- 10 -
Article 4 (Comment on List of Issue 15)
29.
Torture is prohibited based on the penal law in Indonesia. Besides prohibited by the
penal law, torture and other cruel punishment are also against Pancasila, the state ideology,
and also the constitution of the Indonesian Republic. The Law 39/1999 about Human
Rights also guarantees the right to be free of torture. This law also defines torture
somewhat similar with the one in the Convention against Torture (CAT).
30.
The prohibition of the act of torture conducted by public officials is stated in the
penal law Article 442, which says: “A public official in a penal case, who uses the means
of force to obtain confession or information, is penalized with four years imprisonment.”
The prohibition of torture in Article 442 uses the definition which is close to the one
defined in CAT, even though it is not sufficient enough. This is because it has not covered
the act of “instigation” or “consent” or “acquiescence” from public officials or person
acting in an official capacity.
31.
In order to cope with this limitation, at the moment the Draft Law of the Penal
Code that prohibits torture as stated in CAT is being prepared. In the Draft Law, Article
300 states “every public official by or at the instigation of or with the consent or
acquiescence of a public official or other persons acting in an official capacity inflicting
pain or suffering both mentally and physically for such purposes as obtaining from her/him
or a third person information or a confession, punishing him will be sentenced for 3 years
minimum or 12 years maximum imprisonment”.
Article 11 (Comment on List of Issue 24)
32.
The monitoring of places of detention, especially Correctional Institutions (Lapas)
and State Detention Place (Rutan), is conducted by the Human Rights Commission of
Indonesia (Komnas HAM) as a part of its monitoring function. This monitoring was done
from April to May 2007, in several Lapas and Rutan in Indonesia, which were located in
South Sulawesi, North Sulawesi and Riau.
33.
In South Sulawesi, the monitored Lapas and Rutan were Lapas Maros, Rutan
Pangkajene, and Lapas and also Rutan Makasar. Meanwhile, in North Sulawesi, it was
Lapas Manado. In Riau, there were Lapas Bangkinang, Lapas Pekanbaru, and Lapas
Tanjung Pinang.
34.
Komnas HAM has not yet conducted the specific monitoring as suggested in
Article 11 of the Convention against Torture (CAT) that obliged the State to do these steps:
“to monitor systematically the rules about interrogation, instruction, method, habits and
also rules to arrest someone or the treatment for those who got arrested, detained or
imprisoned in each jurisdiction area in order to avoid torture cases.” The monitoring to act
upon Article 11 has not been effectively carried out by Komnas HAM.
35.
From the monitoring of these detention places, either Lapas or Rutan, Komnas
HAM noted several conditions:
(a)
The number occupants were exceeding the capacity of the Lapas or Rutan
and this has caused the condition of the facilities to be quite dreadful;