The inauguration of a monument erected in
memory of Soeharto with three statues in Kemusuk, Yogyakarta, on March 1,
and the publication of a book of stories told by 34 State Palace
journalists who served during the New Order have led to the question: Are
these part of a campaign supporting the nomination of Soeharto as a national
hero?
A year ago,
another book about the deceased figure was published — Soeharto, The
Untold Stories. All the events were sponsored by Soeharto’s family
members, with Probosutejo being the most active. In 2010, the Indonesian
Ministry of Social Affairs endorsed putting Soeharto on the national hero
candidate shortlist. The decision now rests with President Susilo Bambang
Yudhoyono whether or not (yet) to elect the general.
The
Indonesian people are divided when it comes to describing how they feel
about the former president; there are four groups with their own viewpoints:
1) those who speak highly of him; 2) people who are pragmatic; 3) the
group voicing critical opinions; and 4) those that are sharply critical.
Each category can, of course, be designated more elaborate names.
The first
group includes the president’s aides (ministers or even deputy ministers)
and politicians who benefitted from the regime or those who wanted to
please Soeharto. In the second group are technocrats who were appointed
ministers and high officials or experts and capable of pointing out
positive aspects of the New Order’s economy. People under the third group
are observers and NGO activists who criticized the presidency, which they
claimed to be authoritarian, of Soeharto. The last one lists individuals
who are highly critical of the corrupt practices and violations of human
rights by Soeharto’s administration. Under the group are also people who
suffered under the New Order regime.
The views
held by the first group – those who practically support the “Father of
Development” – are reflected in the titles of the writings they prepared
for Soeharto’s 70th anniversary celebration. Jailani Naro, famous for his
intervention in the United Development Party (PPP), praised Soeharto as
the “savior of pancasila”. Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives/
People’s Consultative Assembly (DPR/MPR) 1987-1992, Maj. Gen. R. Sukardi,
saw Soeharto as a man who was a “strict follower of the constitution”.
Gen. Edi Sudrajat went all out by saying that Soeharto was “the nation’s
ultimate statesman”. Former Jakarta governor R. Suprapto believed that
Soeharto “had a sixth sense”. Former president BJ Habibie said that
Soeharto “knows the aspirations of the nation best”. Former vice
president, Try Sutrisno, was in the opinion that Soeharto was a “perfect
leader”.
Pragmatism of
the second group is evident from the titles of their articles. Sarwono
Kusumaatmaja commended Soeharto’s “strategic excellence”. Gandhi, who
once chaired the Indonesian Financial and Development Supervisory Board
(BPKP), considered Soeharto a figure who had “eradicated and prevented
corruption”. Senior researcher at LIPI, Thee Kian Wie, saw that
Indonesia’s economic development after 1965 enjoyed the “New Order
miracle”.
People under
the third category — the opposition or the critical group — demonstrated
their stance through intellectual viewpoints. Baskara Wardaya, for
instance, believed that Soeharto was worthy of the nickname the “powerful
man” of Indonesia because he was in power for too long — over 30 years.
The fourth group is essentially similar to the third; however, they
proposed more sarcastic and blunt labels or descriptions of Soeharto.
George J. Aditjondro is a scholar who does highly intensive research and
gives lectures (abroad) on the corrupt practices of the New Order regime.
He wrote a book comparing corruption between Soeharto’s and Habibie’s
administrations — Murid Kencing Berlari (literally pupils urinate
running; pupils take the teaching to the extreme).
In his book,
Ariel Heryanto talks about state terrorism that took place during the New
Order. Wimanjaya, the author of Primadosa Soeharto (Soeharto’s Prime
Sins), was taken in for questioning by law enforcement officers. The most
malicious statement was found in a book, which is a rarity in Indonesia
but listed on the catalog of University of Washington’s library, written
by Khairil Ghazali Al-Husni: 15 Dalil Soeharto Masuk Neraka (15 Reasons
why Soeharto will Go to Hell), published by Muthmainnah, Jakarta.
An
interesting opinion came from a respondent, as reported by Denny JA,
director of the Indonesian Survey Circle (LSI) following a survey aimed
at finding out what people think of Soeharto, a few years ago. A
respondent uniquely labeled Soeharto Indonesia’s “biggest builder yet
biggest destroyer”, a view not far from the truth. Many development
projects were planned and completed by Soeharto during his presidency.
Yet, too much damage was caused by the New Order regime: a legacy of
monstrous debts that generations of Indonesians have to repay; land taken
by force; deforestation; ignoring rampant corruption (mentality); and
business monopoly by, or facilities given, to Soeharto’s children. There
were also cases of serious violations of human rights reported to have
occurred from 1965 through to 1998.
In 2003, a
team set up by the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) and
led by MM Billah conducted a study on Soeharto’s severe human rights
violations. They concluded that there were indications of such cases
relating to the 1965 tragedy (Island of Buru) and the 1980’s mysterious
killings. The team recommended that both cases be investigated further.
The investigation by the Komnas HAM only released the results a decade
later (July 2012). The commission said that crimes to humanity had been
indicated in the cases of the 1965 power struggle and 1980’s mysterious
killings.
One of
several entities responsible for the crimes was the Command for the
Restoration of Security and Public Order (Kopkamtib), and it is well
known that the first chief of the command was Maj. Gen. Soeharto.
This leads to
another question: Should Soeharto be named a national hero? Legal
certainty remains an issue regarding serious human rights violations
allegedly committed by Soeharto since an ad hoc Komnas HAM was not
established at the times of the alleged violations, and the investigative
brief prepared by the commission has not been formally accepted by the Attorney General’s Office. It would be a good
idea to wait for any legal case involving a national hero candidate to be
fully solved before they are named one because once awarded, the status
may not be revoked. The government only awarded president Sukarno his
title in 1986, 16 years after his death. ●
|
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar