Legislation
What is the Ormas Law for?
Since being enacted in July 2013, the Law Number 17 Year 2013 on Societal Organizations (Ormas Law) has encountered various cases of violence involving members of Ormas(Organisasi Kemasyarakatan). From the case in Kendal, Central Java, involving members of the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI), to the recent attacks on labor activists in early November.
From those cases, it is very obvious that the Ormas Law is not a solution to the problem of violent acts. A professional conduct of law enforcement is the real answer to the problem. The Ormas Law is completely irrelevant as a solution to acts of violence because the Criminal Code (KUHP) is already more than sufficient. This condition then raises further questions; What is the original purpose of the Ormas Law?
On a separate note, as quoted by JPNN.com, Dr. Bachtiar from the Directorate General of National Unity and Politics of the Ministry of Home Affairs (Direktorat Jenderal Kesatuan Bangsa dan Politik, Kementerian Dalam Negeri), stated that the Ormas Law is a positive instrument to stop the fierce process of Liberalisasi Sosial (Social Liberalization). However, it is not clear what he means by “Liberalisasi Sosial” (http://www.jpnn.com/read/2013/11/02/198826/UU-Ormas-untuk-Bendung-Liberalisasi-Sosial-).
Dr. Bachtiar further explains that our social system has been damaged by the movement of social change, which has no direction and does not match the Indonesian values. “Do not let Liberalisasi Sosial become more fierce; the Ormas Law is a tool to stop Liberalisasi Sosial for the sake of the Indonesian unitary state.
The statement could give us a different angle of perspective from the Government. There is an implicit impression that the Government is anxious to see the social changes that occurred in Indonesia. Of course this is just an early sign which needs to be further elaborated. We certainly do not want Indonesia to return to the anti-democracy regime.
Resurrection of the Ormas Law (the previous Ormas Law was in 1985 during the New Order regime) is also the resurrection of a political approach to the social sector in Indonesia. Since the very beginning of the discussion, this law has been rejected by many stakeholders. Komnas HAM (The National Commission on Human Rights) stated that the bill is a threat towards freedom of association. LIPI (The Indonesian Institute of Sciences) stated that they reject the Ormas Law. NGO Coalitions, Labor Unions, and religious based organizations are also against the bill. However, the Government, through the Ministry of Home Affairs, insisted to pass the bill together with the parliament.
One of the biggest social organizations in Indonesia, Muhammadiyyah (with approximately more than 15 million supporters), has filed a judicial review to the Constitutional Court against the Ormas Law. This effort needs to be supported. It is important to make sure that Indonesia is a country with the rule of law, which protects the civil rights and the civic space. (EN)
Constitutional Court
Election of the Constitutional Court Chairman and Vice-Chairman
The Constitutional Court has chosen a new chairman after its previous one, Akil Mochtar, was arrested by the Corruption Eradication Commission. The arrest then followed by his resignation and was dismissed by the Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court. The election process went for two rounds and finally Hamdan Zoelva was chosen as Chairman of the Constitutional Court for the 2013-2013 period.
His name is no stranger to the political and legal constellation of Indonesia. Started out his career as a lawyer in OC Kaligis and Partners and has held a position as a member of the Advisory Board of the Indonesian Advocates Association (AAI). His career as a politician started during the 1999-2004 period, where he became house member of from Bulan Bintang Party (Partai Bulan Bintang). He achieved his Ph.D from Universitas Padjadjaran with his dissertation titled “Presidential Impeachment in Indonesia”. An interesting point in Hamdan Zoelva was when he became a member of the Constitution ad hoc committee amandment in 1999. His candidacy for constitutional court judges several years ago was backed by the Government; since if one should be supported either by the Supreme Court, House of Representatives or the Government.
Along with electing the Chairman, the Constitutional Court also chose its Vice-Chairman; Arief Hidayat. The professor from Diponegoro University was elected after beating out his contender, Patrialis Akbar. Besides his field in the constitutional law studies; his minor is in environmental law. He became infamous with his statement during the fit and proper test stage when he denounced Indonesia’s human rights shouldn’t be dictated by international doctrine and should be based on the constitution and Pancasila instead. With that premise, he also denounced the existence of same-sex marriage, the Papua Liberation Movement (Organisasi Papua Merdeka/OPM) and atheism. Furthermore, he stated that the Parliament should take precaution when establishing laws that indicate foreign agendas and are not in line with the constitution and national ideology. Furthermore he stated that he wouldn’t hesitate to annulled such laws. According to Gede Pasek Suardika (Chairman of the House of Representatives Law Commission at the time), the above statement is one of the reason that caused him to be elected as constitutional judge by the Parliament. (MSG)
CSO Initiative
The 5ᵗʰ th Asia Pacific Judicial Reform Forum 2013: Court Administration and Technological Solution
On 31 October – 1 November 2013, PSHK had the opportunity to become part of the Indonesian Supreme Court Delegates to attend the 5th Asia Pacific Judicial Reform Forum 2013. The forum discussed several issues related to judicial reform and was represented by Chief of Justices and Judges around Asia and the Pacific region. One of the most important topics discussed during the session was on public confidence towards the court.
Several reform activities in increasing public confidence focus on emphasizing the court’s public services. However, it should be noted that an increasing effort on public service is just another aspect among others to increase public confidence. The forum agreed that the issue of judicial corruption is the most important aspect to handle in terms of increasing public confidence. As experienced by Azerbaijan, Indonesia and Bangladesh; the court’s public service quality has increased by adopting technological solutions during the court’s administrative process. These technological solutions aim to improve the flow of information and help to handle court administration swiftly and accurately.
To evaluate the process, Singapore conducts regular court surveys to find out court user perceptions on the court service delivery. In addition, the Singapore court also adopts theMystery Shopper technique when evaluating court performance. PSHK and the Indonesian Supreme Court Supervisory Body have also conducted a similar survey, whose results will be reported by the end of the month. (GAT)
CSO Initiative
Recent Studies and Research by PSHK on Advertisements in the Public Sphere and the Annual Legislative Records
Within this month of November, PSHK will release two results of past their research. The first is the yearly report on the legislative performance of the House of Representatives throughout 2012, named the Annual Legislative Records (Catatan Awal Tahun/Cawahu). Titled “The Foundation of the Political Year”, this legislative performance report discusses relations of the House with the Government and other fellow state institutions in regards to its functions, particularly legislation.
On the other hand, the second research was in collaboration with Ruang Rupa; an art organization located in Jakarta. The research conducted with Ruang Rupa highlighted the topic of using the public sphere for placing advertisements. The significance of each research has its own uniqueness. The House of Representatives legislative performance report has proven its consistency in supervising the parliament for over five years. Meanwhile, the research done with Ruang Rupa is a small but substantial step in opening the opportunity for meaningful collaborations in research partnerships. (GPD)