Legal Literacy - Within the criminal justice ecosystem, there is one thing that is very fundamental, namely justice. The existence of the principle of “fair trial†is the basis of every case examination, which ensures that every individual is treated fairly, non-discriminatorily, and without abuse of power.
However, in recent decades, we have increasingly heard news spread on digital platforms regarding practices of torture in the examination process by law enforcement officials. Is this just a technical error, or is it an indication of increasingly severe system damage?Â
Far from the mark, efforts to eliminate the practice of torture in the investigation process are still far from expectations. Although Indonesia has ratified the Convention Against Torture through Law Number 5 of 1998, which regulates cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, in fact, torture continues to occur.
The fulfillment of the principle of fair trial (fair trial) is a central foundation in law enforcement so that there is no room for arbitrariness. Fair trial is an integral part of Indonesia's identity as a state of law, as well as a manifestation of human rights in an integrated criminal justice system (integrated criminal justice system).
Within the framework of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the concept of fair trial includes the right to be free from extrajudicial execution (extra judicial execution), enforced disappearance, torture, and arbitrary arrest (freedom from torture and arbitrary arrest).
Torture against civilians by law enforcement officers has surged in recent years, with a clear irony: most of the perpetrators are dominated by members of the Indonesian National Police. This is an emergency signal that requires serious attention.
Responding to this condition, the Government should immediately strengthen the oversight and accountability mechanisms of the apparatus if it wants to stop the cycle of torture practices that continue to occur.
Amnesty International noted a significant escalation in the number of torture cases committed by law enforcement officers over the past three years. In the 2021-2022 period, there were at least 15 cases with 25 victims, which then increased in the 2022-2023 period to 16 cases with 26 victims. Even more risky, in the 2023-2024 period the number jumped drastically to at least 30 cases with 49 victims.
The data contained in this Amnesty report is in line with the findings of the National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM), which revealed that complaints related to torture were received from all regions in Indonesia. Based on Komnas HAM complaint data between January 1, 2020 and June 24, 2024, 282 cases of torture were identified, with the majority of reported perpetrators being police officers in 176 cases.
Unraveling the Cycle of Perpetuation of Torture by State Apparatus
Torture, whether as a form of punishment or to obtain confessions from victims or suspects, is still considered a method often applied by unscrupulous investigators to facilitate the disclosure of criminal acts. This demonstrates a lack of skills and professionalism among police officers in handling investigations into alleged criminal acts through scientific methods (scientific crime investigation).
Observing this condition, there are a number of factors that contribute to exacerbating the practice of torture in Indonesia, for example, torture is not considered a strict criminal act, the perpetrators are generally law enforcement officials, minimal supervision, there is no special institution to handle torture cases, public views and trauma experienced by victims.
Legislation in Indonesia has not comprehensively stated that torture that occurs during the investigation process is a criminal act. In fact, although torture of suspects or witnesses is sometimes revealed, there is often no legal process that follows against the perpetrators.
Even if there is, settlements are more often carried out internally and are considered only ethical violations, so they do not create a deterrent effect for the perpetrators. Therefore, the Indonesian government is obliged to clarify the status of torture as a criminal act, in accordance with the obligations arising from ratification Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
As a result, the practice of impunity persists and becomes an institutional culture to protect perpetrators. In addition, supervision by other law enforcement officials is also not effective, such as when the Panel of Judges ignores confessions from the Suspect obtained through torture.
Institutionally, Indonesia also does not have a specific institution to handle torture. However, many victims choose not to report due to the trauma they experienced when having to face the perpetrators who have been torturing them to confess to an act they did not actually commit.
Comments (0)
Write a comment