Human Rights Performance Index 2012

INTRODUCTION

On December 10, 2012, citizens of the world will celebrate the International Day of Human Rights. 64 years ago, December 10, 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) became reference script for every country in the world to treat people with dignity, respecting the self integrity and a set of attached rights. In order to commemorate International Human Rights Day and the annual evaluation of the human rights situation in Indonesia, for the third time SETARA Institute conduct a perceptions survey to measure the Human Rights Enforcement Performance Index in Indonesia, 2012.

The main purpose of the preparation of Human Rights Performance Index is [a] gives an overview based on expert perceptions about current human rights situation in Indonesia, particularly on the right variables of primary interest of SETARA Institute; [b] to evaluate the enforcement of human rights performance advocacy; and [c] to accumulate support for the promotion of human rights in Indonesia.

Report of Human RightsPerformance Index prepared by using a survey with a sample of 100 experts in 13 provinces consist of: human rights activists, academics, public leaders, and government officials. The survey was conducted from 1 to 30 November 2012. Samples were determined by using purposive sampling method specified by SETARA Institute based on certain criteria and snowballing where one informant can inform other appropriate informants for survey respondents. The survey measures perceptions index uses a scale of measurement number “0” to show the weakest performance and number “7” to show a strong enforcement of human rights.

Preparation of Human RightsPerformance Index begins with setting the various eight indicators and sub-indicators. After obtaining the variables and indicators, SETARA Institute presents a narrative of events collected during the year 2012, which describes the performance of human rights enforcement during the year 2012. Once all the data and narratives presented to the informant, the next stage is collecting perceptions of 100 experts with a 0-7 scale. Each indicator was given the score, then the entire score of the indicators in each of the key indicators / variables were summed and divided by the number of indicators as a divisor. The result is a score for each of the key indicators.

FINDINGS

The following table is a recapitulation of the respondent’s perception of the eight key indicators, which are used as a measuring tool.

No	INDICATOR	SCORE
		2012
1.	COMPLETION OF THE PAST HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS	1,44
2.	FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION	3,06
3.	FREEDOM OF RELIGION/BELIEF	2,45
4.	NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS ACTION PLAN (RANHAM) AND HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTIONS PERFORMANCE	3,72
5.	SECURITY & PROTECTION OF CITIZENS	3,06
6.	ABOLITION OF DEATH PENALTY	2,35
7.	ELIMINATION OF DISCRIMINATION	3,27
8.	RIGHT TO ECONOMY, SOCIAL, CULTURE	3,23

In comparison with the survey in 2010 and 2011, the following is a table of the comparison;

No	INDICATOR	SCORE
		2012	2011	2010
1.	COMPLETION OF THE PAST HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS	1,44	1,40	1,14
2.	FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION	3,06	2,50	2,25
3.	FREEDOM OF RELIGION/BELIEF	2,45	2,30	1,00
4.	NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS ACTION PLAN (RANHAM) AND HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTIONS PERFORMANCE	3,72	3,10	2,00
5.	SECURITY & PROTECTION OF CITIZENS	3,06	2,00	3,66
6.	ABOLITION OF DEATH PENALTY	2,35	1,80	3,66
7.	ELIMINATION OF DISCRIMINATION	3,27	2,80	4,00
8.	RIGHT TO ECONOMY, SOCIAL, CULTURE *)	3,23	2,50	–

*) For the indicator of right to economy, social, culture, in 2010 were not included as an indicator. In 2011 and 2012, these rights become survey indicators. Therefore in 2010, the score does not exist.

The following are the score details for each indicator and sub-indicator.

INDICATOR 1:
COMPLETION OFTHE PASTHUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS – 1,44

No.	Sub-Indicator	Score
1.	Enforced disappearances	1.57
2.	Truth and Reconciliation Commission	1.64
3.	Tanjung Priok Case	1.64
4.	Trisakti, Semanggi I and II Case	1.82
5.	Munir Murder Case	2.21
6.	Wamena-Wasior Case	1.50
7.	KKP follow-up for Timor Timur	1.96
8.	Massacre Case 1965/66	1.50
9.	Mysterious Shooting Case	1.18

INDICATOR 2:
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION– 3,06

No.	Sub Indicator	Score
1.	Political expression in Papua	3.21
2.	Violence against Journalists	3.04
3.	Criminalization of Journalism work	3.04
4.	Protection of Human Rights Defenders	2.61

INDICATOR 3:
FREEDOM OF RELIGION/BELIEF – 2,45

No.	Sub Indicator	Score
1.	Freedom to establish a house of worship	2.61
2.	Freedom of religion / belief towards religious minority group	2.32
3.	State regulation that restricts freedom of religion	2.11
4.	Handling cases of violence against religious / minority beliefs	1.79

INDICATOR 4:
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS ACTION PLAN (RANHAM) AND HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTIONS PERFORMANCE – 3,72

No.	Sub Indicator	Score
1.	The establishment and strengthening of the RANHAM Committee	3.32
2.	Ratification of human rights instruments	3.64
3.	Harmonization of legislation with human rights values	3.32
4.	Human rights education	3.54
5.	Implementation of human rights norms and standards	3.14
6.	Human rights report to UN	3.54
7.	Performance of Human Rights and Law Department	3.36
8.	Performance of Human Rights National Commission	4.43
9.	Performance of National Commission on violence against women	4.64
10.	Performance of Child Protection Commission	4.25

INDICATOR 5:
SECURITY&PROTECTIONOFCITIZENS – 3,06

No.	Sub Indicator	Score
1.	Social conflicts	2.71
2.	Terrorism eradication	4.32
3.	Security condition	3.29
4.	Indonesian Migrant Workers Protection	2.14
5.	Protection to citizens abroad	2.63

INDICATOR 6:
ABOLITION OFDEATH PENALTY – 2,35

No.	Sub Indicator	Score
1.	Death verdict	2.14
2.	Death execution	2.07
3.	State Regulation	2.18

INDICATOR 7:
ELIMINATION OFDISCRIMINATION – 3,27

No.	Sub Indicator	Score
1.	Discrimination against women	3.36
2.	Discrimination against race and ethnic	3.25

INDICATOR 8:
RIGHT TOECONOMY, SOCIAL, CULTURE– 3,23

No.	Sub Indicator	Score
1.	Health	3.82
2.	Education	4.11
3.	Job vacancy	2.89
4.	Freedom to cultural expression	3.68
5.	Promotion of indigenous peoples	2.93
6.	Food Provision	3.39
7.	Housing	2.86
8.	A decent living	2.57
9.	Social assurance	2.89
10.	Protection for people with disability	2.61
11.	Protection for children	3.07

If we see the average score for the eight key indicators, the human rights performance index score in 2012 is 2.82 slightly higher than in 2011, which are on a scale of 2.3. Despite an improving trend, it is not enough to note that the performance of the human rights enforcement has made a progress, as it still is in the scale of 2.82. Moderate rate for the promotion of human rights in this index is in the scale of 4-5.

Explanations for each indicator can be found in the annex to the report attached.

SETARA Institute recommends:

1. In the last two years of his administration, SBY-Boediono should establish an accountable human rights enforcement policy in Indonesia through the completion of cases of past human rights violations, breaking impunity and providing a conducive legislation for human rights enforcement.
2. The leadership of SBY-Boediono must build and reinforce human rights institutions as a set of human rights enforcement in Indonesia.
3. The leadership of SBY-Boediono preparing bleid policy to ensure the integrity of the national legal systems and the fulfillment of the constitutional guarantee that is continuously eroded by legislation established on the basis of religion and morality. Including repeal the discriminative legislation.
4. The leadership of SBY-Boediono take the initiative to organize and discuss the six bills that are conducive to human rights enforcement: the Truth and Reconciliation Bill, Protection to Human Rights Defenders Bill, Guarantee of Freedom of Religion / Belief Bill, Amendment of Law 39/1999 on Human Rights Bill, Amendment of Law 26/2000 on Human Rights Court, and Domestic Workers Protection Bill, and Bill on the ratification of international conventions.
5. Make changes to various laws and regulations that adopt the death penalty.
6. Following up on the whole results of the Komnas HAM investigation, recommendation of Representatives on the enforced disappearances, the CERD Committee’s recommendation, the UN Human Rights Council Recommendation on UPR 2012, and plans of human rights enforcement stipulated in RANHAM 2010-2014.
7. Taking poltical step in a comprehensive way to handle Papua including conduct investigative audit to the alleged misuse of Papua special autonomy.

Contact Person:
HENDARDI, Chairman of SETARA Institute (08111.709.44)
BONAR TIGOR NAIPOSPOS, Vice Chairman of SETARA Institute (0811.819.174)
ISMAIL HASANI, Senior Researcher of SETARA Institute (08111.88.4787)

Download Document