Irony Behind UN Intervention in Ahok Sentence
Minggu, 02 Juli 2017 - 17:14 WIB
Irony Behind UN Intervention in Ahok Sentence
A
A
A
JAKARTA - On May 22, 2017, a group of United Nations (UN) human rights experts urged Indonesian government to review sentence which handed down to former Jakarta governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (Ahok).
UN sees cases of religious blasphemy prosecuted against Ahok as criminalization, violating laws of freedom of expression and speech, intolerance, hatred, disproportionate, and so on. The experts urged the government to cancel Ahok's sentence.
Although there was not follow-up to this insistence, this clearly raises a big question mark, why did the UN try to intervene in the legal process against Ahok's verdict.
"What the UN says is unprofessional and improper, why is it obvious that Indonesia is a sovereign state and UN certainly has no right, let alone the legal channels, the channels are still a long way to reach level of UN organization," said political and legal analyst, Kan Hiung in Jakarta, recently.
The purpose of UN intervening also looks like an irony. Kan cited case of Sri Bintang Pamungkas who was detained by the police for approximately 103 days with alleged treason.
"In the end, Sri Bintang was released because investigator was unable to prove it. I think this case has more indication of alleged human rights violation. If UN complains, it is natural, but why is the UN silent?" he said.
Not to mention, he continued, a case of major unrest in May 1998 that resulted in looting, arson, murder and rape that have been reported to international tribunals in Geneva, Switzerland and UN.
"The existence of rape and murder, it is very clear about human rights violations. But why is it that until today the case is so big, serious and already 19 years old not even handled and resolved by UN?" Kan said.
For this reason, the man who reported Veronica Koman for allegedly harassing the president as the country's symbol, questioned the UN's goal of upholding human rights.
"I think it's not clear anymore, I ask the UN more professional, wise and assertive," he concluded.
UN sees cases of religious blasphemy prosecuted against Ahok as criminalization, violating laws of freedom of expression and speech, intolerance, hatred, disproportionate, and so on. The experts urged the government to cancel Ahok's sentence.
Although there was not follow-up to this insistence, this clearly raises a big question mark, why did the UN try to intervene in the legal process against Ahok's verdict.
"What the UN says is unprofessional and improper, why is it obvious that Indonesia is a sovereign state and UN certainly has no right, let alone the legal channels, the channels are still a long way to reach level of UN organization," said political and legal analyst, Kan Hiung in Jakarta, recently.
The purpose of UN intervening also looks like an irony. Kan cited case of Sri Bintang Pamungkas who was detained by the police for approximately 103 days with alleged treason.
"In the end, Sri Bintang was released because investigator was unable to prove it. I think this case has more indication of alleged human rights violation. If UN complains, it is natural, but why is the UN silent?" he said.
Not to mention, he continued, a case of major unrest in May 1998 that resulted in looting, arson, murder and rape that have been reported to international tribunals in Geneva, Switzerland and UN.
"The existence of rape and murder, it is very clear about human rights violations. But why is it that until today the case is so big, serious and already 19 years old not even handled and resolved by UN?" Kan said.
For this reason, the man who reported Veronica Koman for allegedly harassing the president as the country's symbol, questioned the UN's goal of upholding human rights.
"I think it's not clear anymore, I ask the UN more professional, wise and assertive," he concluded.
(rnz)
