The execution of Tibo

August 29, 2006

Arianto Sangaji, Palu

As the seconds ticked away, National Police Chief Gen. Sutanto
announced the postponement of the execution of Fabianus Tibo,
Dominggus Da Silva and Marinus Riwu, which was scheduled for 12:15
a.m. on Aug. 12 in Palu. The execution was rescheduled for after
Independence Day on Aug. 17, although all preparations for it had been
made. Before this decision, few believed Tibo and company would
receive a reprieve from execution.

It appears there were two factors that led to this decision. First,
there were protests throughout the country. Second, there were
numerous protests from the international community against the
execution, including a telegram from Vatican State Secretary Cardinal
Angelo Sodano sent to President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, moments
before the execution was to be carried out.

This latest decision has sparked a new controversy, particularly from
a legal viewpoint. A memorandum from the defense team of Advocacy for
Justice and Peace Indonesia (PADMA Indonesia) -- a local legal
advocacy group representing Tibo and company -- pointed to new
evidence. For example, a new piece of evidence has emerged that
disputes the accusation that Tibo and company committed the series of
attacks, killings and arson in Moengko Baru, Poso, on May 22 and 23,
2000. This evidence clearly points to another group.

Another theory regarding Tibo's alleged complicity in the May-June
2000 violence in Poso is that the idea the group of three are
responsible for the violence is too simplistic, especially considering
the fact the three are "cultural minorities" and from a marginal
social class. As Catholic and ethnic Flores people who lived 280
kilometers away from Poso city, working as farmers and laborers in
rubber plantations, it is clear the allegations that were leveled
against them were influenced by the pressures of identity politics and
economic interests in Poso at the time. As a result of their marginal
status as economic and social minorities, it was easy to make Tibo and
company scapegoats for the violence.

Another aspect that has been systematically ignored in this case is
that the government has been considered free from responsibility. The
Tibo case, and Poso case in general, has always been cast as an
intercommunal problem, whereas, in fact, various state actors (from
the civil and security apparatuses) have directly and indirectly been
connected to the violence. These actors have not been touched at all
in order to prevent the state from taking blame. Because of this, I
believe the execution of the three men constitutes an attempt to bury
the facts of the Poso case.

Thus, in the case of the death sentence of Tibo and company and the
Poso violence in general, there is no other choice but to form an
Independent Team for the Collection and Search for Facts TGPFI). Only
through the TGPFI can the controversies surrounding the Tibo and Poso
cases (both before the May-June 2000 episodes and after) be solved in
an objective fashion.

There are three interests that remain hidden behind the death
sentences. First, there is an interest in closing the case so as to
preclude the possibility of the government taking responsibility for
the May-June 2000 violence. The executions would thereby close the
case and fortify the belief that the violence was a product of the
communities themselves. The state (both civil and security
apparatuses) would therefore be freed from legal entanglements
stemming from possible involvement in the violence. This is a model of
unaccountability that repeats itself over and over in this country.

Second, there is an interest in protecting Poso as a "conflict area."
How is it possible that the complicity of the 16 names provided by
Tibo and his friends in the May-June 2000 violence (whether true or
not) and that the three are only scapegoats, is believed by a large
section of the public? As a result, the unwillingness of the law
enforcement community to exhaustively investigate the connection of
those names only creates a time bomb. The names will likely be
exploited as a precipitant of future conflicts.

Third, there is the potential to politicize the delay or even the
annulment of the death sentence of Tibo and company. Various parties
have already made connections between the case and the death sentences
of the three Bali bombers. Whatever the reason, the right to live of
Tibo, Amrozi and others cannot be played off against each other. These
two cases must be resolved in a law enforcement context with respect
to human rights.

The writer is executive director of the Tanah Merdeka Foundation,
Palu, Central Sulawesi.