Pollycarpus out on parole : Resolve Munir case Hery Firmansyah and Adam Fenton ;   Hery Firmansyah lectures in criminal law at Gadjah Mada University in Yogyakarta; Adam Fenton is researching Indonesia’s counterterrorism legislation and law enforcement regime for his PhD at Charles Darwin University in Australia

JAKATA POST, 05 Desember 2014

                                                                                                                       

Pollycarpus Budihari Prijanto, the former pilot and convicted murderer of the human rights activist, Munir Said Thalib, is now out of prison on conditional release. Munir was about to begin studying international humanitarian law at Utrecht University when, on Sept. 7th 2004, he was poisoned and died on a Jakarta-Amsterdam Garuda Indonesia flight. This issue will test the leadership of the new administration of President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo. Inevitably, Pollycarpus’ release has caused distress for the victim’s family. It further has the potential to erode the community’s sense of  justice. Though the granting of parole is a legitimate element of the judicial and correctional process, there are a number of issues that the community is correct in questioning, such as how a person convicted of murder is eligible to receive 42 months worth of remissions applied to a 14-year sentence. The reduction of Pollycarpus’ sentence has shocked many. Is this the action of a state seeking to establish democracy and justice, without exception? State prosecutors charged Pollycarpus with two separate crimes. First, Pollycarpus, acting alone or with others — namely Garuda flight attendants Yeti Susmiarti and Oedy Irianto — perpetrated, caused others to perpetrate, or directly took part in premeditated murder as stipulated in the Criminal Code. Second, Pollycarpus, acting alone or with others — namely Garuda vice president of security, Ramelgia Anwar, and senior Garuda pilot Rohanil Aini, perpetrated — compelled others to use falsified documents that caused injury. In the case of Munir, it is anomalous that the charges implied the participation of others in the offense, yet only one offender was convicted, namely Pollycarpus. Of course there were accomplices who helped, either logistically or by recruiting others. However, the participation of others in the crime has not been proven. How is this possible? The momentum created by the recent appointment of Attorney General, Muhammad Prasetyo creates an opportune moment for instilling a new paradigm in the handling of criminal prosecutions — whether aimed at civilians or state agencies. Law enforcement agencies consistently point out that they can only operate within the bounds of the law. However, a contrary view was put forward by a representative of Kontras, the independent Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence. For example, a statement made by a Garuda director that Pollycarpus was tasked by the National Intelligence Agency (BIN), has not been fully investigated, although Pollycarpus’ involvement as an agent of BIN was denied by Muchdi Purwopranjono, who was also charged as a suspect in Munir’s murder. Allowing this fact to remain hidden during the investigation and subsequent trial, if correct, was a serious misstep. Further, the real motive behind Pollycarpus’ actions has never been fully exposed. Munir’s murder will remain a mystery and will continue to create controversy if the political will does emerge to finally expose the truth behind it. It is hoped that the state will not fail in its duty to create a sense of security and justice in the community instead of suppressing human rights; whether it be the right to life or other basic rights as set out in the 1999 Human Rights Law, which embodies the International Convention on Political Rights. The government should do more than pay lip service to the principles of human rights, or worse, commodify such issues for political gain. The defense of human rights must not be subjugated to efforts, which still continue, to silence the demands of the people for justice. Justice must still be fought for. ●