JAKARTA: The government’s plan to screen and determine who qualifies as a human rights activist to decide who receives legal safeguards has met with backlash from civil society groups, who warn the move risks state interference in rights protections.
The plan came as the Human Rights Ministry is seeking to introduce changes to the 1999 Human Rights Law and issue a new ministerial regulation to strengthen legal protections for human rights activists, citing concerns over criminalisation against those involved in advocacy works.
To ensure legal safeguards can be provided for activists, Human Rights Minister Natalius Pigai said his ministry would form an assessor team to evaluate whether detained individuals meet the criteria as human rights defenders.
The assessment will be based on strict criteria focusing on the individual’s actions at the time of the incident rather than self-declared status or public recognition. The team will review each case individually to ensure decisions are made based on the context of ongoing legal cases.
Legal protection, the minister stressed, would only be extended to those defending public interests, particularly vulnerable or marginalised groups. Those who are proven to have acted with personal or financial motives would be excluded.
“It’s possible that someone widely known as a human rights activist, at a certain moment, may be found by the assessor team to be acting for (financial gain). In such cases, they can’t be considered a human rights activist,” Pigai said on Wednesday (April 29), as quoted by Antara.
He added those meeting the criteria would be shielded from prosecution from the earliest stages of legal proceedings.
He said: “Once someone is arrested, the assessor team will issue a letter stating the person is an activist and, based on that, they can’t be tried or legally processed.”
To ensure objectivity, the assessor team will comprise members from multiple sectors, including government, civil society, government-sanctioned human rights institutions such as the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) and law enforcement bodies; the latter would help ensure assessments take into account the legal context of an ongoing case.
‘No legitimacy’
The plan quickly drew condemnation from human rights groups, which urged the government to scrap the plan and argued that the state’s responsibility is to protect rights defenders, not to label or strip them of their status.
Amnesty Indonesia deputy director Wirya Adiwena called the proposal “a dangerous step backwards” that runs counter to basic human rights principles.
“The state has neither the moral nor legal legitimacy to decide who can or can’t be called a human rights defender,” Mr Wirya said, adding the proposal echoes screening practices during former president Soeharto’s New Order regime, when authorities vetted citizens based on their perceived political loyalty.
He also criticised Pigai’s remark suggesting paid professionals are not human rights defenders, noting that journalists, lawyers, environmental activists and legal aid workers worldwide often carry out human rights work in a professional capacity.
While efforts to protect human rights defenders may be well-intentioned, placing the designation process under government control could increase the risk of rights violations and be used to obstruct the work of activists, said Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI) chair Muhammad Isnur.
“The government may establish protection mechanisms,” Isnur said, “but it becomes problematic if those mechanisms turn into a form of state certification that determines who is a legitimate activist and not.”
Regulation on human rights defenders should also align with guidelines set by the United Nations’ framework, which defines human rights defenders “primarily by their actions, rather than a formal designation by the state”, Isnur went on to say.
He added the authority to determine whether someone is a human rights activist should rest with independent institutions, such as Komnas HAM.
Imparsial’s Ardi Manto Adiputra concurred, arguing the process to qualify someone as a human rights defender must remain independent and free from state intervention.
He also noted the proposed involvement of law enforcement bodies in the process, noting their involvement raises questions about impartiality as such institutions are among those most frequently reported for alleged rights violations.
“We are concerned that continuing this plan would amount to state interference in the work of human rights defenders and could threaten their independence and objectivity,” Ardi said, urging Pigai to first consult the proposal with civil society and the public. - The Jakarta Post/ANN
