The police take a number of items for investigation at the house of an alleged bomber, INS, 31, in Cibangkong, Bandung, West Java, on Thursday (25/5). INS is believed to be one of the suicide bombers behind the attack at Kampung Melayu terminal, East Jakarta, on Wednesday (24/5) evening.
JAKARTA, KOMPAS – The government and the House of Representatives have agreed to strengthen terror prevention measures. The agreement to help authorities prevent terror acts emerged during the deliberation of the bill to revise Law No. 15/2003 on Terrorism.
A House Terrorism Law Revision Bill Special Committee member from the United Development Party faction, Arsul Sani, said on Thursday (25/5/2017) that there were a number of things the government and the House agreed upon to strengthen terror prevention measures in the deliberations of the revision of Law No. 15/2003, including legal actions against people alleged to have planned acts of terror.
Thus far, the police have faced difficulty in pursuing and arresting alleged terrorists who are known to have planned terror acts, including by participating in militaristic trainings. This is because the existing Terrorism Law does not regulate any preventive measures.
“Officially, the police’s authority in detaining people who are alleged to have prepared acts of terrors will be made clear after the draft law is approved by a House plenary session and enacted by the government,” Arsul said.
Some of the draft law’s articles include Article 10A point (1) that stipulates criminal punishment for people who legally create, have in possession, and export from Indonesia explosives, chemical weapons and its various components with the intention of conducting acts of terror. In the draft law, such an activity is punishable by between five years and 20 years in prison.
Article 12B point (1) stipulates that any citizen who holds or participates in military trainings, either domestically or abroad, with the intention of conducting acts of terror, could face between four years and 15 years in prison.
“However, other purely preventive articles such as a Guantanamo article to detain and arrest alleged terrorists have yet to be discussed,” Arsul said.
Ideally, the names of banned organizations or those linked to terrorism should be listed in the Terrorism Law Revision Bill. Such a list is necessary to ensure people are aware that certain organizations are affiliated with hard-line or terror groups.
Public knowledge
Observer on terrorism issues Al Chaidar said in Jakarta on Thursday (25/5) that the listing of names of banned organizations and those linked to terrorism could raise people’s awareness on the presence of certain banned organizations in Indonesia. The inclusion of such a list in the currently deliberated Terrorism Law Revision Bill may indirectly prevent people from being ensnared by terror networks.
“The names of banned organization can continuously be developed. The list may grow and some of the listed organizations may change names. It is okay if the Terrorism Law is revised periodically to update the information on banned organizations with links to terrorism. This is better than letting the people be ensnared by such groups,” he said. Chaidar said that once they enter a terror network, it is difficult for them to leave.
The suicide bombings in Kampung Melayu, East Jakarta, on Wednesday (24/5/2017) night served as a wake-up call for the government on real ideologies that threaten the nation.
“The people who blew themselves up in Kampung Melayu were just following orders and a pre-determined schedule given by [IS leader] Al Baghdadi. What’s the date in Manchester [the UK], in the Philippines, in Thailand and in Indonesia. The government must be wary that such organizations are building their networks and recruiting people in Indonesia,” he said.
Institute for Criminal Justice Reform executive director Supriyadi Widodo Edyono said that the Terrorism Law Revision bill must also protect the rights of victims of terror acts. Thus far, not enough care is given toward terror act victims, thereby prolonging their trauma and leaving social and psychological scars.
“There are several challenges with this, especially regarding the provision of emergency assistance. Usually no one wants to take the responsibility and everyone just waits for someone else to pay the bill. Another issue is on who determines whether certain persons are victims or not,” Supriyadi said.
