Indonesian president’s amnesty decision criticized for being half-baked

The Indonesian president’s decision to pardon tens of thousands of prisoners is ill-conceived because it fails to address harsh laws that call for incarceration and lead to overcrowding, critics said, amid not inconsiderable cynicism about the plan’s intention.

Some analysts, though, have cautiously welcomed President Prabowo Subianto’s sweeping plan, which could see the release of 44,000 convicts, including political prisoners, juveniles, the elderly, those with mental and chronic health illnesses, and drug addicts.

While the human rights minister called the decision a humanitarian gesture, a political analyst from Diponegoro University viewed it in the context of rights groups’ enduring criticism of Prabowo, a former general with a contentious human rights record.

“Prabowo wants to portray himself as pro-democracy and a defender of human rights,” Mohammad Rosyidin, who teaches at the university, told BenarNews.

“Many have expressed concerns that he is authoritarian and indifferent to democratic and human rights issues. This amnesty could be a … step to dispel these perceptions.”

The Prabowo administration recently repatriated the five remaining Australian members of the “Bali Nine” drug-smuggling group, who were serving life sentences in Indonesian jails, while a Filipina on death row was sent home on Wednesday.

Prabowo, who took office in October after winning the Feb.14 presidential election, has been tainted by accusations of rights abuses during his military career under the late autocrat Suharto.

However, Natalius Pigai, the human rights minister, said the amnesty initiative was a humanitarian gesture to offer a fresh start to those who have committed lesser offenses. 

Additionally it showed the government’s promise to strive for rapprochement, he said in a statement Monday. 

“The main considerations for the pardons are compassion and a commitment to reconciliation. This is a priority for the president,” Pigai said. 

Minister of Law Supratman Andi Agtas did not announce details such as when prisoners who have been pardoned would be freed.

Indonesia’s prisons hold more than 270,000 inmates who are crammed into facilities built to house less than half that number.

In 2021, a fire at a prison in Tangerang near Jakarta claimed the lives of 41 prisoners. Authorities said the facility was overcrowded by 400%.

The country has been criticized for its harsh drug laws that even criminalize the possession of a small amount for personal use.

Critics such as Muhamad Isnur, chairman of the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI), say the amnesty plan does little to address systemic issues, including the criminalization of drug addiction.

“Without addressing these underlying issues, [amnesty]  is a short-term policy without a solution,” he told BenarNews. 

RELATED STORIES

Indonesia’s new govt draws concerns about human rights accountability

Human Rights Watch report: Papuans in Indonesia face ‘entrenched’ racism, discrimination

Papuans worry about new Indonesian leader Prabowo’s plan to revive transmigration

Indonesia considers repatriating foreign drug convicts; President okays ‘Bali Nine’ heading home

Filipina drugs convict nearly executed in Indonesia to return home Dec. 18

The Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR), a legal advocacy group, expressed conditional support for the amnesty plan while concurring that the country’s drug laws needed reform. 

“Shifting all drug users into rehabilitation as an alternative to imprisonment risks merely relocating the overcrowding problem from prisons to treatment centers,” it said. 

“The real solution lies in revising the narcotics law to treat personal drug use as a health or social issue, rather than a criminal one.”

ICJR cited United Nations data that suggested only a small percentage of drug users require medical intervention. 

Meanwhile, ICJR criticized a government proposal to deploy pardoned convicts in agricultural labor programs and military reserves, warning that such policies could lead to exploitation. 

Nasir Djamil, a member of Indonesia’s House of Representatives, said the amnesty plan needed to take the nature of the crime into account, with a particular focus on ensuring that those granted amnesty are capable of rehabilitation.

“For it to be truly effective, individuals should be provided opportunities, such as employment, to secure their reintegration into society and prevent recidivism,” he told BenarNews.

Analysts have also demanded transparency in the amnesty program.

The grant of amnesty was “political choice focused,” YLBHI’s Muhamad Isnur said. “Therefore, the president must carefully select those who will receive amnesty.” 

Minister of Law Supratman Andi Agtas promised to ensure accountability by disclosing the names of inmates granted clemency. 

“We will make the names public,” he told reporters on Monday. 

“I welcome calls for transparency. Amnesty International and several other NGOs have already requested this.”

The Papua case

Meanwhile, Supratman’s announcement that the amnesty plan would also apply to some people from the restive Papua region who are behind bars was met with mixed feelings by an activist from the region.

West Papuan lawyer and activist Yan Christian Warinussy said that even if the amnesties were a symbolic move, they would restore a sense of justice for political prisoners and their families.

“This move may not be a comprehensive solution, but it does offer political prisoners and the Papuan people a sense that their struggles are not in vain,” Warinussy, executive director of the Legal Aid Research, Assessment, and Development Institute (LP3BH), told BenarNews.

“It affirms that their fight for ideology is not wrong and encourages them to continue pursuing their cause through legal and political channels.”

The remote and resource-rich Papua region became part of Indonesia in 1969 via a disputed United Nations-backed referendum and has seen a long separatist insurgency. 

Many activists say Papuans have endured decades of military abuse and human rights violations associated with the Indonesian government’s counterinsurgency operations.