By Akhmad Zamroni
Source: http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net
The trial of cases of human
rights violations in Indonesia is carried out through two court institutions, namely
the general court (ordinary) and the human rights court (special). Judiciary
through public courts is carried out to adjudicate cases of minor offenses.
Meanwhile, the trial through a human rights court is conducted to try cases of
gross human rights violations. Human rights violations that are categorized as
serious violations are genocide and crimes against humanity –– apart from the
two violations are still classified as minor violations.
With Law no. 26 of 2000 on
Human Rights Courts, a special court has been established under the name
"Human Rights Court". However, according to the provisions of this
law, a human rights court is established to hear cases of serious violations
that occurred after the enactment of (passed) Law no. 26/2000. In other words,
the human rights court only has the authority to hear cases of serious
violations that occurred after 2000. As for serious violations that occurred
before Law no. 26 of 2000 applies, the trial is conducted by an ad hoc human
rights court, that is, a special human rights court that is established on a
temporary basis. Cases of gross human rights violations that occurred before
Law no. 26 of 2000 in effect can also be resolved by the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission (KKR).
Justice for cases of human rights
violations is clearly a very important part. Through this judiciary, the
protection and enforcement of human rights will be much determined and at
stake. The success of human rights courts will determine the success of efforts
to protect and enforce human rights in our country.
The success of human rights
courts itself is primarily measured by its ability to produce decisions
(verdicts). If the decisions it issues are fair and correct, the human rights
court can be said to be successful in carrying out its duties and powers. If
this is the case, it is hoped that the efforts to protect and enforce human
rights will also achieve success.
In principle, the judiciary for
cases of human rights violations must be able to give fair and correct
decisions. A fair and correct decision on the one hand will be able to restore
and restore the rights of the victim, while on the other hand it will provide
sanctions or punishments that are appropriate to the perpetrators of the
violation. Both in the short and long term, fair and correct court decisions
will have a positive impact on human rights protection and enforcement. The
positive impacts that will result, among others, are as follows.
•
The public will become more aware of
the importance of human rights.
• The community will be moved to respect and
respect the human rights of each other.
•
People will feel more secure and
guaranteed their human rights.
•
Society increasingly trusts, respects
and obeys the law.
•
People are not prone to human rights
violations because they are increasingly critical, courageous, and proactive in
making complaints and prosecutions.
• Those who have the potential to commit human rights violations will have more control over their behavior because of the deterrent effect (kapok).
• The likelihood or risk that cases of human rights violations will recur will be greatly reduced.
However, a fair and correct
verdict in the trial of cases of human rights violations is not easy to
realize. So far, court decisions in cases of gross human rights violations have
very often caused controversy and dissatisfaction in the community. Even today,
there are still many serious violators of human rights in the past - generally
former officials and high-ranking police and military officers during the New Order
era - who are still free to roam, untouched by the law.
Thus, the establishment of a
human rights court with the task of adjudicating cases of violations is not
sufficient. To optimize and ensure the success of the performance of a human
rights court –– that is, one that can produce fair and correct decisions –– it is
necessary for judges with conditions that are not playing games. Judges in a
human rights court must truly master and have experience in human rights
issues, be professional, have high morals, be free from KKN (corruption,
collusion and nepotism), and have a high level of concern and dedication to
human values. One more thing, they must also be able to work and give decisions
on the basis of the highest justice and truth.