COURT REJECTS LAWSUIT AGAINST KEY GOI ANTI-TERROR

C O N F I D E N T I A L JAKARTA 002310

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EAP, EAP/MTS, S/CT, DS/ICI/RFJ, DS/IP/EAP, DRL,
DS/DSS/ITA, DS/CC, DS/IP/SC
INR FOR CHARLIE ZENZIE, HEIDI PANETTA
DOJ FOR CTS THORNTON, AAG SWARTZ
DOJ FOR CRIM AAG BRUCE SWARTZ
DOJ/OPDAT FOR LEHMANN/ALEXANDRE/ BERMAN, DOJ/CTS FOR
MULLANEY, ST.HILAIRE
FBI FOR ITOSI/ SSA SOLOMON

E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/23/2017
TAGS: PTER PGOV ASEC PHUM ID
SUBJECT: COURT REJECTS LAWSUIT AGAINST KEY GOI ANTI-TERROR
UNIT

REF: A. JAKARTA 02121


B. JAKARTA 01993

Classified By: Pol/C Joseph Legend Novak, reasons 1.4 (b)(d).


1. (C) Summary: A Jakarta Court dismissed on August 21
Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) co-founder Abu Bakar Ba'asyir's lawsuit
seeking to disband the Indonesian National Police
anti-terrorist strike-force, Special Detachment 88. Ba'asyir
had claimed the unit acted in an anti-Muslim way and used
torture. Ba'asyir's lawyers vowed to appeal. The ruling is
the latest setback for JI efforts to undermine police
anti-terror operations. End Summary.


2. (U) SETBACK FOR JI: Indonesia's judiciary has handed Abu
Bakar Ba'asyir another setback in his quest to discredit the
Indonesian National Police (INP) and its anti-terrorist
strike-force, Special Detachment 88 (SD-88). After three
weeks of deliberations, the South Jakarta District Court,
headed by Chief Judge Wahyono (one name only),dismissed
Ba'asyir's class-action lawsuit against SD-88 on August 21.
The judge stated that the lawsuit did not fulfill the formal
requirements of a class-action lawsuit.


3. (U) Abu Bakar Ba'asyir filed the lawsuit last month. The
suit claimed SD-88 violated human rights by torturing
detainees to gain confessions from them. The suit also
alleged SD-88 targeted Muslim activists exclusively, and was
funded by Australia and the USG. The GOI,s lawyers argued
that the case should be dismissed on the grounds that a
class-action lawsuit was not the proper vehicle for such
allegations.


4. (U) APPEAL IS PLANNED: When the ruling was made by the
court, many of Ba,asyir,s supporters jeered (Ba,asyir was
not present in the courtroom). Ba'asyir's lawyers stated
that they would appeal the case to the Supreme Court.
Ba'asyir publicly characterized the decision as the work of
"foreigners," including the U.S. and Australia. He said it
was his obligation as a Muslim to "fight the evil of
Detachment 88," though this had to be done through the legal
process. If this failed, he would "complain to God and let
God deal with it."


5. (C) According to our court monitor (please protect),
Ba'asyir's Muslim Defender Team (TPM) lawyers are pessimistic
about future prospects for the lawsuit. The chief judge was
a non-Muslim and did not recognize the TPM as a legitimate
defense team, they asserted. However, they also recognized
weaknesses in their case: Ba'asyir did not really have
standing to represent the people allegedly abused and there
were no quantifiable damages. One of the lawyers admitted to
our court monitor that the case had been designed mainly to
influence public opinion by asserting that SD-88 was linked
to the USG and other countries.


6. (C) EFFORT TO DISCREDIT POLICE: This lawsuit is not the
first time radical Islamists have attempted to use legal
means to discredit SD-88 and other elements of the security
forces. Members of JI, including the wife of Abu Dujana
(Dujana is now in police custody),recently sued SD-88,
unsuccessfully, for alleged violations of Dujana's human
rights (ref b). There is little doubt there will be more
nuisance-type suits. So far, the Indonesian courts are not
buying it and there is little sign that JI is winning any
sort of public relations effort to undermine SD-88.
HUME