Civil Emergency to Suppress Rebellion, Not Coronavirus: Expert
Translator
Editor
31 March 2020 07:20 WIB
TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - Constitutional law expert Bivitri Susanti opined the government’s plan to implement a civil emergency to combat the new coronavirus that causes Covid-19 was an exaggerated idea. She assessed such a status was not necessary for the current situation.
“We already have Health Quarantine Law and Disaster Mitigation Law. Those are enough,” said Bivitri to Tempo in Jakarta, Monday, March 3.
At present, Bivitri underlined, what is needed is real actions to practice the two regulations that have not been implemented optimally due to lack of government regulation and the determination of public health emergency status.
President Joko "Jokowi" Widodo earlier announced the government was set to issue a policy on large-scale social restrictions to mitigate the spreading of the coronavirus. Jokowi also instructed his ministers to promulgate implementing regulations for the policy, which will enable it to be applied in all regions.
However, Bivitri said that the provision of the civil emergency in government regulation in lieu of law (Perpu) No. 23 of 1959 has a very different context with the current pandemic. At that time, the policy passed in 1959 aimed at combating a number of rebellions in regions, she added.
By means, actions of civil emergency authority were directed to maintain the security, starting from dispersing crowds up to cutting off communication networks. “We don’t need it now. We want to get rid of the virus, not rebels,” Bivitri remarked.
Instead of implementing civil emergency, Bivitri said what is necessary is large-scale social restriction and regional quarantine. In addition, as complied with the Health Quarantine Law, the approach that the government must use is to meet the basic needs of the community, not a security approach or let alone repressive measures.
FAJAR PEBRIANTO