Indonesia's armed forces have played a pivotal role in the country’s development since independence. In many instances, such as Indonesia’s hydrocarbon resources and the long term LNG supply deals to Japan, the military’s influence if not control, has been beneficial. In other cases such as the 1976 invasion of East Timor a year after its independence from the Portuguese, military meddling proved disastrous.
There is now considerable international disquiet that senior army officers convicted of serious crimes during the last period of the 22-year occupation of East Timor, have had their convictions quashed. There is equal concern that a few days later, a judge ruled that the former head of the special forces had no case to answer when troops under his command fatally opened fire on demonstrators 20 years ago at Jakarta’s port city of Tanjung Priok. These are only the latest in a long series of overturned convictions and thrown out cases in which the accused have been members of the Indonesian armed forces.
Outsiders may assume that the majority of these apparently perverse rulings reflect the continuing power of the military within Indonesian society. This analysis does not however go far enough. Most of the country’s civilian political leaders today come from military families. The majority of Indonesia’s wealthy elite has some connection with the armed forces that effectively ruled the country first under President Sukarno and then Suharto. Though the military has its own groups and rivalries, Indonesia’s military-connected families do tend to come together on issues that threaten the reputation of the army, navy or air force.
This explains why though the government in Jakarta could appreciate the uselessness and injustice of continuing the occupation of East Timor, especially in the face of a rising tide of international anger, they refused to recognize that the damage that atrocities committed by both the military and ethnic Indonesian militias, was also sullying the country’s name. It was only with great reluctance that the authorities agreed to investigate some of the most serious allegations. The trials have been the outcome and they themselves have ended up in acquittals (which may be perfectly legitimate) or quashed convictions or stopped trials which even if justifiable have given a powerfully negative impression to the outside world. Thus after the savage repression of East Timor, the brutal murder of suspected rebel sympathizers, the rapine and the looting and destruction of much of the capital Dili shortly before Jakarta pulled out, only two people, both militiamen, are currently being punished and they also may well soon have their convictions quashed.
Such a dismal judicial record is inexcusable. These crimes took place. But only two guilty findings remain standing. It is absurd that many others have not been brought to book and scandalous that those who have are effectively let off. Indeed it sends entirely the wrong message, not only to the international community but also to those parts of this huge and diverse country that are themselves seeking greater autonomy or even independence.
