| Home > South-East Asia >> East Timor | |
Tarnishing the spirit of ‘Friendship’ of both nations
Joint Statement on Commission of Truth and Friendship - February 23, 2007
Human Rights Working Group (HRWG), Kontras, ELSAM, Imparsial, PBHI, Yayasan HAK and FORUM-ASIA have closely viewed the 19-21 February 2007 hearing process of the Commission of Truth and Friendship (CTF) as an instrument of impunity on cases of human rights violations that occurred in Timor Leste in 1999. In this context, we lay down essential reasons why the CTF process won’t benefit the people of Indonesia and Timor Leste in applying its transitional justice.
Firstly, the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)[1] that became the baseline of the CTF ignores the international principle of human rights, for instance, on offering amnesty with no due process of law and vague responsibility of the CTF in the future. This jeopardises both countries’ commitment at the international level, such as the conflict resolution taken up by Indonesia on rendering democratisation in Burma. It is also flawed, with the content in the MoU contradicting the pledges and commitments by Indonesia as a member of the UN Human Rights Council.
Secondly, the CTF is not serious in exposing the bitter truth of human rights violations by not prioritising the perpetrators to attend the hearing process, although they have been identified by UN-sanctioned Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation - CAVR[2] and Commission of Inquiry on East Timor - CIET[3]. Instead, in the hearing, the commission categorized individuals into two groups.
Group 1: Mr Ali Alatas (Former Foreign Minister of Indonesia) Mr F.X Lopes da Cruz, Mr Mariano Sabino (both from Timorese National Resistance Council – CNRT), Dr Sofian Effendi (Reactor of FORUM) and Mr Virgilio Guterres (Resistencia Nacional Dos Estudantes De Timor Leste – RENETIL)
Group 2: Mr Mateus Carvalho (Leader of pro-Indonesia militia, AITARAK), Mr Emilio Barreto, Mr Manuel Ximenes and Mr Florindo de Jesus Brites (all survivors of massacres).
Thirdly, until today, there has been no comprehensive explanation of “friendship” in the framework of transitional justice. In the glossary[4] published by the commission, the definition of friendship is: “Good relation between two nations and the people is based on reconciliation and future-oriented as well as to promote contacts between people and people, innovative and cooperation to uphold peace and stability”.
Supposedly, the product of friendship based on the CTF’s work should be excelled upon transitional justice. For example, cooperation and responsibility for victims’ rehabilitation, mutual solutions through information exchange, witnesses etc. to ensure all identified perpetrators of human rights violation are not spared from due process of law. The commission mandate as stipulated in the MoU is neither political nor cultural but based upon facts.
Therefore, Human Rights Working Group (HRWG), Kontras, ELSAM, ImparsialI, PBHI, Yayasan HAK and FORUM-ASIA express our concern. We:
[1] http://www.ctf-ri-tl.org/ctf1/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=61&Itemid=44The Commission for Dissapeared and Victims of Violence (Kontras)
[2] Comissao de Acolhimento, Verdade e Reconciliaçao de Timor Leste (CAVR) link. http://www.easttimor-reconciliation.org/
[Please note a more up-to-date link is at http://www.cavr-timorleste.org/ - ETAN]
[3] International Commission of Inquiry on Timor Leste (CIET) webpage. http://www.ohchr.org/english/docs/ColReport-English.pdf
[4] Glossary of Terms No. 20, Persahabatan. http://www.ctf-ri-tl.org/ctf1/index.php
See also: