Correction system the weakest link in counterterrorism efforts

Correction system the weakest link in counterterrorism efforts Noor Huda Ismail  ;   The writer won the Australian Development Scholarship Program to further his doctorate program this year

JAKARTA POST,  07 Maret 2014

                                                                                                                       

                                                                                         

                                                                                                             

Since 2002, the police have arrested around 900 terrorism suspects. However, from 2009, the country has seen at least 33 cases of recidivism related to terrorism out of about 400 people released. Among those recidivists is Santoso alias Abu Wardah, who is now believed to be hiding in the depths of the jungle in Poso, Central Sulawesi, orchestrating a series of atrocities targeting mainly police officers. In this year of politics, political candidates are unlikely to give this issue serious thought. My field work suggests that the government is still struggling to cope with the problem. With recidivism rife, has the corrections system for terrorism offenders in Indonesia failed? Or is there aftercare? In theory, there is an aftercare program for terrorism offenders run by the correctional center (Bapas), an office tasked to facilitate social reintegration. The main job of parole officers are the following: to “counsel” clients by understanding their needs and the risks; to provide them with training by inviting competent stakeholders; and to carry out risk assessment in the community when inmates apply for probation by talking to family of terrorism offenders, especially the guarantor. Parole officers have to write a thorough report of the personal history of clients. After talking to the family, parole staff will visit village authorities and tell them that one of their residents requested release on parole. They also have to talk to the head of community about the client’s history before his/her arrest. When the probation is granted, parole staff must monitor them by visiting their houses or requesting the clients visit the parole office. However, the office faces a number of challenges. First of all is image. For years, there has been a little attention to this department. Staff in the directorate general of justice think that lowly-performing staff will be transferred to this office. Working in the prison is more prestigious than working as parole officers because prison staff can look for “side income”. In my interview, one senior official in the directorate general, Christie, who herself used to work at a parole office in Palembang, said that during internal meetings at the directorate general level, most of the discussions would focus on prison problems and little attention was paid to parole problems. With limited staff, one parole officer has to often handle 50 clients. This figure is beyond the load any counselor can handle. At the same time, parole staff must to face the reality that some of their clients live very far from their homes. As an illustration, a parole staff in Semarang had a client that lives around 50 kilometers from his home. There is no public transportation and the road is very challenging. Ironically, there is not enough funding for this type of work. Often, he must spend his own money to carry out the assignment. Most of the parole office staff are female. Females working in this job face extreme risks. They have to deal with the possibility of death. Christie had to confront this scary reality when she was assigned in Palembang. One of her clients almost killed her but locals saved her. Although parole officers understand that terrorism is an extraordinary crime, they tend to treat the convicts as ordinary cases. Often, parole staff avoids dealing with them. One parole officer in Surakarta, who only graduated from high school and received no systematic training to deal with high-risk clients like terrorism offenders, told me she did not want to deal with her clients because they would not cooperate with authority figures and would clam up when they dealt with government workers. Regarding how parole officers viewed their job, Christie said: “We understand that we are doing important things to help former offenders integrate back into society. But because of limited support and recognition from Jakarta, we often feel less confident. We feel small compare to our co-workers in prison. In my case, l take this job as a calling or to serve people less privileged than me.” Therefore, the government needs to demonstrate strong leadership to support the work of parole officers like Christie because these convicts need help to avoid contact with recruiters from the old network. This process of reactivation was faster compared to their first involvement because their existing social networks are linked to active networks. These networks often provide moral justification for their violent action. ●