on “Prospect of Solving Munir’s Case through Judicial Review of the Supreme Court’s Verdict” by Andi Andojo Soetjipto

2 Kompas, 11 April 2007

3 Tempo magazine, 23-29 April 2007 edition

4 Republika, 20 april 2007

5 Tempo interaktif, 18 April 2007

Atty. Sri Suparyati is the head of the advocacy department of KontraS. As a lawyer, she appeared before the President of Indonesia, the Chief of Indonesian Police, the District Police of Kotawaringin Timur, Governor of Central Kalimantan and District Office of Kotawaringin, Timur on the issue of ethnic conflict in Sampit, Central Kalimantan and in citizens’ lawsuit of migrant workers in Nunukan. She participated in a fellowship program in Transitional Justice in the University of Cape Town, South Africa.

VOICE August 2007