SPOTLIGHT ON ACCOUNTABILITY -- ACTIVISTS FLAG

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 JAKARTA 002787 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPT FOR EAP, EAP/MTS, DRL/PHD, EAP/MLS, INR FOR CHARLIE ZENZIE, HEIDI PANETTA E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/03/2017 TAGS: PGOV PINS PHUM ID SUBJECT: SPOTLIGHT ON ACCOUNTABILITY -- ACTIVISTS FLAG CONCERNS ABOUT CIVILIAN KILLINGS CASE REF: JAKARTA 1525 Classified By: Joseph Legend Novak, reasons 1.4 (b)(d). ¶1. (U) This message was coordinated with Consulate Surabaya. ¶2. (C) SUMMARY: Human rights groups are concerned that a group of marines accused in the shooting deaths of four civilians in the so-called "Pasuruan incident" have been released from jail. They are calling for the cases to be heard by a human rights court, outside of the military system. Mission continues to urge that the GOI take all measures needed to assure accountability in the case. Against the background of past incidents, the current case illustrates how the military's use of ill-prepared troops to resolve disputes--rather than referring civilian matters to the police--can spark violence. END SUMMARY. ¶3. (SBU) SUSPECTS OUT: Thirteen marines accused of shooting and killing four civilians and wounding others on May 30 in a land dispute in Pasuruan, East Java, were released on September 19 after reaching the time limit for which they can be held as suspects (see reftel re incident). Navy Chief Adm. Slamet Soebijanto told the media that the marines had returned to their unit in Pasuruan. He guaranteed that they would not flee pending conclusion of the investigation. Chief of Military Prosecutors Lt.Col. Bambang Aribowo told the media that Navy Military Police had sent the case dossiers to military prosecutors, who would need some time to determine whether to indict the marines (to date there has been no further word on a possible indictment). If indicted, they would be tried in a military court. ¶4. (C) TRANSPARENCY -- WELL, IT'S NEEDED: Several human rights groups told us that military prosecutors have not responded to their many inquiries on the exact status of the case. Syaiful Aris, Director of the Legal Aid Foundation (LBH) Surabaya, told Congen Surabaya that LHB has not received a response to a letter it sent two weeks ago to the military prosecutor asking for results from the East Java Police forensic investigation. Syaiful recently sent a follow-up letter complaining about the lack of transparency. A respected national human rights watchdog, Imparsial, told poloff that they also have not been able to get information on the case. ¶5. (C) The National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) has already investigated the incident, determining in July that while it did constitute a serious human rights violation, it does not rise to the level of a gross human rights violation which would justify a special human rights court; rather, Komnas HAM called for a transparent and objective investigation by navy police. Imparsial and LBH, however, are calling for Komnas HAM to reconsider by forming an ad hoc human rights tribunal on the case. ¶6. (C) NAVY EXPLAINS: The Navy sees what happened as unfortunate, but believes the marines were under acute pressure when they used their weapons. An Indonesian military source close to the investigation told Mission's Marine attache recently that the Navy's investigation has revealed that the marines fired warning shots into the ground when confronted with angry villagers who were pelting them with debris; six marines were injured. The shots reportedly ricocheted off the ground, killing bystanders not involved in the protest. The media, for example, reported that a pregnant woman was killed in her kitchen, when one bullet went through the wall of her home. This military source told us that the Marine Corps realizes the potential damage of this incident to its reputation, particularly since the Navy pretty much has a reputation for responding humanely and calmly to cases of civil disorder. ¶7. (C) URGING ACCOUNTABILITY: Mission continues to urge that the GOI take all measures needed to assure accountability in this case. Transparency is key: revealing the facts of the military investigation to the public could only boost the reputation of the Marine Corps, not to mention the credibility of the military judicial system. Appropriate punishment for the marines involved in a transparent process would certainly mark a major breakthrough in accountability. JAKARTA 00002787 002 OF 002 It might also help the reputation of the Navy, which Indonesians commonly regard as the one branch of the military which has always defended citizens' rights, a record besmirched by what happened at Pasuruan. ¶8. (C) LONG HISTORY OF TENSIONS: By way of background, the military has a long history of land disputes with civilians which sometimes lead to conflict. A Surabaya law professor recently told the media that in East Java alone 26 percent of the 102 land conflicts in the past 50 years were between the military and civilians. The current case illustrates several faults which lead to such tragedies: the Navy was engaged in a business venture with a private company to provide funding for its operations; armed marine forces were providing security for business activities; the Navy did not refer the land conflict to police; the marines should not have been put into a position in the first place of carrying arms with live ammunition in close proximity to a community; and marines were poorly trained and ill equipped to deal with the civil dispute once it got out of hand. HEFFERN