Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
07JAKARTA343
2007-02-08 06:57:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Jakarta
Cable title:  

ETHNIC CHINESE GUARDEDLY OPTIMISTIC OVER IMPROVED

Tags:  PHUM PREL PGOV ID 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0000
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHJA #0343/01 0390657
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 080657Z FEB 07
FM AMEMBASSY JAKARTA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 3209
INFO RUEHKL/AMEMBASSY KUALA LUMPUR 2171
RUEHGP/AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE 5695
C O N F I D E N T I A L JAKARTA 000343 

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/08/2016
TAGS: PHUM PREL PGOV ID
SUBJECT: ETHNIC CHINESE GUARDEDLY OPTIMISTIC OVER IMPROVED
STATUS

REF: JAKARTA 10649

Classified By: POLITICAL OFFICER SANJAY RAMESH FOR REASONS
1.4 (b) and (d)

C O N F I D E N T I A L JAKARTA 000343

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/08/2016
TAGS: PHUM PREL PGOV ID
SUBJECT: ETHNIC CHINESE GUARDEDLY OPTIMISTIC OVER IMPROVED
STATUS

REF: JAKARTA 10649

Classified By: POLITICAL OFFICER SANJAY RAMESH FOR REASONS
1.4 (b) and (d)


1. (C) Summary: A prominent Chinese-Indonesian human rights
lawyer and leaders of NGOs focused on fighting racial,
ethnic, and religious discrimination expressed guarded
optimism about the status of ethnic Chinese in Indonesia. In
a January 25 discussion, they said a new citizenship law
unequivocally bestowed long overdue citizenship rights on
Chinese-Indonesians and noted that ethnic Chinese enjoyed
great freedom to practice their religion and culture.
However, they remained deeply concerned about discriminatory
local regulations in Yogyakarta, Central Java that violate
the citizenship law, as well as the continued existence of
anti-Chinese national regulations dating back decades which,

though not actively enforced, have never been revoked. They
also alleged that the 2006 decree on new places of worship
made it difficult for religious minorities such as Chinese
Christians and Confucians to build new churches or temples.
End Summary.


2. (C) On January 25, Poloff met well-known
Chinese-Indonesian human rights lawyer Frans Winata, Chairman
Wahyu Effendy of the Anti-Discrimination Movement,
anti-discrimination activist Esther Jusuf, and Hotma
Sitompul, a Legal Foundation researcher. These contacts
expressed guarded optimism over the improving condition of
the Chinese-Indonesian community. They said by enacting the
2006 citizenship law, President Yudhoyono had taken a bold
step to end decades of institutionalized anti-Chinese
discrimination. Yudhoyono signed the citizenship law in
August 2006 revising the definition of indigenous Indonesians
to include all citizens who had never assumed foreign
citizenship. Winata and Effendy said the citizenship law
unequivocally bestowed Indonesian citizenship on ethnic
Chinese and eliminated the need for citizenship certificates,
finally giving Indonesian Chinese the legal basis to secure
their fundamental rights as citizens. Before this law,
ethnic Chinese were required to procure a "citizenship
certificate" proving their Indonesian citizenship and without

the certificate were often denied basic government services
such as birth and marriage certificates. Effendy alleged
that local officials often refused to issue this citizenship
certificate to ethnic Chinese. No similar requirement
existed for Indonesians of non-Chinese descent.


3. (C) While the new law is a major step forward, Winata
warned that it would take a long time before all local
officials actually complied with its provisions. He argued
that a major test of the government's resolve to fully end
anti-Chinese discrimination lay in how effectively it
implemented the new law. Sitompul agreed, saying his
organization continued to receive reports of local officials
across Indonesia who still demand citizenship certificates.


4. (C) All of our contacts said the ethnic Chinese now enjoy
unprecedented freedom to practice their religion and culture
without hindrance by government officials or other
Indonesians. Sitompul explained that during the Suharto era,
over 60 national and local anti-Chinese regulations prevented
the Chinese from practicing most aspects of their culture,
from learning Chinese in schools to publicly celebrating
Chinese New Year (in contrast, today, Chinese New Year is an
Indonesian National Holiday). These discriminatory
regulations and the 1999 anti-Chinese riots caused many
Chinese, especially those with means, to flee Indonesia and
seek asylum abroad. However, former president Abdurrahman
Wahid fought hard to overturn most of these discriminatory
regulations and to foster a more tolerant atmosphere in
Indonesia. Since then, Esther Jusuf said, ethnic Chinese
felt relatively safe and were no longer actively trying to
leave Indonesia or send their assets overseas. She noted
that many wealthy Chinese business owners who fled the
country in 1999 had returned, but maintained assets abroad in
places like Singapore and Taiwan as a form of insurance.


5. (C) Despite Wahid's efforts, Sitompul and Winata claimed
that several local and national anti-Chinese regulations and
decrees, though largely not enforced, remained on the books:

--A Yogyakarta regulation prohibiting ethnic Chinese from
owning land in the district.

--A Yogyakarta regulation requiring ethnic Chinese to produce
citizenship documents before being issued government
identification cards.

--A 1917 Dutch state regulation segregating Indonesians into
three races: Europeans, Chinese/Arabs/Indians, and indigenous
Indonesians; and a related civil registration law requiring
all newborns to be identified by race.

--A 1967 national regulation entitled "measures to resolve
the Chinese problem" barring Chinese from politics and
military service.

--A 1966 Joint Parliamentary Resolution differentiating
between natives and non-natives, which served as the basis
for many anti-Chinese regulations over the years.

--A 1973 "implementing procedure" which established a
coordinating body and procedures at the Indonesian National
Intelligence Agency for tackling the "Chinese problem."


6. (C) Sitompul expressed a foreboding that a future
government, less well-disposed to the Chinese, could use
these regulations and resolutions as the basis for
anti-Chinese policies. Winata accused the government of
continuing to monitor ethnic Chinese by assigningQnique
serial numbers to their identification cards and birth
certificates. Esther Jusuf also noted that another source of
anxiety for ethnic Chinese was government inaction in
bringing to justice the perpetrators of the 1999 anti-Chinese
riots. She said the Indonesian National Human Rights
Commission (Komnas Ham) prepared a 2003 report on the riots
but alleged that they refused to make its details public.
She also claimed that the Attorney General's Office never
acted on the report, allowing the perpetrators to evade
justice. Jusuf characterized the ethnic Chinese as "deeply
skeptical" of the government's commitment and ability to
punish those who orchestrated the 1999 riots. As a result,
most Chinese had given up actively seeking justice for the
1999 riots.


7. (C) Sitompul believed the only way to fully end legal
discrimination was to pass an anti-discrimination law modeled
on United Nations conventions. Sitompul claimed human rights
NGOs had pressured the Indonesian parliament (DPR) to set up
an ad-hoc committee to explore comprehensive
anti-discrimination legislation. He believed this DPR ad-hoc
committee was actively discussing a draft bill criminalizing
ethnic and racial discrimination, but noted that the bill did
not address religious discrimination as it was "too sensitive
a topic." Sitompul said that to be effective, such a bill
would need to explicitly revoke all past discriminatory laws,
regulations and policies. He also said human rights NGOs
were divided in their approach to the bill: some advocated a
limited bill focused on ethnic and racial discrimination,
while others favored more comprehensive legislation covering
religious, gender-based, and other forms of discrimination.
(Note: We will explore this topic further and report
separately on the anti-discrimination bill).


8. (C) All these contacts also worried about the growing
influence of "Islamic parties and groups" and resulting
implications for religious freedom. They claimed the 2006
decree on new places of worship would hamper religious
freedom. (Note: In 2006, the Ministries of Religion and Home
Affairs issued a joint decree stipulating that building a new
house of worship requires a petition signed by 90
congregation members and at least 60 other community members
(reftel). The petition must then be approved by the local
offices of the Religious Affairs Department and the
Communications Forum for Religious Harmony). Effendy argued
that the decree would make it very difficult for dispersed
ethnic Chinese Christians and Confucians to obtain the
necessary signatures. He said the requirement for permission
from the local offices of the Religious f"fairs Department
and Communications Forum for Rlligious Harmony gave local
officials enormous discretion to stop the building of new
places of worship. He believed that many local officials in
Indonesia remained both deeply biased against ethnic Chinese
and afraid of Islamic groups, thus making it likely that they
would reject petitions from Christians and Confucians.


9. (C) Our contacts believed that although the Chinese
enjoyed great freedom today, they still faced legal
challenges and other risks to their well-being. Effendy and
Sitompul encouraged the USG to push for a comprehensive
anti-discrimination bill that encompassed racial, ethnic and
religious discrimination.
PASCOE