The Birth of Civil Society Actors: The Case of the ProPatria Coalition

The Birth of Civil Society Actors: The Case of the ProPatria Coalition

The initiative to form a coalition of civil society to address the problem of military reform was taken by a small NGO called ProPatria Institute in October 1999. 3 Through the able leadership of its director, T. Hari Prihatono, ProPatria managed for the first time to bring a diverse group of civil society activists and academics

2 Indeed, the military had promised to reduce its political role, among others, by (a) liquidating social-political offices within its organization; (b) banning its members from taking up civilian

jobs while still in service; (c) separating the police from the military; (d) severing its ties with Golkar, Suharto’s electoral vehicle; and (e) accepting the reduction of reserved seats for the military both in national and local parliaments.

3 The discussion in this section is primarily drawn from author’s own personal notes based on his experience as a member of the ProPatria Working Group since the group was established in

October 1999.

152 R. Sukma

together to meet and discuss the challenges of redefining the role and function of the military in post-authoritarian Indonesia. The main focus of the meeting, which lasted for 2 days in Bogor on the outskirts of Jakarta, was on the need for Indonesia to establish civilian control of the military and implement the concept of civilian supremacy through the framework of security sector reform (SSR). While there was

a consensus among the participants about the role of civil society and the imperative of a coherent strategy, they initially differed regarding the best approach for implementing the agenda. Three particular views emerged in the meeting. The first view, especially expressed by some activists with human rights background, suggested that the agenda should be carried out through sustained public pressure on the military and civilian government. The second view, held by some academics, maintained that a confrontational strategy would not work and suggested that the agenda for reform should be advanced through public education. The third view, while maintaining the need for public pressure, argued that there should also be a strategy of persuading the military and civilian government by working with them closely. This view was shared by the majority of participants, both from the academia and NGO activists. Despite the differences, the Bogor meeting managed to produce a document on the roadmap for SSR in Indonesia.

The Bogor meeting set the stage for coordinated involvement and participation of civilian military reformers in the process of military reform in Indonesia. In February 2000, ProPatria organized a meeting, the first of its kind, between participants of the Bogor meeting and top military officers (both retired and active) during which the roadmap for Indonesia’s SSR was presented and debated. Similar meetings were also held with members of parliament, government officials, and NGOs during the period February-April 2000. Encouraged by the positive responses from the participants, including from the military, ProPatria continued to maintain the loosely organized coalition. As the ProPatria-led coalition began to establish itself as an independent and credible group of civilian military reformers, its work began to attract the attention of the media and the civilian government. ProPatria’s role in military reform took a new, more significant direction when the group was invited in May 2000 by the Ministry of Defense to officially participate in the drafting committee of the State Defense Bill until it was passed by the Parliament in January 2002.

After completing its work on the State Defense Law, ProPatria was involved in the drafting of the Armed Forces Bill. Aware of the formidable task at hand, in October 2002, ProPatria sought to consolidate the coalition through the establishment of Kelompok Kerja Reformasi Sektor Keamanan Indonesia (Indonesia’s Working Group on Security Sector Reform, hereafter ProPatria WG). The membership was drawn from various civil society institutions, primarily from NGOs and academics working in universities and research institutes, with several original participants of the Bogor meeting serving as core members. Active members of ProPatria WG include, among others, Hari Prihatono (ProPatria WG), Rizal Sukma (Centre for Strategic and International Studies, CSIS), Kusnanto Anggoro (CSIS), Edy Prasetyono (CSIS), Ikrar Nusa Bhakti (Indonesia’s Academy of Sciences, LIPI), Riefqi Muna (LIPI), Indra Samego (LIPI), the late Munir Thalib (KontraS), Fajrul Falakh (Gadjah Mada

7 The Role of Civil Society in Indonesia’s Military Reform 153

University of Yogyakarta), Cornelis Lay (Gadjah Mada University), Andi Widjajanto (Pacivis, University of Indonesia), Bambang Widjajanto (Lembaga Bantuan Hukum or Indonesia’s Legal Aid Institute, LBH), Jaleswari Pramodhawardani (LOGOS), Bob Sugeng Hadiwinata (Parahyangan University of Bandung), and Anak Agung Banyu Perwita (Parahyangan University). 4

In addition to its direct involvement and participation in military reform, ProPatria WG also functioned as an informal “coordinating board” for various civil society actors involved in the process. As the scope for SSR is too broad to

be tackled by one actor, several – including some members of ProPatria WG – also carried out their own activities in various issue areas of military reform in particular and security sector reform in general. LOGOS, for example, focused its works on the role of the military in business, military financing, and defense budget. LIPI also ran its own program to encourage the military to reform its organizational structures and doctrines. Additionally, it worked on the Military Support to Civilian Authorities Bill. The Pacivis-UI formed a working group on intelligence reform and organized a series of activities – workshops and public advocacy – to push for intelligence reform. KontraS and Imparsial, another NGO working on human rights, played a leading role in pushing the government and the parliament to reform the military justice system (the complete list is provided in Table 7.1 below). As these groups are also members of ProPatria WG, they often exchanged information and coordinated their activities with each other. In other words, there was, and still is, effective “division of labor” among these various actors.

Indeed, ProPatria WG is not the only actor involved in the process of military reform in Indonesia. However, it is by far the most enduring one, and its imprint on the state of military reform in Indonesia is noticeable. As of today, ProPatria WG is still active, even though the intensity of its work and the number of its activities had begun to decline by October 2004. Members of ProPatria WG continue to serve as resource persons for the media, government agencies, and even the military itself on military and defense-related issues. At the same time, ProPatria WG continues to expand the scope of its activities into specific issues such as the role of the military in post-conflict peace-building. Given such breadth and depth of its activities in advocating military reform, the experience of ProPatria WG provides a gamut of lessons to be learned, both in terms of approaches it has adopted, strategies it has employed, and the expertise it has acquired over the course of a decade of its involvement and participation.

4 CSIS is an independent think-tank. LIPI is a government-funded research institute. Parahyangan University is a private university based in Bandung. Gadjah Mada University and the University of

Indonesia are state universities. Pacivis is affiliated with the University of Indonesia, led by Andi Widjajanto. LOGOS, KontraS, and LBH are prominent NGOs. Over time, active members of ProPatria WG changed according to the working agenda of the group.

154 R. Sukma

Table 7.1 Civil society’s work on defense and military legislations Category

Regulations Advocating institute State defense

1. Law on National Security ProPatria Institute 2. Law on State Defense

ProPatria Institute 3. Law on State Intelligence

Pacivis University of Indonesia

4. Law on State Secrecy Pacivis University of Indonesia LBH

5. Laws on Anti-Terrorism Imparsial KONTRAS

Military 6. Law on TNI ProPatria Institute organization

Imparsial KontraS

7. Law on Military Tribunal Law Faculty, University of Indonesia LBH Imparsial

Defense 8. Law on Reserve Forces – resources

9. Law on Mobilization – 10. Law on Mandatory Military Conscription – 11. Law on Strategic Defense Compartment

LIPI Management 12. Law on Defense Resources Management

– Military

13. Law on State of Emergency ProPatria Institute operations

14. Law on Military Operations other than War LIPI

ProPatria Institute Source: Widjajanto ( 2007 , pp. 22, 23)