Government's Performance in Democracy, Law and Human Rights Sectors Is Unsatisfactory
Translator
Editor
3 August 2024 15:10 WIB
TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - Interview with Presidential Chief of Staff Moeldoko on the critical human rights record in 10 years of the Jokowi administration.
Moeldoko brought almost his entire team for a special interview with Tempo about the 10 years of President Joko Widodo’s administration. In his office in the Bina Graha Presidential Palace compound, which once served as Suharto's office, the Presidential Chief of Staff was joined by seven staff members. Three of his five deputies were among them, namely Febry Calvin Tetelepta who is in charge of infrastructure, Edy Priyono who handles the economic sector, and Rumadi Ahmad who oversees legal and political matters.
“Let them also work and help me explain,” Moeldoko said and laughed. Almost every team member brought a bundle of documents containing notes about the government’s performance that they referred to during the interview. Moeldoko occasionally asked his deputies to answer when he needed additional statistics, especially when he explained Indonesia’s reliance on Chinese investments and the financial institutions’ independence. “The government has the opportunity to announce its achievements to the public,” he said.
For this edition, Tempo tried to secure an interview with Jokowi through people close to him but did not receive a response. When asked about Jokowi’s directive to answer the interview, the former Commander of the Indonesian Military (TNI) said, “Even without the instruction, we are ready.”
Over the course of one and half hours, Moeldoko explained the decline in democracy, distorted law enforcement, dismal freedom of expression, conflicts in Papua, and the idea of extending terms to three periods during Jokowi’s administration to Raymundus Rikang, Daniel A. Fajri, and Yosea Arga Pramudita from Tempo. He declined to be photographed for the interview.
Democratic backsliding occurred during Joko Widodo’s administration. Law enforcement is weak, freedom of expression is curbed and there’s almost no opposition. What is your response?
The question is whether the state has a role in them or not. For instance, in the case of the burning of a journalist’s house in North Sumatra. If it was done by some rogue personnel, it was a (personal) altercation. The state had no part in it but people insisted it had. The actors involved must be first identified. Don’t always jump to conclusions.
Numerous data confirmed that the primary actor was the state, and the state also has resources to conduct systematic operations.
Sometimes there is a gap between a policy and the execution. For example, President Jokowi wants to have it resolved peacefully. However, deviations occur on the ground because of this policy gap. Maybe some personnel who did not understand the President’s wish ended up taking a different approach. So, once again, the state had no role in it.
Isn’t it necessary to read Jokowi with a reversed logic? What the President wants is the opposite of what is said to the public.
(Laughing)… You are zigzagging very quickly. That’s your analysis and it is not necessarily the same as ours. I am a former Commander of the TNI so I understand situations like this.
Speaking of the TNI, military reform was also threatened at the end of Jokowi’s administration with the revision of the TNI Law, which grants privileges, especially regarding business. What is your response?
What is the definition of TNI business? It has to be clear. One of the demands of the TNI reform initiatives is the prohibition of the military from engaging in business ventures and real politics. All activities related to businesses, except cooperatives, were dismantled. The definition of how TNI can do business has to be clear first.
Do you agree that the TNI can engage in business again?
I don’t understand if these words really exist. Pragmatically, the TNI sees it as a concept for military personnel’s welfare. It is still in poor condition. Equip us with modern defense equipment. Ensure their welfare so, when they are on military missions, they don’t have to worry about leaky roofs or sick children at home. What is meant by the issue of doing business is perhaps wives opening shops and whether that is allowed. That is the simplest definition of soldiers doing business.
