Exercising with new mechanism, Universal Periodic Review (UPR), was related to the effort from the Indonesian government in implementing human rights, which was still considered weak.

If there was no riddle, starting from Wednesday (9/4) until Friday (11/4), Indonesia would be reviewed for three hours in Human Rights Board of the UN, in Geneva. In the review, Indonesia would be placed in the fifth place of the first group. ”Is this not a discrimination because it applies to all UN members, according to the Resolution of the General Assembly of the UN No. 251/60/2006?” said the spokesperson of the Department of Foreign Affairs, Kristiarto Legowo, Monday (7/4).

In the Human Rights Board there was a universal periodic review mechanism where the Board periodically and regularly studied the Human Rights records from each country, beginning with countries which were the members of the Board by holding the universality principles, neutral, objective, and not selective in choosing Human Rights topics or themes, also not selective in targetting certain countries.” he added.

The review would ensure all the 191 country members of the UN, starting from the members of the Human Rights Board, the Human Rights record of which would be reviewed to improve the Human Rights condition throughout the world. The review would be conducted by a panel of 47 member countries of Human Rights Board, except the member undergoing the review and the leader of the Human Rights Board.

Universal Periodic Review (UPR)
Beginning with the disappointment toward the performance of the Human Rights Commission of the UN, leaders of the countries all over the world in the World Summit, September 2005 in New York, agreed to put end to the activities of the Human Rights Commission of the UN and substituted it with Human Rights Board of the UN.

Of 191 member countries of the UN, 170 members agreed and only four countries opposed the resolution to establish the Human Rights Board, they were the USA, Marshall Islands, Palau, and Israel.

Following the forming agreement, the appointment of countries to sit in the Board was done in May 9, 2006 then in the General Assembly of the UN. Indonesia was chosen as one of the 47 countries with 165 supporting votes or far beyond the minimal support requirement.

The first years of Human Rights Board trials were the crucial moment for negotiation and setting the procedural aspects of the Human Rights Board which was expected to be filled with political content, including the working methods, agenda, subsidiary bodies. Because of that Indonesia needed to be actively involved as a member with a vote.

Many parties, including Indonesian Government, considered the forming of the Board set a new era for Human Rights improvement and protection. Why did it call a new era? There were a number of new mechanisms that differed the Human Rights Board in its predecessor, the Human Rights Commission.

One of them was the existence of universal periodic review mechanism where the Board periodically and regularly reviewed the Human Rights record in each country beginning with the Board member countries by referring to the universality principles, non-aligned, objective and not selective in choosing a Human Rights topic or theme, also not selective to aim at certain countries.

The universal periodic review would ensure that all 191 member countries of the UN, starting from the Human Rights Board, the record would be reviewed to improve the Human Rights condition throughout the world.

This mechanism would regulate all member countries of the UN especially countries that became the member of the Human Rights Board to have the review in their membership period. In this relation, there was a possibility/suggestion that member countries of the Human Rights Board with one year membership to be prioritized in conducting the universal periodic review.

The Human Rights Board meetings could also be done more than once a year,  with longer time than in the late Human Rights Commission. The Board would also have a simpler and more efficient mechanism to hold a special meeting in order to respond to a Human Rights crisis in an area.

Another important key was that the Human Rights Board had a weapon in form of sanction to member countries with heavy and systematic Human Rights violation. The agreement to impose a sanction such as membership suspension to certain period of time could be attained by agreement from two-third of the members.

Human Rights Board was also expected to maintain the complaint report mechanism from NGOs, whether individual or independent people organization, which nowadays known as “1503 Special Procedure”.

The meeting was based on three kinds of documents, those were the compilation of recommendation of UN Human Rights mechanism like result of the visit of Special Reporter for Human Rights Defender, Hina Jilani, also the Special Reporter for Torture, Manfred Nowak, in Human Rights Board related to their visit to Indonesia in 2007 based on the invitation from Indonesia. Then there was also a people’s input compilation, which was the input from 17 NGOs focusing on Human Rights in Indonesia about the Human Rights Implementation in Indonesian and a report from Indonesian Government.

Government report brought to the Human Rights Board of the UN only contained children’s rights, women’s rights civilian and political rights, Army and Police Reformation that was reviewed a little, and various regulations that the government made.

“The report from the government consisted only about 20 pages,” said the Coordinator of Human Rights Working Group (HRWG), Rafendi Djamin to some journalists and reporters related to the UPR realization. The meeting with the press in Kontras headquarter, on Friday (4/4), was also attended by Atnike Nova Sigiri (Elsam), Bhatara Ibnu Reza (Imparsial) and Sri Suparyati (Kontras).

According to Rafendi, the mechanism of UPR was to see the implementation conducted by the Indonesian Government in the last four years in improving Human Rights in Indonesia. “Indonesia has failed to meet justice so it is normal that Indonesian people filed Human Rights violation cases to international forums,” he exclaimed.

The new mechanism, UPR, which was formed based on the Resolution of Human Rights Board of the UN No. 60/251, was actually almost similar to the mechanism in other Human Rights Board meeting of the UN. “The different is that UPR, besides talking about Human Rights violation in the past, also bring up the latest issues. Besides, the procedure is better and not complicated,” said Head of International Bureau of Kontras, Sri Suparyati.

If in the past, to observe Human Rights condition in a country, The UN Human Rights Board had to send Special Rapporteur on the President’s agreement. Now, with the UPR mechanism, the NGOs could deliver their observation result concerning the Human Rights issues directly to the UN Human Rights Board.

This mechanism also put forward essential dialogue and cooperation to improve the capacity of a country in carrying out the commitment to improve and protect the Human Rights. This mechanism was according to the Resolution 60/251 dated March 15, 2006 should also not imposing too much burden to the country being reviewed and should not overlap one another. 
The Right to speak

For the meeting, the government had prepared their 20 delegates, including the General Director of Human Rights and Officers from the Department of Foreign Affair. ”For International NGOs delegates, they sent 17 delegates. For Indonesian NGOs, they are represented by 3 people, they are Atnike from ELSAM, Mina Susana Setra from Nation Customary People Congress (AMAN, ed.), and mysellf,” said Rafendi.

The resending of Indonesian delegates after last March attending the meeting in Human Rights Board of the UN in Geneva was aimed at  providing opportunities to the NGOs in saying what they wanted to say. Because so far the government was considered less sensitive to the NGOs aspiration. Not only the NGOs, but the reports from Manfred Novak and Hina Jilani were also denied by the government.

With the UPR mechanism that provides the right to speak for the NGOs, at least they could express their complaints even their urges to the government through international mediation. “For UPR this April, there are three facilitators, one of them is from Canada” explained Sri Suparyati.

Unfortunately, in this UPR, the NGOs had not had the right to speak yet. In June, they would start to be given the right to speak. Even though they were without the right to speak; “There are many issues and questions that we are going to ask to the government through the UN Human Rights Board,” explained Rafendi.

There were seven issues to be brought up by the Indonesian NGOs delegates in the UPR, starting from the issue of Human Rights violation, the past to the latest. The violation of Human Rights in the past still became the focus of attention of the NGOs were the re-trial case for human rights criminals in Timor Leste (1999) and the impunity for the actors of the bloody case in Biak, Wamena, Wasior, and Abepura in Papua; and not to forget the disclosure of Munir death case.

For the latest case, related to the ratification status of Children Rights Convention that never became a legislation. Then, about religious freedom and freedom of expression, the extention for the exploration of Natural Resources that threatened the rights of indigineous people (native people) and the security over the enactment of act on press effectively. ”Other questions that we want to ask is around the return of the investigation cases from the Human Rights National Commission by the Attorney Office,” added Sri Suparyati.

In a different opportunity, Commissioner for Surveillance Division for Human Rights National Commission, Nurcholis, said that apart from the past cases of Human Rights violation still in investigation process (including the cases whose files were returned by the Attorney Office to the Human Right Commission), the Human Right Commission also paid attention to the complaints from the people in the last six months, such as the Human Rights violation cases conducted by the police officers and land conflicts. ”Those are some inputs that become our focus, but there are also other cases like labours and migrant workers,” he said.

The Commitment
The most important thing from the UPR meeting was the change of Indonesian government attitude to be more committed in enforcing Human Rights. Rafendi exclaimed that even though the recommendation of the UPR was not forcing nor binding, but this is a political commitment between Indonesia and international world to show their (the government – ed.) consistency in enforcing Human Rights”. 

Because of the character, the approach to the recommendation was up to the government. It might be followed up or it might be ignored. ”The Problem is that there is no sanction because it is merely a recommendation and not obligation,” he added.

Nurcholis added, what was important from the UPR was to build general understanding on Human Rights implementation in international level. Whether or not the recommendation was followed up depended on the government. ”Every recommendation was not without any forms. So every one can use the recommendation in many shapes, including the Human Rights Commission itself. For Human Rights Commission, the recommendation was very important because it can be the follow up agenda,” said Nurcholis.
 
Source:  www.hukumonline.com
Photo courtesy of http://www.google.go.id

Translated by Yogi Djatnika (MKRI)