Font size: 
During the campaign, the three teams have bombarded the public with their images and spent a great deal of money to advertise themselves in newspapers and on radio, television and websites. Each of them claims that they are pro-people and better than the other two. However, an important ingredient that has been missing from the whole campaign is a meaningful discourse on human rights.
Former President Megawati Soekarnoputri and her running mate, Prabowo Soebianto, came together as they claim to share a nationalist platform. They persistently depict themselves as pro-people. To strengthen this image, they even chose Bantargebang, Jakarta’s main dumpsite, as the site to declare their candidacy. Their main campaign message is that they will fight for the prosperity of laborers, farmers and fishermen. In terms of human rights, this pair intends to improve the economic, social and cultural rights of poor and disadvantaged people. But can they do that?
Prabowo himself was convicted by the Military Honorary Council of kidnapping rights activists in 1997-98. How can someone possibly protect people’s human rights if he has been involved in kidnapping rights activists? Furthermore, Prabowo was allegedly among the officials suspected of involvement in the May Riot of 1998, in which many ethnic Chinese were killed and raped.
Current President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and his running mate, economist Boediono, are best known for their calmness and elegance. In the initial stages of the campaign, these two were branded as agents of neo-liberalism, particularly Boediono. However, the label didn’t stick as none of their attackers succeeded in explaining it.
Although much of the public deems this pair to have a cleaner human rights record than the other two, one must not forget that Yudhoyono has not yet succeeded in resolving the Lapindo Mud Flow case. Hundreds of civilians are still without livelihoods in the area where the mud volcano erupted in May, 2006. Also, the struggle to eradicate Indonesia’s pervasive corruption is in peril as Yudhoyono has not taken necessary measures to enact the Law on Corruption Court, although the deadline is running out.
Indonesia’s third set of candidates, current Vice President Jusuf Kalla and former military commander Wiranto, is known for the catchphrase: “The faster (you do), the better (you get).” Completely different from the previous candidates, they portray themselves as quick decision makers and an easygoing pair. Kalla even took off his shoe in public to show that his shoes were locally made.
Kalla has a relatively clean record in terms of human rights; however his vice presidential candidate, Wiranto, has been accused of being responsible for serious human rights violations. Wiranto is allegedly the man behind the killings of students at Trisakti University in 1998 and at Semanggi in 1999, and also the massacre in East Timor during the same time period.
The Commission of Truth and Friendship – a joint commission established by Indonesia and Timor Leste – has named him in its report. In its analysis of past documents, especially the indictment of the U.N. Serious Crimes Unit, the commission revealed the role of Wiranto, who was blamed by omission for the violence because as the highest-ranking military officer, he should have known of the militia groups' movements. This report cites important findings around the time of the referendum in East Timor in 1998, in which crimes against humanity took place.
Obviously, all three pairs of candidates have promised to better protect human rights. Unfortunately, however, they have failed to present detailed ideas on how to do this or explain adequately to the public how they will fulfill their obligation to protect human rights in the upcoming administration.
The Lapindo Mud Flow is one of the biggest human rights violations during Yudhoyono’s presidency. It has been more than three years now and Yudhoyono has not provided a remedy for the victims. In the context of next week’s election, the public should know how each of the three presidential candidates would resolve this case. If one of them becomes the next president, will the elected candidate be able to end this tragedy? If so, how? If not, the public should not vote for him, as it will only prolong the victims’ suffering.
Also, what is their position toward the most controversial human rights issue, the death penalty? Yudhoyono seems to be a true believer in the death penalty; he has solidly proven his position by executing ten people during his presidency. How about Megawati-Prabowo and Kalla-Wiranto? They must also retain the death penalty as it will bring them more support.
These are just a few examples of how human rights should have been an intense topic of discourse during the campaign, rather than just a make-up tool. Even though the General Election Commission set up a national debate on good governance, the supremacy of law and human rights, the event failed to serve as a forum for the candidates to debate about human rights problems in Indonesia. It was not even a “debate,” as it was only a plain dialogue between the candidates.
Each time issues of human rights have been raised – particularly past abuses – the candidates have insisted they have all been resolved and there is nothing more to be done. Often, they have said there is no need to look back, just look forward.
Sadly, Indonesia’s next president has failed to acknowledge that if past human rights violations have never been fully resolved, it will burden future generations and haunt them with only mysteries – which, to be honest, are not theirs to solve.
--
(Ricky Gunawan holds a law degree from the University of Indonesia. He is program director of the Community Legal Aid Institute, or LBH Masyarakat, based in Jakarta. The institute provides pro bono legal aid and human rights education for disadvantaged and marginalized people.)
