Young Indonesian demonstrators danced in the fountains of parliament when they heard of Suharto's resignation. Among them were the children of some of the tens or hundreds of thousands who died in army-sponsored massacres when he came to power in 1965-66. Among them too were the children of the hundreds of thousands who died after his army invaded East Timor in December 1975.
These were the worst. Thousands more died in numerous other massacres perpetrated by the harsh regime General Suharto put in place over three decades ago. The angry bereaved in Indonesia number in their many millions. They want to know - will Suharto now face trial for crimes against humanity?
It seemed an unattainable goal a mere six months ago. Even now, the New Order may not be over. Wednesday's army-backed transfer of power to vice-president Habibie was an elite affair that does not satisfy wide-ranging demands for a new political order. But the opposition is unlikely to accept the Habibie appointment. Even with army backing, he may not survive. If Habibie falls as well, and the opposition impresses itself strongly on a new government, it will want to close the books on the many wrongs of the New Order.
Many Indonesians may not realise that the international legal machinery is available to do exactly that. It has developed considerably since the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials at the close of World War II, which were somewhat tainted with the flavour of 'victor's justice'.
In 1993, the United Nations Security Council empowered an International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) to 'prosecute persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law'. These could include genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the Geneva conventions of 1949, and violations of the laws of war, all specified in various conventions.
A similar tribunal was established for Rwanda in 1994. Last May 1, Jean Kambanda, former Prime Minister of Rwanda, pleaded guilty to charges of genocide and crimes against humanity. Kambanda will probably be sentenced to a maximum of life imprisonment.
On April 30, the United States announced its intention to request that the Security Council establish an International Criminal Tribunal to try Cambodian former Khmer Rouge leaders on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity.
A case could be made that under international law former president Suharto committed crimes against humanity. He directed the Indonesian armed forces that murdered tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of overwhelmingly unarmed civilians in 1965 and 1966.
It is not known whether Suharto personally killed Indonesian Communist Party members, or simply left that to colleagues, subordinates and civilian allies. But he exercised both direct and command responsibility for the planning and execution of what amounted to a massive crime against humanity in those years.
Professor Richard Tanter, an Australian teaching at Kyoto Seika University in Japan, says in a paper about to be published that such a tribunal would serve three purposes. First, to punish the guilty. By ordinary human standards, Suharto and his colleagues committed - and then benefitted greatly from - crimes on a horrific scale. Second, to deter such acts in the future, by establishing the possibility that such leaders may have to take responsibility for their actions. Third, to establish a basis for national reconciliation and the overcoming of deep collective trauma.
Foreign governments, including Australia, should recognise the
political importance of righting the wrongs of the past. They
should place the issue of an International Criminal Tribunal for
Indonesia on the agenda of the Security Council.
Gerry van Klinken, editor, 'Inside
Indonesia' magazine.
| Return to digest index |
