PART I - Human rights abuses in NAD

1. Introduction
In May 2003 a military emergency was declared in the Indonesian province of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam (NAD)(1) under which civilian government was suspended and a massive counter-insurgency operation was initiated against the armed pro-independence group, the Free Aceh Movement (Gerakan Aceh Merdeka, GAM). The following year marked one of the bloodiest in the 28-year conflict in NAD. In May 2004 the status of NAD was downgraded from military to civil emergency. While bringing the administration back under civilian authority, military operations continued as before and human rights abuses are still being reported.

Amnesty International recognizes that governments must respond to the threat posed by armed groups. It also takes no position on the political status of NAD, neither supporting nor opposing any demands for independence. The organization's concerns are limited purely to the human rights situation in the area in relation to which research is conducted both into human rights abuses committed by GAM as well as by the Indonesian security forces.

However, monitoring the human rights situation in NAD during the latest military campaign has been made difficult by tight restrictions on access to the province. These government-imposed restrictions have prevented Amnesty International and other international human rights organizations from undertaking research in NAD. Nevertheless, it has been possible to gather data from a variety of credible sources. For this report Amnesty International conducted interviews outside Indonesia with Acehnese human rights activists and lawyers, with some 55 refugees who have fled NAD since May 2003, as well as with independent experts and observers.

The information collected provides ample evidence of a disturbing pattern of grave abuses of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights in NAD. The Indonesian security forces bear primary responsibility for these human rights violations, although GAM has also committed serious human rights abuses, most notably the taking of hostages and the use of child soldiers.

There are certain principles of international law which have risen to the level of peremptory norms meaning that they cannot be derogated from in any circumstances, including during a national emergency. They include the prohibition of the arbitrary deprivation of life and the right to be free from torture. Nevertheless, unlawful killings and torture are among the human rights abuses that have been committed during the past 15 months in NAD.

The current pattern of human rights abuses is all too familiar to the population of NAD who have suffered grave violations of human rights during previous counter-insurgency operations in the province. While dramatic changes in Indonesia's political landscape have taken place since 1998(2) and the process of democratization is proceeding, symbolised by recent parliamentary and presidential elections, it appears that little has changed in the way in which the security forces respond to both armed and civilian independence movements. It is also the case that, as in the past, little national or international attention has been given to the situation.

The human rights abuses that have taken place during the latest military operation are so pervasive that there is virtually no part of life in the province which remains untouched. As in previous military campaigns against GAM, the security of the civilian population has been paid scant regard. There has been a failure by the Indonesian military to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants. Young men are frequently suspected by the security forces of GAM membership and are particularly at risk of human rights violations, including unlawful killing, torture, ill-treatment and arbitrary detention. Members of GAM have also been unlawfully killed after being taken prisoner. Women and girls have been subjected to rape and other forms of sexual violence. Trials of individuals suspected of being members of or supporting GAM have contravened international standards for fair trials and some of those imprisoned may be prisoners of conscience.

In its efforts to sever the logistical and moral support of the population for GAM, the security forces have also forcibly displaced civilians from their homes and villages, carried out armed raids and house-to-house searches and destroyed houses and other property. Civilians, including children, have been forced to participate in military operations and other activities in support of the military operations. Disproportionate restrictions have been placed on freedom of expression and movement and the delivery of humanitarian assistance has been severely disrupted.

The military has conducted investigations into some allegations of human rights violations and a number of soldiers have been brought to trial in military tribunals. However, these processes, which have only dealt with a fraction of the total number of allegations of human rights violations, lack independence and impartiality. In the meantime, while the National Commission on Human Rights (Komisi Nasional Hak Asasi Manusia, Komnas HAM) has conducted field investigations, local human rights monitors have been subjected to arrest, detention and other forms of harassment and intimidation. International human rights organizations are denied access to the province entirely.

Conditions in NAD have forced hundreds of Acehnese to flee to Malaysia as well as other countries. While the Malaysian government has shown some limited tolerance of the Acehnese and other refugee populations within its borders, officially it affords them no legal recognition or protection. Without such recognition refugees in Malaysia are at constant risk of arrest as "illegal immigrants" and can face charges under Malaysia's punitive Immigration Act, detention in the squalid conditions of an immigration detention centre, or both.

In contravention of the norm of customary international law which prohibits the return of persons to a situation where they would face serious human rights violations, Malaysia has forcibly returned Acehnese refugees to Indonesia on several occasions. The threat of prolonged detention in immigration detention camps in poor living conditions has also prompted some Acehnese refugees to "volunteer" to be returned to Indonesia. In addition to the risk of arbitrary detention and refoulement by Malaysia, the lack of formal recognition as refugees prohibits Acehnese asylum-seekers and refugees from working or accessing basic services such as healthcare and education.

The following report is divided into two parts. Part one provides details of the current human rights situation in NAD. Part two focuses on the situation for Acehnese refugees in Malaysia. Recommendations are provided to both the Indonesian and Malaysian governments, as well as to the United Nations (UN) and second governments which, if implemented, would contribute to reducing the suffering of the Acehnese people.

2. Political Background

The province of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam (NAD), with a population of some 4.2 million, lies at the northern tip of the island of Sumatra, a short distance across the Straits of Malacca to Malaysia. The current conflict in the province dates back to the mid-1970s when, on 4 December 1976 the Acheh/Sumatra National Liberation Front (ASNLF), widely known as the Free Aceh Movement (Gerakan Aceh Merdeka, GAM), unilaterally declared independence. Support for independence in NAD is rooted in a long tradition of resistance to outside domination, including against the former Dutch colonial power. In recent times, the unequal benefits of economic development, the perceived lack of respect for cultural and religious traditions and the appalling record of human rights violations by the Indonesian security forces have fuelled the resentment of many Acehnese against the Indonesian government.

The 1976 insurgency was quickly crushed by the Indonesian security forces. Those among GAM's leadership who were not killed or imprisoned, fled abroad. A self-proclaimed government in exile, led by GAM's founder, Dr Tengku Hasan di Tiro, has since been established in Sweden.

In 1989, GAM's military wing re-emerged in NAD. Following a series of attacks on police and military installations the Indonesian security forces embarked on counter-insurgency operations that became characterized by grave human rights violations.(3) At the time, NAD was a "Military Operations Zone" (Daerah Operasi Militer, DOM) which gave the military effective control of the province. The DOM status was finally lifted in August 1998, soon after former President Suharto, who had led Indonesia for 32 years, was forced to resign in the face of massive popular opposition to his authoritarian and corrupt rule.

The lifting of the DOM brought only brief respite. In January 1999, the first of a series of new military operations was launched following attacks on the security forces allegedly by GAM. Contrary to the aims, the military operations, and the human rights violations and general hardships for the civilian population that accompanied them, led to increased support among the general population for GAM, or at least its declared goal of independence. The most visible demonstration of support was in November 1999 when, according to some estimates, one million people attended a rally in the provincial capital of Banda Aceh to demand a referendum on the political status of NAD. At the same time, GAM's own strength was increasing. Hundreds of village chiefs were reported to have transferred their allegiance to GAM. By mid-2001, GAM claimed to be in control of almost 75 per cent of the province(4) and was reported to have established parallel administrative systems, including for tax collection and registering births and marriages.

Although force continued to define the response of the military and some parts of the civilian leadership to GAM, former President Abdurrahman Wahid (October 1999 – July 2001), initiated efforts to seek a political solution to resolve the situation. On the one hand a dialogue between the two parties to the conflict was mediated by the Switzerland-based Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue.(5) At the same time, a law was drafted with a view to offering the Acehnese a greater level of autonomy in the government and administration of the province and greater control over revenues from natural resources. The law on special autonomy was regarded by observers as being intended to provide an alternative to independence and thereby undercut support for GAM's armed struggle.(6)

Law No. 18 on Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, which provides the legal basis for special autonomy in NAD, was signed by the newly appointed President Megawati Sukarnoputri in August 2001, but was considered seriously deficient in key areas, particularly in relation to human rights and justice.(7) It was never fully implemented and was effectively superseded by the military emergency declared in May 2003.

In the meantime, the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue had some success in bringing the two sides to the negotiating table. On 12 May 2000, the "Joint Understanding on a Humanitarian Pause for Aceh" was signed, the first of a series of agreements between the Indonesian government and GAM. The three month "humanitarian pause" was intended to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian assistance and reduce levels of violence. Initially it met with some success, but within a few months levels of violence began escalating once again. Nevertheless, talks continued intermittently over the next two years, culminating in the signing of the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement (CoHA) in Geneva, Switzerland on 9 December 2002.

The CoHA, which was a framework for peace talks, rather than a peace settlement, was ambitious, involving international monitors,(8) the establishment of "peace zones", disarmament of GAM and a limited withdrawal of Indonesian troops.

However, within months the CoHA had begun to unravel as both sides contested the interpretation of the agreement; levels of general violence and human rights abuses increased; and members of the international monitoring teams came under attack from vigilante groups, widely believed to be proxies for the Indonesian military.

By April 2003, the military had begun deploying additional troops to NAD in preparation for a new campaign against GAM and at midnight on 18 May 2003 a six-month military emergency was declared.(9) In contrast to DOM, which was a purely military response, the government described the new campaign against GAM as an "integrated operation" with military, humanitarian, law enforcement and local governance components. However, in reality the emphasis of this latest campaign has also been on the military operations, as a reported 48,000 troops were deployed against GAM which, it was claimed by the Indonesian authorities, had some 5,000 troops under arms.

In November 2003, the military emergency was extended by a further six months. In May 2004 it was downgraded to the status of civil emergency and authority was transferred back to the provincial civilian administration under the Provincial Governor.(10)

3. A well-established pattern of human rights violations

"Of course, it's alright to think about human rights but the more important thing is to think about the territorial integrity of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, NKRI" Minister of Defence, Matori Abdul Djalil.(11)
From the period of the DOM to the latest military campaign, the various military operations pursued against GAM in NAD have in common an almost total disregard for human rights norms and standards. During the first four years alone of DOM it is estimated that 2,000 civilians, including children and the elderly, were unlawfully killed by the Indonesian security forces. By the time the DOM status was lifted in 1998, many hundreds and possibly thousands more civilians had been killed. Several thousand people were arbitrarily arrested during these years on suspicion of supporting GAM. Many of those detained were subjected to extensive periods of incommunicado detention and torture and ill-treatment. Others "disappeared" in police or military custody.

Human rights violations, albeit at times at a reduced level, continued to be reported throughout the period of the peace negotiations and other political initiatives. In 1999, locally-based human rights groups estimated that over 421 people had been unlawfully killed in NAD. By 2001 the figure had more than doubled to 1,014 and in 2002 it increased again to 1,307.(12)

GAM has also committed human rights abuses both during and after the DOM period. According to official Indonesian sources and local media reports, GAM has been responsible for the targeted killing of suspected informers, government officials, civil servants and others with links to the Indonesian administration. It has also taken hostages and is alleged to have been involved in the burning of schools and other public buildings, and in intimidating, harassing and possible unlawful killings of non-Acehnese or "transmigrants."(13)

Data collected by Amnesty International about the human rights situation under the current military operations demonstrates a pattern of grave abuses of human rights that closely match both the pattern and the intensity of the human rights abuses committed during the height of the DOM period. Indeed, many of those interviewed by Amnesty International described the recent military emergency as "DOM 2".

The stated objective of the latest military campaign is to "crush" GAM and restore security to NAD. The methods employed to achieve this, in common with methods employed in previous operations, have frequently been in contravention of international humanitarian and human rights law which forbid the derogation of certain basic rights, including the right to life and the right not to be subjected to torture and ill-treatment. Such methods include unlawful killings, "disappearances", arbitrary detention, torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. GAM has retaliated with the taking of hostages, unlawful killings and other abuses.

A strategy of civil-military cooperation has been employed in which the civilian population is enlisted to provide support to the military operations. Measures have also been put in place, which have had the effect of controlling the population, restricting access to the province and preventing the gathering and dissemination of information about the human rights situation.

These strategies have resulted in considerable hardship for the population, including internal displacement, disruption to economic activity, denial of access to humanitarian assistance, and disproportionate restrictions on movement and freedom of expression.

Under the civil emergency, which has been in place since May 2004, military operations are continuing as before and civilian casualties are still being reported. Indeed, unlawful killings appear to have been sanctioned by the Head of the Regional Civil Emergency Authority (who is also the Provincial Governor), who stated in June 2004 that "unidentified, suspicious looking people" will be shot on sight.(14) In the meantime, many hundreds of political prisoners, tried in unfair trials and in many cases convicted primarily on the basis of evidence obtained under torture, remain in prison. Arrests of "GAM suspects" are still continuing and those detained are at grave risk of torture and ill-treatment. Moreover, an existing ban on access to NAD by foreigners has been extended, with the result that international humanitarian and human rights agencies are still unable to carry out their work in the province.

3.1 Militias and civilian defence

Counter-insurgency operations in Indonesia have historically made extensive use of civilians, including as militia, civilian defence groups and military auxiliary units. The current military operations in NAD are no different in this respect. Vigilante and militia groups are reported to have been set up in several areas and there are reports that they have carried out human rights violations with impunity. All adult males must participate in compulsory night guard duty and there are reports of civilians, including women and children, being used during military operations as scouts and spies.

The concept of civilian defence is well-established in military doctrine in Indonesia where the use of military and police auxiliary units and other civil defence groups have been integral to military operations in the past in NAD, in East Timor (now named the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste) and elsewhere. The legal basis of this concept is found in Indonesia's 1945 Constitution that states that civilians have both the right and the duty to participate in the defence of their country.(15) Moreover, Law 23/1959 on States of Emergency, also provides the military with authority to instruct inhabitants of a region under a military emergency to perform compulsory labour in the interests of security and defence.(16)

However, Indonesia must comply with its obligations under International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 29 on forced labour which forbids forced or compulsory labour(17) and ILO Convention No. 182 on the worst forms of child labour, which specifically protects children from forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment for use in armed conflict. Amnesty International is concerned that in some cases civilians have been used for counter-insurgency in a manner that may have violated these obligations. Amnesty International is also concerned by cases where children have been used by the military in contravention of Indonesia's obligations under the ILO conventions and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).

The capacity of militia for violence came to international attention in Timor-Leste in 1999 at the time of the UN-sponsored ballot on independence. In the months leading up to the ballot new militia groups were set up and old ones activated. Equipped, trained and supported by the Indonesian military, with the support of the civilian authorities, they were at the forefront of the campaign to intimidate the population into rejecting independence. When this failed, they participated in a massive wave of violence in which hundreds of people were unlawfully killed, thousands forcibly displaced and much of the territory reduced to ashes. Despite considerable evidence to the contrary, the Indonesian military continues to deny that it had any connection to the militia.(18)

There is no evidence that militia in NAD have carried out human rights violations on the scale seen in Timor-Leste, but given the history of the use of militia by the Indonesian military, the lack of clarity of their command and control structures and absence of accountability mechanisms, their existence in NAD is a cause for serious concern.

In June 2003, a member of the National Commission on Human Rights (Komisi Nasional Hak Asasi Manusia, Komnas HAM) publicly stated that militias were being recruited in Central Aceh District and that they were receiving military training, including in the use of firearms.(19) The allegation was denied the next day by the Army Chief of Staff, General Ryamizard Ryacudu.(20) Since then though, provincial level military commanders have acknowledged the presence of such groups, but describe them as having been spontaneously formed for the purpose of self-defence against attacks by GAM. However, detailed reports both from local human rights activists and in the media indicate that support for these groups is being provided both by the military and civilian authorities.

One report from April 2004 written by an Acehnese human rights defender in exile, describes the establishment of at least seven different militia groups in Central and East Aceh Districts since 2001 which, it is claimed, are supported to varying degrees by local government officials and the military. Funding is also said to be provided by local businessmen. Militia members are said to be recruited predominantly from transmigrants and from the Gayo ethnic-group, which is based mainly in the central and southern areas of the province, although some of the newer groups are said to have Acehnese members. Equipment varies, but according to reports, can include military-style uniforms, assault rifles and two-way radios as well as home-made guns, knives and machetes. In some cases equipment is reported to have been provided by the military and ammunition purchased from them. Training and in some cases supervision is alleged to have been provided by a variety of military units, including, within the territorial command structure, the District Military Command (Komando Distrik Militer, Kodim) and Sub-district Military Commands (Komando Resor Militer, Koramil); as well as from specialised units such as the Army Strategic Reserve (Komando Strategis Angkatan Darat, Kostrad); the Combined Intelligence Task Force (Satuan Gabungan Intelijen, SGI); and the Police Mobile Brigade (Brigade Mobil, Brimob).(21)

According to this report and other reports in the media, militia groups have carried out patrols, identified GAM suspects to the military and in some cases carried out arrests and arson attacks. In a more recent report, militia in Central Aceh District are accused of killing 20 people during the course of an operation to search for GAM near the town of Takengon in June 2004. According to the report, which Amnesty International cannot verify, those killed were alleged by the militia to have been members of GAM, or were individuals who refused to provide information on the whereabouts of GAM.(22) Militia are also reported to have participated in joint operations with the military.(23)

A wide range of other anti-GAM civil defence-style groups have also been formed more widely throughout the province. Equipped with bamboo spears and curved swords, their primary duties appear to be to assist the security forces in identifying GAM members and participating in loyalty ceremonies. Membership of these groups is not in all cases voluntary. Village heads have been required to provide members for these groups. In other cases, it appears that young men have been instructed, directly by the military, to join. One man from Nisam Sub-district, North Aceh District described to Amnesty International how soldiers came to the market place and picked out young men whom they wanted to recruit for these civil defence groups.

Amnesty International has also received reports of the forced participation of civilians in military operations as scouts and human shields in violation of fundamental principles of international humanitarian law. A man from Lhoksuemawe in North Aceh told Amnesty International that at the beginning of the military emergency 10 young men from his village were forcibly taken to the jungle by the military on an operation. In September 2003 it was reported that 1,000 villagers from Leupang in Aceh Besar District had been drafted by the military to assist them in searching for GAM members.(24)

There have been reports that families of GAM members are among those who have been forced to act as human shields during military operations. In May 2004, for example, a credible source told Amnesty International that villagers, including wives, children and other relatives of suspected members of GAM, from three different villages in Nisam Sub-district, North Aceh had been instructed by the military to take two kilos of rice each and accompany them to the forest. They are alleged to have been ordered to walk in front of the soldiers, effectively acting as shields, as the military searched for GAM. Prior to being taken to the forest, the GAM family members were reported to have been separated out and beaten. The operation is reported to have lasted for three days from 16-18 May 2004.

Although forbidden by military regulations, children under the age of 18 have also been used by the Indonesian military for functions such as cooking, cleaning, spying and communications. According to informed sources, this practice does not take place systematically, but rather is on the initiative of individual soldiers. As a state party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Indonesia has an obligation to ensure that children are protected against exploitation when performing labour, and as a signatory to the Optional Protocol to the CRC on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, the Indonesian government must not act in a way that is contrary to the Optional Protocol. In this instance Article 2 of the Optional Protocol prohibits the compulsory recruitment of children into the armed forces.

In addition, since the second week of the military emergency all adult males, throughout the province, have been obliged to participate in compulsory, unpaid night guard duty (known as "jaga malam"). The system of civilian night guards exists elsewhere in Indonesia and has previously been used in NAD, but never so intensely. In NAD it is organized by village leaders under the direction of the Sub-district head (Camat), police and military. The night guards are unarmed and do not receive any training. The frequency with which an individual must participate depends on the number of men in the village or community, but seems to vary between twice-a-week to once every few weeks. Generally it appears that only men over the age of 18 are required to participate, although some interviewees from smaller communities told Amnesty International that boys of 16 and 17 years old are also involved.

While civilians may be required to provide services in cases of emergency,(25) Amnesty International is concerned that the current system of compulsory night guard duty for all adult males in NAD may be a form of harassment of the general population. This is most obviously the case in situations such as that described to an Amnesty International delegate by a market vendor from a village in Muara Dua Sub-district near the town of Lhokseumawe. According to him, in the run-up to the April 2004 parliamentary elections he and the other men in his village were required to perform night guard duty for 20 nights in a row. Individuals who fail to turn up for duty, or do not perform their duties to the satisfaction of the authorities, have been subjected to various forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

3.2 Internal displacement

Although the numbers of internally displaced people (IDPs) never reached the governments' projected figure of 200,000,(26) tens of thousands of people have been displaced, the majority during the first months of the military emergency. In some cases the displacement was under threat of force. Several people interviewed by Amnesty International described how the military or police came to their village and ordered them to leave, sometimes without giving sufficient time to pack their belongings. One man from Juli Sub-district in Bireun District said that the military had come to his village in August 2003 and told all the villagers to leave or they would be considered to be members of GAM. They had to leave within 24 hours and were only permitted to take a small bag of clothes with them.

IDP numbers have decreased during 2004. The official figure for IDPs in NAD as of June 2004 was 6,946. Some of those who have returned to their villages are reported to have found their homes and other property looted or destroyed and their livestock stolen or killed. The man from Juli Sub-district told an Amnesty International delegate that residents from his village were permitted to return after three months in an IDP camp. On his return his father's house, in which he also lived, had been damaged, possessions destroyed and livestock and electrical goods stolen.

The Ministry of Social Welfare provides returnees with funds to assist their return. However, as is frequently the case with government funding in NAD, recipients may not necessarily receive their full entitlement. According to one local NGO which works with IDPs and which monitored the return of some 215 families to Bandar Sub-district in Central Aceh District in August 2003, they only received two million rupiah (US$220) rather than the seven million rupiah (US$780) that they had been promised.

Under international humanitarian law forcible relocation of civilians is only allowed for their own safety or for valid military reasons.(27) If forced relocation occurs for a legitimate reason under international law, the security forces are obliged to ensure an orderly evacuation, humane conditions in transit and adequate alternative accommodation. The duty of the authorities to assist IDPs to return, voluntarily, safely and in dignity to their homes, or to be resettled voluntarily in another part of the country is contained in the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Principle 29.2 of the Guiding Principles states that:

"Competent authorities have the duty and responsibility to assist returned and/or resettled internally displaced persons to recover, to the extent possible, their property and possessions which they left behind or were dispossessed of upon displacement. When recovery of such property and possessions is not possible, competent authorities shall provide or assist these persons in obtaining appropriate compensation or another form of just reparation."

Amnesty International is concerned that the Indonesian authorities are not fulfilling this duty in all cases.

3.3 Isolating GAM from the population

A range of measures directed at identifying GAM members within and isolating GAM from the general population were taken during the military emergency. The population has also been forced to take part in various public demonstrations of support for military operations against GAM. Amnesty International is concerned that some of these measures have been disproportionate and have violated the rights to freedom of expression and movement.

In its effort to remove GAM members from the local bureaucracy and general population, new identity cards (known as "Red and White" identity cards) were introduced in the first weeks of the military emergency.(28) The process of obtaining a new identity card entailed registering at four different local government, military and police offices, undergoing questioning and proclaiming loyalty to the unitary state of Indonesia. Frequent identity checks are carried out by the Indonesian security forces and anyone not in possession of the "Red and White" identity card risks being labelled as GAM.

Acehnese refugees interviewed by Amnesty International who did not have the new identity cards expressed anxiety that if deported back to NAD, they would automatically be suspected of being members of GAM. A number of them explained that they had not dared to apply for a new identity card because they had been detained in the past and are therefore already suspected of being members of GAM.

In addition, beginning in July 2003, NAD's civil servants, who are reported to number over 85,000 people including local government officials and school teachers, were required to undergo a screening process to prove their loyalty to the state.(29) Some civil servants were reported in the local media to have been dismissed for refusing to make the pledge of loyalty.(30) Others reportedly resigned because they feared retaliation by GAM for participating in loyalty ceremonies.(31) Civil servants are also among the many hundreds of people who have been detained under the military emergency.

The civilian population has also been required to show its support for the military operation through participation in loyalty ceremonies. These ceremonies have taken place across the province at strategic moments. For example, within the first weeks of the military emergency there were reports in the local media of large crowds assembling to pledge their loyalty to the Indonesian state. Similar ceremonies were held in advance of the six-month and one-year anniversaries of the military emergency. Individuals interviewed by Amnesty International were among the thousands of people who were ordered by the military to attend such events. They described how all the inhabitants of their village, including children and the elderly, were required to travel, in some cases in trucks provided by the military, to football fields, stadiums or other locations, where they were provided with t-shirts or banners and told to shout slogans such as: "Don't leave Aceh" and "We the people of Aceh demand the extension of the military emergency."

Participation in the parliamentary elections that took place in April 2004 was obligatory in NAD, although voting in Indonesia is not compulsory by law. Interviewees told Amnesty International that those eligible to vote were instructed by the military, via village heads or other community leaders, to cast their votes. As in the case of the ceremonies in support of the military emergency, threats were more frequently implied rather than made explicit, but it was widely understood that refusal to vote would result in being labelled as a member or supporter of GAM, with the associated risk this brings. No one reported being told for which party they had to vote, merely that they must cast their votes. There has been speculation that the intention was not to influence the outcome of the election, but rather to demonstrate that an election could be held in NAD under emergency conditions.

3.4 Restrictions on access to humanitarian and human rights actors

The civilian population in NAD has been almost entirely cut off for over one year from the assistance and protection afforded by the presence of independent human rights monitors and humanitarian workers. Mirroring the tactics so effectively employed in Timor-Leste, the Indonesian authorities have also attempted, in large part successfully, to close down all other channels of independent information about the situation in NAD, including by restricting the access of journalists to the province.

Statements by military officials, in which human rights organizations were publicly accused of links with GAM, quickly forced local human rights defenders into hiding or to flee the province and in some instances, the country. Those that have remained have been unable to carry out their work effectively due to fear of human rights violations. At least 24 NAD-based human rights defenders have been detained since the beginning of the military emergency, six of whom are on trial or have already been sentenced to terms of imprisonment. Amnesty International believes that the motivation for some, if not all, of these detentions is to discourage human rights defenders from carrying out their legitimate activities in NAD.

Although access by the media to NAD during the first week of the military emergency was relatively open, a succession of reports on human rights violations committed by the military, including the unlawful killing of children, quickly resulted in the introduction of restrictions. Since then Indonesian journalists have come under intense pressure to report the official version of events, while international journalists have faced considerable difficulty in obtaining permits to travel to NAD.(32)

Access to humanitarian assistance has also been severely disrupted by the restrictions placed on the work of international humanitarian organizations. Under a decree issued at the end of June 2003, a system was introduced, under which international staff are required to apply to the government for permits (or "blue books" as they are known) in order to travel to the provincial capital, Banda Aceh. An additional permit is then required from the provincial authorities (previously the military, now the civil administration) for permission to travel outside Banda Aceh. Since the imposition of the military emergency, "blue books" have only been issued infrequently. The process of applying for them has been described by those that have to go through it as "a bureaucratic nightmare". Even with the permits, access to international humanitarian workers has been restricted both in the time that they can spend in the province (usually a few weeks only) and the places that can be visited.(33)

Although some improvement in access since the early days of the military emergency has been reported, at least for UN agencies, it remains far from the full, unimpeded access required for humanitarian organizations to implement their programs. The Provincial Governor, shortly after taking over as head of the Civil Emergency Authority, stated that the existing restrictions on international humanitarian agencies would be extended and access is reported to be particularly poor in areas regarded as GAM strongholds which are designated "black areas" by the military authorities. In some of these areas there is believed to have been no access by independent humanitarian actors since May 2003.

In the absence of qualified and independent humanitarian actors in NAD it is not possible to make a meaningful assessment of the humanitarian situation in the province, although some impression can be gained through media reports which indicate that economic activity has improved in recent months. However, Amnesty International was told by some Acehnese refugees that their communities had on occasions faced food shortages. Such shortages were typically reported to occur in rural areas during times of intense military operations when villagers were prevented from tending to their paddy fields, gardens, or from going to the forest to gather food. On some occasions the restrictions were reported to last for several weeks. Some complained that on returning to their fields or gardens they found crops destroyed or stolen.

Extortion by the security forces, although not unique to the current military operations, has also placed an additional burden on individuals and businesses. Much of the extortion is reported to be small-scale – typically in the form of requests for "cigarette money" or non-payment of restaurant bills. However, owners of larger businesses have reported being forced to enter into formal protection agreements with the military. GAM is also responsible for extortion, although their capacity to engage in such practices is likely to have been much reduced under the current military campaign.

The military operations may also have adversely affected access by the general population to health care and education. A number of the refugees in Malaysia told Amnesty International that the primary health clinics in their villages had closed down since the beginning of the military emergency. According to one unverified report from Peureulak in East Aceh District, in January 2004 nurses and midwives had been prevented from working in health centres in rural areas of the district because they were suspected of providing medical assistance to GAM.

While there appear to have been no further arson attacks on schools since some 600 were burnt down in the first weeks of the military emergency,(34) and schools in many areas appear to be operating, several interviewees noted that economic hardship resulting from the military emergency had made school fees prohibitively expensive for some families.

4. Extrajudicial executions under the military emergency

"Hunt them down and exterminate them", The Commander of the Armed Forces, General Endriatono Sutarto talking about GAM at a briefing of military officers in Jakarta in May 2003.(35)

"It won't do any damage to Indonesia to lose several people, rather than jeopardizing 220 million other people", President Megawati Sukarnoputri at the beginning of the military emergency.(36)
"We will not tolerate people in this territory who join the separatist celebration. No matter who they are, we will shoot them on sight for supporting the movement," the Military Commander for the Lilawangsa Military Resort (Korem 011/Lilawangsa) in advance of the anniversary of GAM's declaration of independence.(37)
"…unidentified, suspicious looking people will be shot on sight", the Governor of NAD on taking over authority in NAD from the military in May 2004.(38)

Statements such as these have set the tone for the behaviour of troops during the current military operations and leave little doubt as to the message from their superiors - that they should shoot first and ask questions later. Not surprisingly there have been frequent allegations of unlawful killings by members of the security forces, both of civilians and of members of GAM.

Various and often inconsistent figures have been issued of the number of people killed during the military operations. According to figures issued by the military in September 2004, 2,879 members of GAM have been killed since May 2003. Of this figure, 2,409 are said to have been killed during the military emergency and 440 since.(39) A military spokesman had previously put the number of GAM deaths at 400 in the first six weeks of the civil emergency.(40) The police have stated that 230 GAM members were killed in the first eight weeks of the civil emergency.(41)

The military has acknowledged that there have been civilian casualties. In mid-August 2004, according to media reports, the military said that 147 civilians had been killed during the past 10 months.(42) However, according to figures from the military information centre published in September 2004 the number of civilian fatalities is much higher. According to these figures 662 civilians have been killed; 579 during the military emergency period, and 83 since the beginning of the civil emergency.(43)

The military has not said who is responsible for these deaths, although in the past it has blamed GAM for civilian causalities, yet at the same time, it has also admitted that it has difficulty in distinguishing between GAM and civilians.(44)

The National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM), which has been permitted to carry out investigations in NAD, has confirmed that unlawful killings have been carried out by both sides, but has not published the results of its investigations. Local non-governmental organizations (NGOs) believe that hundreds of civilians have been killed by the security forces.

Amnesty International is in possession of several testimonies from individuals who witnessed extrajudicial executions of civilians by the military. These cases are described below. The names of the interviewees and their home villages have been withheld to protect them or their families from possible reprisals.

The majority of those killed appear to be men, particularly young men who are more likely to be suspected of being members of GAM and have therefore been disproportionately targeted during the operations. However, there are also reports in the media of the unlawful killing of women and children. Among the testimonies received by Amnesty International are accounts of young men who have been shot dead while at work in the paddy fields or on shrimp farms. Others, including children, have been killed or injured during indiscriminate shootings. There is also evidence that suspected members of GAM have been unlawfully killed after being taken prisoner. In some cases their bodies, sometimes bearing marks of torture, have been found or returned to their families.

4.1 Illustrative cases of extrajudicial executions

A farmer from Samalanga Sub-district in Bireun District told Amnesty International that his 25-year-old brother, Ilhami, was shot by soldiers as he was cutting grass for his livestock on 9 April 2004. The farmer believes that his brother died instantly, although his body was taken away by soldiers and only sent back to the village four days later. The two brothers had lost their father in 1990, at the height of the DOM period, when he was taken away by soldiers and never returned. Following the killing of his brother in 2004, the young farmer fled the country fearing that he might also be at risk.

A grocery shop owner from Nisam Sub-district in North Aceh District recalled how, following an exchange of fire between soldiers and GAM in the early weeks of the military emergency, the military had come to his village and shot dead three men called Fadli, Rosmani and Lukman, who were working in the paddy fields.

Another interviewee from Samalanga Sub-district told Amnesty International that a mentally ill man, Muhammad Hussain, from his village was shot dead in his paddy field by members of the marines after being accused of having a cache of weapons. A second man was allegedly shot in the leg, but escaped. Following the incident around 30 villagers were lined up by the marines and some, including the interviewee, were beaten. The interviewee, could not recall the exact date, but claimed that the incident had taken place within the first six months of the military emergency.

A 25-year-old farmer from Kuala Simpang Sub-district in East Aceh explained to Amnesty International that the reason he had fled Indonesia in January 2004 was because two men from his village had been killed by the military that month. The first was a former schoolfriend of the farmer called Ilyas who had been mistakenly taken by the military because he shared the same name as a member of GAM for whom they were searching. Ilyas's body was found in a paddy field three days later. The interviewee, who claimed to have seen the corpse, said he could hardly recognize Ilyas because his body was so badly mutilated. The second person to be killed was a man called Mayu. He was said to be a sympathiser, although not a member of GAM, who had previously surrendered to the security forces and undergone "re-education".(45) He was taken away during military operations to search for GAM in January 2004 and subsequently "disappeared". His family, the local imam and other villagers reportedly pleaded with a local military commander to return his body if he was dead, in order that he could receive a proper burial. The body was subsequently returned to them.

An eyewitness account was also received by Amnesty International of the shooting of a 16-year-old boy called Muliadi while he was working in the paddy fields in Samalanga Sub-district, Bireun District in October 2003. According to the account the boy attempted to flee after being summoned by the soldier, but was shot in the ankle as he ran and subsequently captured. The boy is believed to have survived the shooting, but there is no further information on his whereabouts.

5. Arbitrary detention and unfair trials under the military emergency

As of mid-July 2004, the authorities claimed to have arrested some 2,200 members of GAM. Hundreds, and possibly more than one thousand, of those detained have been or are in the process of being tried.(46) The vast majority of those put on trial are accused of membership or support for GAM and have been charged under Articles 106 and 108 of Indonesia's Criminal Code (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana, KUHP) with "rebellion", which carries up to 20 years' imprisonment or, under some provisions, the death penalty. The district courts in NAD, most of which have not been functioning for the past few years, are now reported to be operating at full capacity, staffed by judges and prosecutors drafted in from North Sumatra Province and other areas on six-month contracts.

From the dozens of cases on which Amnesty International has data, it is apparent that the detentions and trials have manifestly contravened international norms relating to the right to fair trial. As such these detentions must be considered arbitrary. It is of particular concern that some of those accused of membership or links with GAM and who have sentenced to terms of imprisonment after unfair trials are children under the age of 18. While Amnesty International condemns the use of child soldiers by GAM it believes that priority should be given to prosecuting those who have recruited the children as soldiers and not the children themselves.

Arrests and detentions, usually a policing function under Indonesia's Code of Criminal Procedure (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana, KUHAP), may be carried out by the military during a military emergency under Law 23/1959 on States of Emergency. So, although in reality the military has frequently carried out arrests in NAD in the past, it is only during the one-year period of the military emergency that it had the legal authority to do so.

Under Law 23/1959, the military has the authority to detain suspects for up to 70 days. However, Law 23/1959 contains no provisions to safeguard the rights of detainees except that arrests shall be carried out with a warrant (Article 32(4)). The extensive, although not exhaustive, safeguards contained in KUHAP are interpreted by the military not to apply. For example, lawyers who have attempted to gain access to detainees during the first days of detention have been told that they have no right to see them. In the meantime, the safeguards in KUHAP have been universally ignored by the police in NAD.(47)

The result is a protection vacuum which has been exploited by both the military and the police to deny detainees their most basic rights. Prosecutors, judges and lawyers in NAD have also failed to exercise their responsibilities to ensure the effectiveness, impartiality and fairness of trial proceedings and are often complicit in, or directly responsible for, violating the rights of suspects.

Among the extensive and serious contraventions of international standards relating to arrest and detention documented by Amnesty International are: the failure to present warrants on arrest; failure to inform detainees of the reason for arrest or detention and inform them promptly of any charges against them; failure to promptly notify detainee's family members of their arrest or whereabouts; denial of access to legal counsel, particularly during the first days of detention; failure to provide competent and effective legal counsel in cases where lawyers are provided by the state; denial of adequate time and facilities to prepare a defence and of the right to confidential communication with legal counsel; denial of adequate medical assistance; the absence of judicial oversight of detention and of opportunities to challenge the lawfulness of detention; the absence of safeguards during interrogation, including the presence of a lawyer; and the extensive use of torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment to extract confessions.(48)

Rights at the actual trial are similarly denied. Despite the efforts towards judicial reform that have been carried out by the Indonesian authorities in recent years, including measures to strengthen the independence and improve the professionalism of the judiciary and related institutions, the trials in NAD demonstrate the considerable potential for political interference and the scope for other forms of improper influence. There is also an apparent lack of awareness among judicial officials of their role in ensuring that judicial proceedings are conducted fairly and that the rights of the parties are respected.

Many detainees do not have access to adequate legal representation. There are estimated to be only 13 human rights lawyers in the province who can handle only a fraction of the total number of cases. The majority of suspects are therefore defended by state appointed lawyers who human rights activists claim show little rigour in defending their clients. There have been reports that some of these lawyers have not accompanied their clients during interrogations and that, while they may appear in court, do not actually mount a defence on behalf of the suspect.

Some trials appear to be conducted in a fashion that human rights lawyers have labelled "instant trials". In one case, that of a woman from Pidie District who was accused of providing logistical support to GAM, the trial was completed in a single day. She was found guilty and sentenced to one year in prison. A teacher who was accused of collecting rice from villagers to raise funds for GAM was quoted in the media as saying: "I blinked and the judges banged the gavel to end the trial." There were reported to have been no defence witnesses at his trial. He claimed that many people from his village had wanted to testify that he was raising funds for his school, but that they were too afraid to appear in court.(49)

Typical examples of other problems that have arisen during the trials have included the use of confessions elicited as a result of torture as primary evidence against suspects. Evidence is also reported to have been fabricated in some cases. Amnesty International was informed by human rights lawyers of individuals being forced to hold a gun and stand in front of a GAM flag to be photographed – the photograph was subsequently used as evidence of their membership of GAM. In two cases reported to the organization by a credible source, GAM symbols (in one case the GAM flag and in the second the word "GAM") was scored with a knife or other sharp instrument on to the chest or back of the suspects by police officers as proof of their GAM membership.

The right to call and examine witnesses is frequently denied. It is common for prosecution witnesses, who are generally from the police or military, not to appear in court in person, thereby denying the defence an opportunity to cross-examine them. In the absence of a victim and witness protection programme, witnesses for the defence are reluctant to testify in these politically sensitive trials. A lawyer with a legal aid organization in NAD said that, from the nearly one hundred cases handled by his organization, in only two did defence witnesses agree to appear.

Attempts by defence lawyers to challenge procedural violations or complain about the torture or ill-treatment of their clients have met with threats of longer sentences by judges. In many cases, people do not appeal their sentences, either because they are not informed of their right to do so, or because they fear that their sentence will be increased on appeal.

From information gathered by Amnesty International, corruption appears to be rife at each step of the process. Amnesty International has been informed that detainees have been able to purchase their freedom from detention; to buy less serious charges from the prosecution; and to bribe judges to reduce their sentence. In this situation, where the judicial process is so thoroughly subverted by corruption, individuals without financial resources are particularly disadvantaged.

5.1 The case of the GAM negotiators

The most prominent of the many hundreds of NAD political prisoners are Sofyan Ibrahim Tiba, Teungku Kamaruzzaman, Amni Bin Ahmad Marzuki, Teungku Muhammad Usman Lampoh Awe and Nashiruddin Bin Ahmed. The five men were all negotiators on behalf of GAM during the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue mediated talks with the Indonesian authorities. They were arrested in May 2003 on their way to the airport in Banda Aceh to catch a flight to Tokyo, Japan for the talks on 18 May 2003 which had been called to try and prevent the break-down of the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement (CoHA). They were released briefly, but never reached Tokyo. In the meantime, the CoHA collapsed, the military emergency was declared, and the five were rearrested.

Despite the high profile of the five negotiators, their trials were riddled with irregularities among which were the denial of access to legal representation, the lack of witnesses, retroactive application of legislation and the criminalization of the act of participating in the negotiations. There have also been allegations that some of the defendants were subjected to torture and ill-treatment during and subsequent to the pre-trial detention period.

The trials took place between July and October 2003 in Banda Aceh. All five men were found guilty of "terrorism" and "rebellion" and sentenced to prison terms of between 12 and 15 years. Their appeals to the High Court and Supreme Court were rejected in January and June 2004 respectively.

Amnesty International considers the trials to have breached international standards for fair trials and calls on the Indonesian authorities to set aside the convictions and ensure that they are retried on recognizably criminal offences in trials that conform to international standards of fairness, or release them.

Compliance of legislation to international law and retroactive application of legislation

The five negotiators were charged under provisions contained in Articles 106 and 108 of Indonesia's Criminal Code with attempting to separate the region of NAD from the state and of leading a rebellion which carry maximum prison sentences of 20 years and life respectively. In addition, and uniquely in the current wave of political trials in NAD, they were also charged under Indonesia's "anti-terrorism" law with provisions that relate to "assisting and facilitating terrorism" and "planning and attempting terrorism".(50)

The Law on Combating Criminal Acts of Terrorism (Law 15/2003) was adopted in April 2003. It replaced a Government Regulation in Lieu of Law on the Elimination of Terrorism (Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang, Perpu No.1/2002) which had been enacted in the aftermath of the bombing of a night club in Bali in October 2002 in which 202 people died.(51)

Amnesty International has previously expressed its fear that Indonesia's "anti-terrorism" legislation risks undermining human rights.(52) Among Amnesty International's concerns is the undefined nature of "terror" or "acts of terrorism" that are criminalized under the law -- it is a general principle of international law that all criminal offences must be defined precisely by law so that people know what is actually prohibited. It is also of concern that the death penalty is provided for some offences, including those with which the negotiators were charged. Amnesty International believes the death penalty to be the ultimate violation of the right to life and constitutes cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.

Rights to fair trial are also not fully guaranteed under the legislation. Specific concerns include the period of arrest (seven days based on initial evidence) and detention (six months) without judicial review (Articles 25 and 28); a provision under which the initial examination of evidence takes place in a closed session, which would appear to deny the defendant, or their legal representative, the opportunity to challenge the evidence presented to the court (Article 26.3); and provision for trial in absentia (Article 35). More positively, the law does provide for the protection of victims and witnesses as well as examiners, public prosecutors and judges (Article 35), which is not generally available in Indonesia except in the recently established Human Rights Courts.(53)

In relation to the cases of the negotiators there is also a concern that the legislation was applied retroactively in violation of the principle of non-retroactivity contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). This principle is also contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Indonesia is due to ratify this year,(54) and is reflected in Article 28.i of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, which protects individuals from being prosecuted for an offence which did not constitute a penal offence at the time it was committed.(55)

The five men were accused of conspiring, attempting or assisting to commit various acts of violence by GAM. These acts of violence are alleged to have taken place between January and March 2003. However, the assistance provided to GAM by the five is alleged to have taken place in some cases from as early as June 2000: that is, over two years before the original government regulation was adopted and nearly three years before it was replaced by Law 15/2003.

Although the provisions of Law 15/2003 (under which the negotiators were charged) are the same as those contained in the October 2002 Government Regulation (which Law 15/2003 replaced), Amnesty International considers that if the principle of non-retroactivity is strictly applied, the negotiators should not have been held criminally responsible under Law 15/2003 for acts that took place prior to April 2003 – the date when the law making these acts criminal offences came into force.

This conclusion appears to be supported by a recent ruling by Indonesia's Constitutional Court. On 23 July 2004, the Constitutional Court decided that in the case of Masykur Abdul Kadir, one of the 33 men convicted in relation to the October 2002 Bali bombings, the application of Law 16/2003, which authorizes the retroactive application of Law 15/2003 on Combating criminal Acts of Terrorism, was unconstitutional because the law had been enacted after the bombings took place.

Accusations and evidence

The main accusations against the five negotiators were that by representing GAM in the negotiations, and as members of one or more of the various committees set up to implement and monitor the CoHA and the earlier Joint Understanding on a Humanitarian Pause,(56) they were aware of, supported, or took no action to prevent, various "acts of terrorism" committed by GAM. The indictments then go on to list individual incidents of bombings, unlawful killings, hostage-taking and arson allegedly committed by GAM in early 2003.

Amnesty International is not in a position to judge whether or not the individual negotiators had any direct knowledge of or involvement in the various acts of which they are accused. Nevertheless there are concerns relating to the veracity of some of the prosecution's evidence against them. Few details are provided in the indictments about the listed acts, most of which were alleged to have taken place in the first three months of 2003. At most there is a date, location and name of victim. Lawyers for the defence complained that the prosecution did not present witnesses to any of the specific incidents referred to in the indictments. Instead, the evidence in relation to these incidents appears to have been based primarily on police intelligence documents that were submitted to the court. The defence lawyers were never permitted to see these documents.(57)

Among the few witnesses summoned by the prosecution in the trials were negotiators who were themselves on trial on the same charges. They refused to appear as witnesses in each other's trials and instead their police investigation reports were read out. Not only did this deny the lawyers for the defence the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses, but their right to time and facilities to prepare a defence was undermined because they had never been permitted to see the police investigation reports for any of the five defendants.

Amnesty International is also seriously concerned that some of the charges against the five men were based on what is clearly a non-criminal act – that of engaging in an officially approved, internationally mediated peace process.

Their support, indirect or direct for "acts of terrorism" appeared to have been partially based on the accusation that as negotiators for GAM, or as members of the committees set up to monitor the various agreements, they conspired to commit, attempted to commit, or assisted in committing "terrorist acts". However, in some instances, the very act of negotiating appears to have been regarded as evidence of providing support for acts of violence by GAM. Sofyan Ibrahim Tiba, for example, was accused, among other things, of fighting during the deliberations with the Indonesian government, "for the wishes, mission, ideas, and interests of GAM as one effort on behalf of their struggle in the diplomatic field". The indictment further added that: "This struggle in the diplomatic field is interconnected and inseparable from the armed struggle carried out by GAM soldiers in the field – the two struggles supporting and supplementing each other."

In the case of the charges of rebellion, the accusations by the prosecution were based almost entirely on what appear to be the legitimate actions of individuals engaged in negotiations on behalf of one party to a conflict or as members of committees set up to monitor the various agreements resulting from the talks.

For example, among the accusations against Teungku Kamaruzzaman were that he "met with other GAM negotiators both in Aceh and overseas (in Switzerland) to plan and discuss the steps that should be taken by GAM in the diplomatic and political fields to achieve its goals through the mechanism of the negotiation." He was also accused of knowledge of and sympathy towards GAM's opposition to the Indonesian state. Similarly, Nashiruddin Bin Ahmad is accused of meeting with other GAM negotiators "to plan and discuss the steps that should be taken by GAM to achieve its goal of re-establishing the authority of the sultanate of Aceh-Sumatra". He was further accused of providing in these meetings "ideas and suggestions that aided GAM's struggle," and, as a GAM member or sympathizer "and by becoming one of the GAM representatives in negotiations, the accused was party to unlawful conspiracy, attempts to commit or give assistance to terrorist acts, that directly or indirectly form an inseparable part of the activities of GAM".

The judges, like the prosecutors, appear not to have drawn a distinction between recognizable criminal acts, such as acts of violence carried out by GAM, and the non-criminal act of representing a party to a conflict in peace talks. Rather, representing GAM's objectives during the talks were regarded as having encouraged and supported GAM members in committing "acts of terrorism", while the act of negotiating was itself an act of subversion or rebellion.

Following the conviction of the negotiators the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue issued a public statement in which it expressed concern that the convictions might have been related to their activities in relation to the peace process. The statement noted that "[b]oth parties entered into the dialogue process and negotiated the CoHA in good faith in the belief that their involvement would not expose them to any legal repercussions related to these efforts." It also warned of the potential negative implications the convictions may have for opportunities for future dialogue in NAD.(58)

Denial of legal representation

The five negotiators were denied access to lawyers during the first seven days of their detention. Regular access was subsequently permitted, but always within the hearing of a police officer. The lawyers protested, but were told that they would be denied access to their clients if they did not agree to the presence of a police officer during their meetings.

The right to confidential communication between lawyers and their clients is contained in the UN Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment (Body of Principles)(59) and the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.(60) Indonesia's Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) also provides for confidential communication between a lawyer and their client, although makes an exception in cases involving crimes against the security of the state (KUHAP Article 71). Amnesty International regards this exception to be in violation of the right to fair trial.

The lawyers were also hampered in their task of preparing a defence because they did not have access to key documents. In particular, despite requests to the prosecutors, judges and other court officials, the defence lawyers were never provided with copies of the police investigation report.

Allegations of torture and ill-treatment

During his trial, Sofyan Ibrahim Tiba submitted a complaint to the judges that he was ill-treated and threatened while in police custody. According to the letter, Sofyan Ibrahim Tiba was shot at twice on 29 July 2003 by two members of the Police Mobile Brigade (Brigade Mobil, Brimob).(61) It has also been alleged that the negotiators were forced to watch other detainees being tortured. The five were held at the Regional Police Headquarters (Polda) in Banda Aceh from the date of their arrest until August 2004, even though in theory they should have been transferred to prison once the police investigation was complete and the prosecution took over. A continual flow of new detainees is brought to Polda and in some cases they are reported to have been brought to the area outside the negotiators' cells, apparently deliberately, where they were beaten and subjected to other forms of torture in full view of the negotiators.

Further adding to the distress of the negotiators and their families was a rumour in January 2004, that they were to be among prisoners who were to be transferred from NAD to prisons in Java. Three days before the transfer, all access to them by their families was stopped. They are reported to have been put through a trial run in preparation for the transfer that included being handcuffed and chained together. In the event, they were not moved in January 2004. However, Teungku Kamaruzzaman, Amni Bin Ahmad Marzuki, Teungku Muhammad Usman Lampoh Awe and Nashiruddin Bin Ahmed were among a group of 74 prisoners from NAD transferred to prisons in West Java on 25 August 2004.(62)

The four negotiators join over 400 other prisoners from NAD who have been transferred to Java since January 2004. The authorities have claimed that the reason for the transfers is to alleviate overcrowding in NAD's prisons. In view of the large numbers of people arrested and put on trial in NAD during the past year, it is likely that there is a problem of overcrowding in prisons in NAD. However, Amnesty International is concerned that the families of the prisoners, including the four negotiators, will now have difficulty in visiting them in Java because of the long distances and expense of travelling.

Sofyan Ibrahim Tiba was not transferred because of his ill-health. Aged 57, he suffers from heart disease and diabetes and is reported to be suffering from complications resulting from these conditions, including an ear infection and "swollen legs". He is believed to have received some treatment in a military hospital in Banda Aceh, although according to some sources requests for him to see his own doctor or to be treated in a civilian hospital have been turned down. Others among the negotiators are also reported to be suffering from ill-health and may have been denied appropriate medical treatment. Muhammad Bin Usman Lampo Awe is said to be suffering from respiratory and stomach problems. There has also been an unconfirmed report that Teungku Kamaruzzam suffers from a back injury resulting from ill-treatment during an earlier period of detention.

6. Possible prisoners of conscience

Among those detained and imprisoned in NAD are political activists, humanitarian workers, human rights defenders and an environmental activist. Amnesty International believes that some of them may be prisoners of conscience - that is, individuals who are detained solely on the basis of their peaceful and legitimate activities or beliefs.

In the few years prior to the military emergency Amnesty International adopted a number of prisoners of conscience in NAD. The majority were political activists, most notably members of the Aceh Referendum Information Centre (Sentral Informasi Referendum Aceh, SIRA), which promotes a referendum on the political status of NAD. Human Rights defenders and humanitarian workers were also subjected to grave human rights violations as well as lower-level intimidation and harassment during this time. Some 18 human rights defenders are believed to have been unlawfully killed or "disappeared" between January 2000 and May 2003.

Under the military emergency the authorities have demonstrated an increased level of intolerance for civilian pro-independence activists and members of non-governmental organizations whose work involves collecting and disseminating data on, and campaigning against, human rights abuses or providing assistance to the civilian population. Threatening statements have been made by officials;(63) a workshop organized by Komnas HAM in Banda Aceh in October 2003 was broken up by the security forces; and a number of NAD-based political or human rights organizations have been publicly accused by the military of having links with GAM and their members threatened with investigation and arrest.

In a number of cases these threats have been realised. Three members of SIRA are currently in detention or serving prison sentences. They include the head of the organization, Muhammad Nazar, who was found guilty in July 2003 of publicly expressing "feelings of hostility, hatred or contempt against the government". The charges related to his involvement in organizing peaceful pro-independence events earlier the same year. Amnesty International considers him to be a prisoner of conscience and is calling for his immediate and unconditional release.

In addition, at least 24 human rights activists, environmental activists and humanitarian workers have been detained since the imposition of the military emergency. Most have been released, but six are accused of membership or other links with GAM and have been charged and put on trial. Details of these cases are provided below. There is insufficient information to determine whether or not there is any factual basis for the accusations of links with GAM, but in light of the record of the Indonesian authorities on imprisoning prisoners of conscience in NAD and its animosity towards those who are critical of its policies there, Amnesty International believes that it is likely that they may be prisoners of conscience. If this is the case, they should be immediately and unconditionally released.

6.1 Humanitarian workers

Yusni Abdullah, aged 26, and Mahyeddin, aged 23, are members of the NAD-based humanitarian organization, the People's Crisis Centre (PCC). Established in January 1999, PCC activities are focused around providing assistance to IDPs. The two men are currently serving prison sentences of one year and one year and six months' respectively having been found guilty of rebellion.

According to their colleagues in PCC, Yusni Abdullah and Mahyeddin's arrest and detention is linked to the arrest of a member of GAM who had spent a night in their office among a group of villagers who were visiting the town of Lhokseumawe. PCC frequently provides accommodation for villagers who have travelled to the town and who cannot return the same day because of the long distances and inadequate transportation. The member of GAM was subsequently arrested and is believed to have admitted, possibly under torture, to staying at the PCC office. In the current climate, this single link with PCC appears to have been sufficient to accuse two of its members of involvement with GAM.

Yusni Abdullah and Mahyeddin were allegedly subjected to torture in order to obtain confessions of their links with GAM. Yusni Abdullah was arrested from PCC's office in Lhokseumawe on the morning of 15 December 2003 and taken to a local post of the Combined Intelligence Task Force (Satuan Gabungan Intelijen, SGI). There he was reportedly beaten and questioned about the whereabouts of Sofyan Daud, the GAM Commander for North Aceh. When he said that he did not know, a member of SGI is alleged to have told him "if you do not want to reveal the information, you will be annihilated". He was also ordered to admit that PCC was involved with GAM. Not wishing to implicate the whole organization, he eventually admitted that he had been a member of GAM prior to joining PCC in 1999.

Mahyeddin was arrested some hours later on the same day also by members of SGI. At the SGI post he too was reported to have been beaten, questioned about the whereabouts of GAM and accused of passing information to them. On two separate occasions a plastic bag was reportedly placed over Mahyeddin's head until he was forced to admit that he knew of some GAM members.

Both men were subsequently transferred to Lhokseumawe Prison where they were allegedly subjected to further beatings and interrogations over the course of several days by the military police. Mahyeddin was told by a police officer that he would be released in exchange for a payment of 900,000 rupiah (US$100). He refused to pay the bribe and instead he and Yusni Abdullah were put on trial on charges of rebellion.

6.2 Student and women's activists

Three activists with the Acehnese Democratic Women's Organization (Organisasi Perempuan Aceh Demokratik, ORPAD), whose work is focused on the education and empowerment of women, and two student activists were arrested in Banda Aceh in February 2004 by members of Brimob. One of the student activists, Iwan Irama Putra (27 years old) is still in detention and is facing trial. He is a member of the Network of Lingke Students (Ikatan Mahasiswa dan Pelajar Lingke, Impel), whose work includes providing assistance for IDPs, and Student Solidarity for the People (Solidaritas Mahasiswa untuk Rakyat, SMUR), a student-based human rights and education group. Iwan Irama Putra has been accused of involvement in an attack on a Brimob post in Central Aceh District in 2000 in which three Brimob officers were killed. Harlina (f) aged 22, a member of both ORPAD and Impel, was also accused of involvement in the same incident, but has been released.

The arrests of the activists followed the detention on 19 February 2004 of Masrizal, an IDP from Central Aceh who had been living in Banda Aceh since 2001 and who the authorities allege is a member of GAM. Masrizal is acquainted with Iwan Irama Putra through his work in providing assistance to IDPs in Central Aceh with Impel. It is believed that Masrizal may have referred to Impel and the other non-governmental organizations under interrogation and that this has formed the basis of the accusations against Iwan Irama Putra.

Iwan Irama Putra was arrested at the home of a friend on 22 February 2004. The next day a series of raids were carried out on the homes of members of ORPAD. Harlina, Nursida (f), aged 22, and Nova Rahyu (f), aged 23, were arrested during the raids and taken to a Brimob post in the Lingke area of Banda Aceh. A sixth person called Syafruddin (m) who is a member of the student human rights and education group, SMUR, was arrested from a student hostel the following day.

Both Harlina and Syafruddin are reported to have been beaten on arrest. Harlina, Masrizal and Iwan Irama Putra were also reported to have been beaten at the Brimob post to where they were all taken.
Nursida, Nova Rahyu and Syafruddin were released within 24 hours. All have fled the province. Harlina was detained until 9 March 2004 when she was conditionally released. It is unclear whether she remains a suspect in the case, but she has been called as a witness against Iwan Irama Putra. At the time of writing, Iwan Irama Putra was being held in Keudah Prison in Banda Aceh on charges of "rebellion". Masrizal was transferred to Takengon Prison in Central Aceh in March 2004. It is not known if he has been charged or brought to trial.

6.3 Environmental activist

Bestari Raden, an environmental and indigenous peoples activist from NAD, was arrested in March 2004 and charged with "separatism" (KUHP Article 106), "rebellion" (KUHAP Article 108 sub-clause 1.2) and "inciting acts of violence" (KUHP Article 160). Cumulatively these charges carry a sentence of up to 26 years' imprisonment. His trial, which began on 28 June 2004 in Tapak Tuan District Court, South Aceh, was still ongoing at the time of writing. The verdict is expected in early October 2004.

Bestari Raden was arrested by members of the Southeast Aceh District Military Command (Kodim) on 23 March 2004 during a visit to the district as part of a 37 member government team set up to review the Ladia Galaska road project. The proposed 500km-long Ladia Galaska highway has been strongly opposed by environmental groups because it will cut through virgin tropical rainforest in the Gunung Leuser National Park in NAD and North Sumatra. In contrast, there is reported to be support for the project by members of the security forces.(64) Some observers believe that Bestari Raden's arrest may be connected to his efforts to halt the construction of the highway as well as his earlier activities protesting against logging operations in NAD. Fellow activists have speculated that the reason for his arrest may also involve the settling of old scores by members of the police and businessmen in the area.

On his arrest Bestari Raden was accused of membership of GAM, of carrying out operations with, and extorting money on behalf of, GAM. He was also accused of organizing demonstrations in support of a referendum for NAD in 1999; of protesting against environmental damage caused by the logging operations by PT Medan Remaja Timber; and of inciting others to commit an arson attack on the company's logging camp in South Aceh District also in 1999.

Bestari Raden is reported to have confessed to all of the charges soon after his arrest because he feared that he would be subjected to torture or ill-treatment. There is no information to suggest that he was tortured on this occasion, but his fear was based on earlier experiences in 1999 when he was detained on at least two separate occasions by police in South Aceh. On one of these occasions he is alleged to have been beaten by members of Brimob. These earlier arrests are reported to have been linked to his anti-logging protests which had earned him the reputation as a provocateur which, in the NAD context, implies GAM membership. His name was subsequently placed on a "wanted list" of GAM members. Colleagues, friends and relatives have always claimed that he is not a member of GAM nor linked to it in any way.

The arrests, beating and other forms of intimidation and harassment to which he was allegedly subjected in 1999, caused Bestari Raden to leave the province and take up residence in the Indonesian capital of Jakarta. From 2001-2003 he served as a Coordinator for the Alliance of Indigenous Peoples of the Archipelago (Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara, AMAN), a nationwide alliance that campaigns for the rights of indigenous people. In 2004 he became the national coordinator of the Environmental Caucus (Kaukus Lingkungan), a new alliance of Indonesia-based environmental groups.

Bestari Raden's defence team claims there are no basis for any of the current charges against him. Indeed, part way through the trial, the prosecution dropped the charge of "separatism". This charge was based on the accusation of his links with GAM and was dropped on the basis that there was insufficient evidence.

However, the two other charges of "rebellion" and "inciting to violence" still stand and the prosecution is demanding a prison sentence of five years for them. Bestari Raden's lawyers claim that he has not taken part in any activities in support of referendum on NAD's political future. They have also pointed out that, although he has always been vocal in his opposition to the environmental damage caused by logging, this did not amount to inciting others to commit acts of violence against logging companies.

Bestari Raden remains in prison in Tapak Tuan pending the outcome of his trial.

7. Torture and ill-treatment under the military emergency

"It's a good lesson how the [US and British] soldiers in Iraq treated the prisoners. We put it in our education in Kopassus units that they cannot and should not imitate this." Major General Sriyanto the Commander of the Special Forces Command (Kopassus).(65)

"For example, my soldier slugs a suspect across the face. That's no problem. As long as he is able to function after the questioning. [But] if it's gross torture which causes someone to be incapacitated… that's a no-no." The former Regional Military Commander and Commander of the Provincial Martial Law Authority (Penguasa Darurat Militer Daerah, PDMD) Brigadier-General Bambang Darmono, November 2003.(66)

Torture and ill-treatment during investigation appear to be routine in both military and police detention in NAD. However, such practices are not confined to places of detention. Beatings and other forms of torture and ill-treatment, particularly of young men, in order to obtain information on the whereabouts of GAM, to intimidate and to punish are commonplace during "sweeping operations" by the security forces in the villages. Rape and other forms of sexual violence against women and girls have also taken place in these contexts.

The methods of torture under the military emergency that have been documented by Amnesty International are consistent with well-established patterns of torture and ill-treatment in NAD over many years. It is striking that, despite significant changes in Indonesia's political landscape and important reforms in some areas, torture still appears to be a modus operandi in situations where there is resistance, armed or otherwise, to the state.

Those principally responsible for the torture have been military and police officials. The extent and severity of torture in NAD, and the failure of the Indonesian authorities to take effective preventative measures despite the numerous allegations both recent and past, indicates a high level of knowledge and acceptance of the practice among senior officials, if not actual authorization.

7.1 Torture and ill-treatment of political prisoners

Lawyers in NAD told Amnesty International that political detainees, almost without exception, are tortured and ill-treated within the first days of detention. The primary objective of this torture is to extract a confession of GAM membership or support which is then used as the basis for the charges against them.

The methods of torture commonly suffered by political detainees in NAD include: beatings, for which the butt of a gun, rattan stick, metal bar or wooden beam are commonly used; slapping, punching, kicking with heavy military boots and being stamped on. Other methods used include: electric shocks; near strangulation by placing a rope or wire noose around the neck and tightening; near suffocation by placing a plastic bag over the head; burning with lighted cigarettes or cigarette lighters; cutting the skin with a bayonet or other sharp instrument; having the muzzle of a gun placed in the mouth; death threats; immersion for long periods in water; showering with cold water or urine; sexual molestation and rape. Detainees have also been forced to swallow objects such as cardboard noodle boxes, a metal bolt nut and hair.

In addition, detainees have been forced to watch others being tortured and to participate in the torture or ill-treatment of others. There are reported cases of detainees being ordered to beat and slap other detainees. In some cases they have been ordered to kiss, smell, tickle or lick the armpits of or perform oral sex on other prisoners. In one case reported to Amnesty International, a male detainee was forced to have sexual intercourse with another male detainee.

The intensity of the torture or ill-treatment is reported to decrease after the first seven days, or after a confession has been obtained. However, the risk of further torture or ill-treatment is not entirely eliminated and, according to lawyers, the threat of being returned to military or police custody to face further torture, compels many of those tried for political crimes to plead guilty or offer no defence.

7.2 Illustrative cases of torture and ill-treatment of political prisoners

Information contained in the following cases has been obtained by Amnesty International both from interviews with victims and from reliable sources in NAD. The names of the victims and the names of their village have been withheld to protect them from possible reprisals.

a) A 22-year-old man, originally from Leupung Sub-district in Aceh Besar District, was arrested on 8 June 2003 and taken to Aceh Besar Police Resort (Polres). There, over the course of four days he was reported to have been beaten with a rifle butt, a rattan stick and leather shoes, kicked, trampled on by some 30 people and burnt with a cigarette. He was allegedly ordered to eat an instant noodle box and swallow a metal bolt nut. He was transferred to Lambaro police station, Aceh Besar. There he was reported to have been kicked, had the muzzle of a SS1 assault rifle placed in his mouth and he was trampled on. On one occasion he was reportedly forced to strip naked and to stand on his head and on another to perform oral sex on a fellow detainee. His hands were crushed using the metal bar used to secure the cell door and his eyes poked with fingers. He was forced to drink alcohol and smoke marijuana. In Keudah Prison in Banda Aceh, to where he was later transferred, he was ordered to run barefoot on hot tarmac with the result that the soles of his feet were burnt. He is since believed to have been put on trial, although the outcome is not known.

b) A 20-year-old man from Indrapuri Sub-district in Aceh Besar District was arrested at 8am on 8 July 2003 by soldiers from the West Java-based unit, Siliwangi Regional Command (Kodam III/Siliwangi) and police from the NAD Regional Police Command (Polda). According to information received by Amnesty International, before being taken to a military post in Lam Klieng, Aceh Besar, he was paraded around his village and beaten. At the military post his face was allegedly smeared with cow dung and he was forced to eat chicken dung. He was hit with a piece of wood, his fingers squeezed into an electric socket until he received an electric shock, and he was sprayed with urine. He is reported to have been transferred to another military post where it is alleged that his hands were pinned under a chair and they were then pricked with a needle. He was then said to have been subjected to further kicking and beating at the NAD Regional Military Command (Kodam) and Polda. At Polda, where he spent five days, fellow detainees were ordered to slap him. At Keudah Prison, where he was sent pending his trial he was also ordered to crawl into a ditch. He has since been sentenced to one year and six months' imprisonment.

c) A 25-year-old small shop owner from North Aceh District was arrested by members of Brimob in January 2004. He was accused of being a GAM intelligence officer. He denied that this is the case and believes he was detained because he had refused a request by members of Brimob to give them "cigarette money". He was taken to the local Brimob post and held for 24 hours during which time he claimed to have been beaten on the face and in his eyes with the butt of a rifle so that his nose was broken. He was also burnt with cigarettes on the arms, stomach and thighs. Dozens of burn marks were still visible on his arms when Amnesty International met him in May 2004. He was also still suffering from nose bleeds. He was released after members of his village came to look for him and on a payment of 200,000 rupiah (US$22). He has since fled the country.

d) A 30-year-old rice farmer also from North Aceh was arrested in March 2004 by soldiers from the Siliwangi District Command. He claimed to have been taken to a temporary military post where he was tortured because he could not give names of GAM members. According to his testimony, his hands were tied behind his back and he was beaten and punched by 12 different people on his face and body. At one point he was struck on his head with the antennae of a two way radio and a hot electric soldering iron was dragged across his chest five times. The torture took place during the first day of detention. He was released two days later after agreeing to pay half a million rupiah (US$55) for his release. He was given three days to gather the money, but fled before the deadline and is now living outside Indonesia.

e) A 29-year-old a farmer from Indrapuri Sub-district, Aceh Besar District was arrested on 15 August 2003 at around 5pm by soldiers from the Rajawali military unit and local police officers. He was taken to the sub-district community centre for interrogation, during which time he was punched in the face, kicked in the chest, hit with a wooden plank on the back, and he was trampled on. He is reported to have sustained further beatings at a military police post and in Keudah Prison. At the Regional Police Headquarters (Polda) in Banda Aceh where he, he was reportedly forced to have sexual intercourse with another male detainee. He has since been sentenced to two years' imprisonment.

f) A 23-year-old builder from Darussalam Sub-district in Aceh Besar District was arrested on 15 July 2003 by soldiers and local police officers. He was taken to the District Military Command Headquarters (Kodim) where he is reported to have been locked in a small room with 12 soldiers who proceeded to beat him with fists, rifle butts and military helmets. The same afternoon he was ordered to stand in front of his cell fully clothed while eight buckets of cold water were poured over him. At a military post in Mata Ie, Aceh Besar he was allegedly hit with a wooden mallet on his head and nails and received burns on his lips, hands and elbows. At Polda in Banda Aceh he was again beaten and kicked by police officers. He and other detainees were ordered to tickle one another and to lick each others armpits. He has since been put on trial and sentenced to three years and six months' imprisonment.

g) A market vendor from Muara Dua, Lhokseumawe was arrested by members of the military shortly before the parliamentary elections which took place on 5 April 2004. He told Amnesty International that he had provided food and other support to GAM, but claimed not to be a member. He said that he was held for 24 hours at a military post in his village where he was tortured as he was questioned about the whereabouts of GAM and of their weapons. According to his testimony, he was beaten with the butt of a gun, hung upside down by his feet for approximately 20 minutes and a plastic bag was placed over his head. At one point he felt his back being burnt but was unable to see what was causing the pain. He fled the country shortly after he was released.

7.3 Torture and ill-treatment in public settings

Both the military and the police have also carried out torture and ill-treatment in public places and in homes. This frequently takes place during "sweepings" of villages and house-to-house searches, most commonly in rural areas and often after an exchange of fire between the security forces and GAM. During such searches it is common for the men of the village to be rounded-up and beaten, kicked and slapped to force them to cooperate in locating a suspect or as a form of reprisal.

Torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment are also inflicted as a punishment for reasons such as failing to turn up for, or falling asleep during compulsory guard duty or for refusing to provide members of the military or police with free cigarettes or other provisions on request. Punishments that have been reported for such misdemeanours are beatings, submersion in water for prolonged periods, being forced to lie in a muddy gutter or to simulate swimming while lying on dry ground.

7.4 Illustrative cases of torture and ill-treatment in public settings

a) A grocery shop owner, aged 51, from Nisam Sub-district in North Aceh, explained to Amnesty International that he was regarded by the Indonesian military as a "separatist" and was subjected to beatings on several occasions because he had given cigarettes, under pressure, to members of GAM. In one incident, before he fled the country in April 2004, around 60 soldiers arrived in his village and rounded up between 20 and 30 men. The men were beaten, including the grocery shop owner, whose little finger was broken and ribs bruised as a result.

b) A 31-year-old farmer from Banda Baru Sub-district in Pidie District left Indonesia in March 2004 to escape the numerous beatings to which he had been subjected during military operations in his village. He described how the men of the village had been repeatedly lined up and individuals, particularly the younger men, would be called out of the line and beaten. He claimed to have been beaten on 12 separate occasions since the beginning of the military emergency.

c) A farmer, aged 27, from Muara Tiga Sub-district in Pidie District claimed that he was stopped by two soldiers in plain clothes at a checkpoint on 16 July 2003 as he was on his way to tend his garden. The soldiers accused him of being a member of GAM. When he denied the accusation he was beaten. He suffered a broken knee from having been kicked and a broken tooth from being hit in the mouth with a rifle butt. He was left on the road to limp home. He later heard that he was being searched for by the military and so fled initially to Medan, the capital of North Sumatra Province, but feeling insecure in Medan, he eventually fled the country in January 2004. When Amnesty International met with him in May 2004, he was still limping as a result of his injuries.

d) Night guards in a village in Baitussalam Sub-district, Aceh Besar District have been subjected to beatings and forced to perform humiliating acts for failing to turn up for compulsory night guard duty, falling asleep while on duty, or otherwise failing to perform their duties. Punishments have included beatings and standing in water for several hours. On one occasion some youths from the village moved the bamboo guard post as a joke. When members of Brimob arrived and discovered what had happened all the men in the compound were gathered and ordered to stand in muddy water and then to watch as a local school teacher was singled out and verbally insulted in public. Another informant described how a 35-year-old man called Abdurrahman from his village in Jeunieb Sub-district, Bireun District was forced to lie in water for half a day for failing to turn up for duty one night in December 2003.

7.5 Indonesia's obligations under the Convention against Torture

Indonesia acceded to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Convention against Torture) in 1998. In consideration of its initial report to the Committee against Torture(67) in 2001, the Committee expressed its concern about the "large numbers of allegations of acts of torture and ill-treatment committed by the members of the police forces, especially the mobile police units ("Brimob"), the army (TNI), and paramilitary groups reportedly linked to the authorities, and in areas of armed conflict (Aceh, Papua, Maluku etc.)".(68)

The concerns of the Committee against Torture echoed those made nearly 10 years earlier by the Specia Rapporteur on torture following a visit to Indonesia. In his 1992 report following the visit the Special Rapporteur noted:

"… the Special Rapporteur cannot avoid the conclusion that torture occurs in Indonesia, in particular in cases which are considered to endanger the security of the State. In areas which are deemed unstable, … torture is said to be practised rather routinely".(69)

As a state party to the Convention against Torture, Indonesia is required to take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture from taking place. However, little progress has so far been made to implement the various measures contained in the Convention against Torture, or in implementing recommendations made by the Committee against Torture.

8. Violence against women

Women have been subjected to human rights violations, including unlawful killings, arbitrary detention and torture during the military emergency. However, physical violence is only one aspect of the suffering experienced by women in NAD. The years of conflict have also brought economic hardship and isolation. Thousands of women have been widowed over the years as a result of unlawful killings and "disappearances" of their husbands. Between 1989 and 1998, Komnas HAM estimated that 3,000 women were widowed as direct result of the conflict. Given the large number of people who have been killed during the military emergency and afterwards it can be assumed that this number will have significantly increased since May 2003.

Women are also left as sole providers because their husbands and other male relatives have fled. For example, it is notable that the overwhelming majority of the refugees who have fled since the beginning of the military emergency are men. Many leave behind wives and children. In some cases they have left them in the care of relatives, but often they must fend for themselves. Many of the refugees to whom Amnesty International spoke expressed anxiety about the well-being of their families and their inability to support them. In some cases they had lost touch with them altogether.

8.1 Arbitrary detention of women

Women who have been accused of membership of GAM or of providing logistical or other support to it have been detained and imprisoned. Wives and other relatives of GAM members, or suspected GAM members have also been detained, in some cases effectively as hostages in lieu of their male relatives.

As of April 2004, there were reported to be 33 women convicted of GAM-related offences in Lhoknga Prison in Aceh Besar District They were serving prison sentences of between one and 11 years. There are also believed to be female prisoners in other prisons in NAD, although the numbers are unknown. Amnesty International believes that these women may have been convicted in unfair trials.
In addition, Amnesty International has received reports of nearly 50 separate cases in which female relatives and children of GAM commanders and troops have been detained since May 2003. In some cases they are reported to have been tortured or ill-treated, in others they are alleged to have been forced to take part in military operations. Amnesty International cannot verify most of the individual reports, but the detention of wives, children and other family members in lieu of their male relatives in GAM, is known to have taken place in other counter-insurgency campaigns in Indonesia.
In one confirmed case, the wife and two young children, aged three years and four months, of GAM's Commander-in-Chief, Muzakkir Manaf were detained briefly in April 2004. In another case, a reliable source, who was involved in negotiating the release of the wife of a GAM Commander in Aceh Besar District held by Kopassus at their base in Indra Puri, Aceh Besar, told Amnesty International that Kopassus insisted that she was not being detained, but that they had merely asked her to go for questioning. According to the source, she was not physically harmed although she was intimidated. She was instructed to persuade her husband to surrender.

8.2 Rape and other sexual crimes

There is a long-established pattern of rape and other sexual crimes against women in NAD which have been repeated in the current operations. Female detainees have been subjected to torture, including rape and other forms of sexual violence including fondling of breasts and genitalia. They have also been threatened with rape and subjected to verbal sexual insults.

Rape and other forms of sexual violence have also been committed during military exercises in the villages of NAD both before and during the latest military campaign. Women are reported to have been forced to strip naked in front of soldiers and in some cases have been fondled. There are also reports of women being forced to expose their breasts to members of the security forces so that they can check for crescent moon tattoos which members of Inong Bale, the female unit of GAM, are reported to bear on their breasts.

The extent of such crimes is unknown, but the fact that they take place is confirmed by first-hand and eyewitness accounts received by Amnesty International, by information received from credible NGOs, by the findings of investigations carried out by Komnas HAM and by investigations and trials by the military into several cases.

8.3 Illustrative cases of violence against women

Torture and rape in military and police detention

One woman told Amnesty International that she had been stripped naked and raped by six soldiers while in military detention in Pidie District from 2 July to 28 September 2003. The woman explained that her family is suspected of close links to GAM and that over the course of the last 10 years, her four brothers and husband have been shot dead by the military. She denied any links with GAM, but said that she believes she and her family have been targeted because her father is a wealthy coffee merchant who has angered members of the military by refusing to pay bribes. While being interrogated, the woman was accused of providing food to GAM and was asked about the whereabouts of her father.

Initially she was held at a military post in Kembang Tanjung, in Pidie District. It was during this time that she claims to have been raped. She also described how she was punched and beaten with a wooden plank and, on one occasion, forced to stand in a tank of cold water up to her neck for nine hours. Her family was not informed of her whereabouts, although after searching for one month they did manage to locate her. Her requests to see her three children, ranging in age from four to 13 years old, were met with refusal and threats that they would be killed. The woman was eventually released after paying five million rupiah (US$555) and has since fled Indonesia leaving her three children in the care of relatives.

A 27-year-old human rights activist, who was arrested in Pidie District in June 2003 by the troops from both Delima Sub-district Military Command (Koramil Delima) and Brimob, was reported to have been subjected to sexual violence while in detention. According to an interview in the media, the activist had her headscarf and shirt ripped off, was forced to fondle the genitalia of a soldier, and was threatened with gang rape if she did not admit to being a member of GAM. She is also reported to have been punched, kicked, slapped and throttled as a confession was demanded from her. The activist was released after two weeks and has since left the province.(70)

Information on other cases of violence against women has been received by Amnesty International by reliable sources in NAD. Among the cases is that of a 25-year-old women who works as a farmer in Montasik Sub-district, Aceh Besar District. She was arrested on 11 June 2003 by soldiers from Rajawali unit. During the first day of detention she is reported to have been hit with the butt of a rifle, slapped, and trampled on as she knelt down. She was also threatened with rape with comments such as: "We have now a blanket and a place to satisfy our libido". She has since been put on trial and has been sentenced to two years and eight months' imprisonment.

A female tailor, aged 32, from Kuta Baro Sub-district, Aceh Besar District, is reported to have been arrested on 22 July 2003 by members of Brimob and the local police. She was taken to the office of the head of Kutabaro Sub-district where she was allegedly beaten with a metal bar, a rifle butt and a rattan cane and slapped. She was subsequently transferred to Kuta Baro Police Sector (Polsek) and then to Lambaro Polsek where she was once again reported to have been subjected to beatings and slappings. As she was beaten she was questioned about the numbers of guns belonging to her and the whereabouts of members of her family and friends who were suspected of being members of GAM. She has since been put on trial and sentenced to two years and two months' imprisonment.

Rape of girls

A 12-year-old girl is alleged to have been raped by soldiers in August 2003 in Jeumpa Sub-district, Bireun District. A neighbour of the girl described to Amnesty International how he had seen the military arrive in trucks, fire shots into the air and burn houses in the village. It was during this raid that the rape is alleged to have taken place. The neighbour claimed that villagers had tried to report the incident, including the rape, both to the local military and the Sub-district Head (Camat), but that both refused to consider it.

Several cases of rape of teenage girls have also been reported in the respected weekly news journal, Tempo. In June 2003, it reported on separate cases of three girls aged 14, 15 and 16, who it was alleged had been raped by members of the military or Brimob. The 16-year-old claimed that she was gang raped by soldiers who had come to her house to look for her brother. The 14-year-old is alleged to have been raped by four members of Brimob.(71)

Cases of public stripping and beating of women

One 29-year-old woman from Samalanga Sub-district in North Aceh District told Amnesty International how soldiers had come to her house in October 2003, claiming to be searching for her father. She explained that her father had died many years previously and that she was not married. Nevertheless, she was forced to take off her clothes and was hit with the butt of a rifle on her face and back. She was instructed to give the soldiers gasoline which they then used to set light to her uncle's house next door. Following this experience, she decided to leave Indonesia. She borrowed two million rupiah (US$220) from friends to help finance the journey. She is now in debt and, unable to find a job, and has little prospect of being able to repay the money.

A farmer from Ranto Peureulak Sub-district in East Aceh told Amnesty International that to his knowledge no women had been raped in his village, but that early on in the military emergency three women had been forced to strip in public and were touched and fondled, including on the genitals. He claimed to have seen the three women, one of whom was pregnant, being slapped as they tried to resist and that they were later tied up with their husbands. It is not known what happened to them subsequently.

8.4 Indonesia's obligations under international law to protect women against human rights violations

Under international law rape and other sexual crimes constitute grave violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, and are recognised as war crimes and crimes against humanity. They have been recognized in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal as such.(72) Rape and other sexual abuse by officials constitute torture or ill-treatment and states have an obligation to prohibit, prevent and punish such acts.

Indonesia, as a state party to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), has a general obligation to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights of women. Gender-based violence such as rape and other sexual crimes against women constitute a form of discrimination. The Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women in their General Recommendation 19 have confirmed that: "Gender-based violence is a form of discrimination that seriously inhibits women's ability to enjoy rights and freedoms on a basis of equality with men".

UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000) on Women, Peace and Security requires all parties to implement fully international humanitarian and human rights law that protects the rights of women and girls during and after conflicts. Among the applicable standards is the CEDAW and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) both of which have been ratified by Indonesia.(73) In addition, Common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions which relates to conflicts not of an internatio