Indonesia’s military wants its lost powers back

[serious_fun]

Indonesia’s military wants its lost powers back

A natural reaction to skandal polisi ?

 

[SamR]

The Police scandals might be a convenient trigger. But from what I gather, they're struggling with there being not enough posts for the officer corps and the retirement age being raised from 55 to 58 during the Reformasi era (https://www.thejakartapost.com/acad...nnel-problems-need-more-than-quick-fixes.html). Back in the Soeharto days, they get appointed as governors, bupati, mayors and provincial parliamentarians and might criss-cross military and civilian postings but that option doesn't exist after 1998.

 

[jstar]

A natural reaction to skandal polisi ?

Well, the two broke up more than 20 years ago, but the rivalry between the Indonesian army and national police did not ease down. On the contrary.

 

[serious_fun]

Now in the Asia Sentinel:

Concerns Over the Return of the Military in Indonesia

 

[MamangDudul]

Let's see how the upcoming elections turn out, personally I think Prabowo will take the win this time. Wouldn't be a surprise.
Anyway, Iam rather positive that things won't be worse than in the past. Iam not a big fan of fear of this, fear of that and fear everywhere. Iam still aware that reality doesn't care about what Iam a fan of. But yeah, I spent too much time of my life worrying about things that didn't happen yet or will maybe never happen or won't be as bad as everyone fears. Let's see how this plays out.

 

[SamR]

I would say another thing Police-related that might motivate the military to ask for more authority in non-military matters is that the Police has increased in (political) prominence under the current government. The Minister of Home Affairs is a Policeman, the Chief of Intelligence is a Policeman, more Policemen being appointed to this or that position and hell, for quite a while and in the not to recent past, the Dirjen Imigrasi was a Policeman (https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronny_F._Sompie).

 

[fastpitch17]

I would say another thing Police-related that might motivate the military to ask for more authority in non-military matters is that the Police has increased in (political) prominence under the current government. The Minister of Home Affairs is a Policeman, the Chief of Intelligence is a Policeman, more Policemen being appointed to this or that position and hell, for quite a while and in the not to recent past, the Dirjen Imigrasi was a Policeman (https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronny_F._Sompie).

While there may be more former police now in high level government positions, former military certainly remain in some of the highest positions.

Former military were the choice starting with Suharto up through SBY. What good ever came from it except for who was president paying back those that kept quiet.

I agree there are probably too many former police in the government administration but I personally would rather see that than too many former military. Of course, my idea would be to put actual people that have knowledge of the positions they have and just to pay back political parties for their support.

Leave the domestic security to the police and the nations boarders and beyond to the military. You start bringing the military back into domestic affairs, you put the Suharto regime back into the minds of the citizens. Military have no business in domestic affairs. If one of the military members commits a crime on a military installation or the crime is military related they should be have a military trial. If a military member commits a crime within the civilian community not related to military duties then they should have a domestic trial.

 

[pantaiema]

I think better to just do the other way around, to deploy some of the Indonesian policemen to the frontline to fight separatists movement in Papua so it will not trigger something considered to be unfair to Indonesian army.
For some Indonesian policemen, their job is far too easy, getting paid for not doing their job properly. Instead the are getting protection money. No wonder so many people who are not smart enough to enter favourable state universities want to join the Indonesian police force. In the previous thread, there are some stories from Expat indo how a family member become a policemen.
But I have no doubt that there are still many Indonesian policemen with high dedication and integrity.

 

[Helpful Herbert]

spent too much time of my life worrying about things that didn't happen yet or will maybe never happen or won't be as bad as everyone fears.

Me too!

 

[harryopal1]

Included in the Omnibus laws last year was "The law also bans insulting the president, the vice president, state institutions, Indonesia’s national ideology known as Pancasila, and the national flag.

As the police force is a state institution this could be used to jump on anyone critical of the police. There was much debate about many of the new laws and I am not sure if the one above got through.
If it did and we had a new, right wing president then these kind of laws could be used to stifle reporting of corruption or even comment in in forums such as this.

 

[pantaiema]

Included in the Omnibus laws last year was "The law also bans insulting the president, the vice president, state institutions, Indonesia’s national ideology known as Pancasila, and the national flag.

As the police force is a state institution this could be used to jump on anyone critical of the police. There was much debate about many of the new laws and I am not sure if the one above got through.
If it did and we had a new, right wing president then these kind of laws could be used to stifle reporting of corruption or even comment in in forums such as this.

Differentiate between an insult and a criticism:
An insult is to hurt or disparage another person.
A criticism is to call attention to a defect or deficiency.

ChatGPT:
"Insult and criticism are two distinct forms of expressing disapproval or negative judgment, although they differ in their tone, intent, and impact. Here's a breakdown of their differences:

Insult: An insult is an offensive or derogatory remark intended to belittle, offend, or hurt someone's feelings. It often lacks constructive feedback and is aimed at attacking the person rather than their ideas or actions. Insults are usually disrespectful, rude, or insulting in nature and can be motivated by anger, spite, or a desire to demean or provoke a negative reaction. Insults typically do not provide any helpful or constructive information for the recipient to improve upon.

Criticism: Criticism, on the other hand, involves offering feedback or a judgment about someone's ideas, actions, or work with the intention of providing constructive advice or highlighting areas of improvement. Criticism can be positive or negative, but it is ideally expressed in a respectful and tactful manner. Constructive criticism aims to help the recipient grow, learn, and make positive changes based on the feedback received. It focuses on specific aspects or behaviours rather than attacking the individual personally.

In summary, while both insult and criticism involve expressing disapproval or negative judgment, insults are generally disrespectful and offensive, aimed at attacking the person, while criticism is meant to offer constructive feedback and promote personal or professional growth.

It is not quantitative, so it could be interpreted according to the interest of who interpret it and the power, money they have.

 

[harryopal1]

"....It is not quantitative, so it could be interpret according to the interest of who interpret it and the power, money they have."

So much then will depend on the incoming government. If one were to say "the Indonesian police force is corrupt" this might be regarded as fair comment given the number of police found acting corruptly. On the other hand there are doubtless many police who are not corrupt and therefore such a remark might be deemed insulting.

 

[pantaiema]

So much then will depend on the incoming government. If one were to say "the Indonesian police force is corrupt" this might be regarded as fair comment given the number of police found acting corruptly. On the other hand there are doubtless many police who are not corrupt and therefore such a remark might be deemed insulting.

This the original version of the Criminal Code

Regarding Police and other state institutions
"Pasal 349 ayat 1 :Setiap Orang yang Di Muka Umum dengan lisan atau tulisan menghina kekuasaan umum atau lembaga negara, dipidana dengan pidana penjara paling lama 1 (satu) tahun 6 (enam) bulan atau pidana denda paling banyak kategori II. Hukuman akan diperberat bila penghinaan menyebabkan kerusuhan.
Article 349 paragraph (1) Any person who in public verbally or in writing insults public power or state institutions, shall be punished with imprisonment for a maximum of 1 (one) year and 6 (six) months or a maximum fine of category II. Punishments will be increased if the insult causes a riot."

So my understanding here is to insult some policemen (as person or group of people) is not against the law. To Insult (not criticize) police as a state institution is against the law. So using the wording policemen (persons) rather than police (institution) will not put you on the right side of the law.

Regarding President/Vice president
"Pasal 218 ayat (1) KUHP menyatakan, “Setiap Orang yang Di Muka Umum menyerang kehormatan atau harkat dan martabat diri Presiden atau Wakil Presiden dipidana dengan pidana penjara paling lama 3 (tiga) tahun 6 (enam) Bulan atau pidana denda paling banyak kategori IV.”
Article 218 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code states, "Any person who in public attacks the honor or dignity of the President or Vice President shall be subject to imprisonment for a maximum of 3 (three) years and 6 (six) months or a maximum fine of category IV. .”

For the President/Vice president, it is more to do with the dignity.

 

[ChrisTex]

Differentiate between an insult and a criticism:
An insult is to hurt or disparage another person.
A criticism is to call attention to a defect or deficiency.

The problem is while we will know there is a difference between insult, there are those in charge who think they are the same thing. One example has already been shared in the General Chat.

 

[pantaiema]

So my understanding here is to insult some policemen (as person or group of people) is not against the law. To Insult (not criticize) police as a state institution is against the law. So using the wording policemen (persons) rather than police (institution) will not put you on the right side of the law.

Sorry I mean will not put you on the wrong side of the law.