Wayzata World Factbook 1996/The World Factbook - 1996 Edition - Wayzata Technology (3079) (1996).iso/mac/TEXT/HUMANrts/INDONESI.TXV

Text File | 1996-01-03 | 30KB | 570 lines

TITLE:  INDONESIA HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES, 1994
AUTHOR:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DATE:  FEBRUARY 1995



Section 5  Discrimination Based on Race, Sex, Religion,
           Disability, Language, or Social Status

     Women

By law, women are equal to and have the same rights,
obligations, and opportunities as men.  However, in practice
women face some legal discrimination.  For example, in divorce
cases women often bear a heavier evidentiary burden than men,
especially in the Islamic-based family court system.  Although
some women enjoy a high degree of economic and social freedom
and occupy important midlevel positions in both the public and
private sectors, the majority of women do not experience such
social and economic freedoms, and are often disproportionately
represented at the lower end of the position scale.  For
example, although women constitute one-quarter of the civil
service, they occupy only a small fraction of the service's top
posts.  Income disparity between men and women diminishes
significantly with greater educational attainment.

Women are often not given the extra benefits and salary that
men receive that is their due when they are the head of
household, and in some cases do not receive employment benefits
for their husband and children, such as medical insurance.
Despite laws guaranteeing women a 3-month maternity leave, the
Government has conceded that pregnant women are often dismissed
or are replaced while on leave.  Some companies require that
women sign statements that they will not become pregnant.
Women workers also have complained of being sexually victimized
by foremen and factory owners.

Women workers in manufacturing generally receive lower wages
than men and also are more likely to be hired on a daily only
basis.  As a result, they are less likely to receive benefits
legally mandated for permanent workers.

Women disproportionately experience illiteracy, poor health,
and inadequate nutrition.  However, women's educational
indicators have improved in the last decade.  For example, the
number of girls graduating from high school tripled from 1980
to 1990.  Several voluntary, private groups work actively to
advance women's legal, economic, social, and political rights
and claim some success in gaining official cognizance of
women's concerns.

Rape is a punishable offense in Indonesia.  Men have been
arrested and sentenced for rape and attempted rape.  The
National Police reported 1,341 rape cases for 1991, 1,356 cases
for 1992, and 1,341 cases for 1993.  However, women's rights
activists believe rape is grossly underreported owing to the
social stigma attached to the victim.  Some legal experts state
that if a woman does not go immediately to the hospital for a
physical exam which produces semen or other physical evidence
of rape, she will not be able to bring charges.  Some women
fail to report rape to police out of fear of being molested
again by the police themselves."

In general, the problem of violence against women remains
poorly documented.  However, the Government has acknowledged
the problem of domestic violence in society, which some say has
been aggravated by recent social changes brought about by rapid
urbanization.  Longstanding traditional beliefs that the
husband may "teach" or "control" the wife through several
means, including violence, also contribute to the problem.
Although women's groups are trying to change the law, rape by a
husband of a wife is not a crime in Indonesia.  While police
could bring assault charges against a husband for beating his
wife, due to social attitudes they are unlikely to do so.  The
Government provides some counseling, and several private
organizations exist to assist women.  Many of these
organizations focus mainly on reuniting the family rather than
on providing protection to the women involved.  There are no
battered women's shelters.  Many women rely on extended family
systems for assistance in cases of domestic violence.

     Children

The Government is committed to children's rights and welfare,
but is hampered by a lack of resources in translating this
commitment into practice.  A 1979 law on children's welfare
defines the responsibility of the State and parents to nurture
and protect children.  However, implementing regulations have
never been developed, and the law's provisions have yet to go
into effect.  The Government has made particular efforts to
improve primary education, maternity services, and family
planning.

The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) estimates that more
than 1 million children drop out of primary school every year
due mainly to the cost of supplies, uniforms and other
expenses, in addition to the professed need for the children to
supplement family income.  Thousands of street children living
in Jakarta and other cities sell newspapers, shine shoes, help
to park or watch cars, and otherwise earn money.  Many
thousands more work in factories and fields (see also Section
6.d.).  NGO's criticize government efforts to help these
children as inadequate.

Child prostitution and other sexual abuses occur, especially
cases of incest between stepfathers and stepdaughters, but data
on their incidence is lacking.  Some child care experts believe
it to be low.  While there are laws designed to protect
children from indecent activities, prostitution, and incest,
the Government has made no special enforcement efforts in these
areas.

Female genital mutilation (FGM) occurs in some parts of
Indonesia; precise statistics are not available.  In Java, it
usually takes place within the first year after birth and is
performed either at a hospital or by a local traditional
practitioner or "dukun," especially in rural areas.  Usually a
small section of the tip of the clitoris is cut or a small
incision is made in the tip of the clitoris with the purpose of
drawing a few drops of blood.  Total removal of the clitoris is
not the objective of the practice, although it does occur if
ineptly performed.

     Indigenous People

The Government states publicly that it recognizes the existence
of several indigenous population groups, and that they have a
right to participate fully in political and social life.
Critics maintain that the Government's approach is basically
paternalistic and designed more to integrate them more closely
into Indonesian society than to protect their traditional way
of life.

The Government's transmigration program, which moved large
numbers of people from overpopulated islands to more isolated
and backward ones, has been significantly reduced in recent
years.  The program is criticized by human rights monitors who
say that it not only sometimes violates the rights of
indigenous people but also those of some of the transmigrants
who claim that they are duped into leaving their home villages
without any means of return.

Human rights monitors have expressed concern about the
practices of some logging companies which recruit indigenous
people for work.  According to Human Rights Watch, this
activity in Irian Jaya has separated these people from their
traditional economies.  Workers reportedly are paid using
company-issued credit cards that can be used only at company
stores where prices are fixed.  Workers go into debt and remain
indentured to the company.

Where indigenous people clash with development projects, the
developers almost always win.  For example, in Kalimantan
members of a Dayak tribe were forced from their land by a
timber concession in August.  In retaliation, they attacked
company facilities and several were subsequently arrested.

Most civil servants in local governments in Irian Jaya and
other isolated areas continue to come primarily from Java
rather than the indigenous population.

     National/Racial/Ethnic Minorities

Indonesians exhibit considerable racial and ethnic tolerance,
with the important exception of official and informal
discrimination against ethnic Chinese, who comprise about 3
percent of the population.  Since 1959 noncitizen ethnic
Chinese have been denied the right to run businesses in rural
Indonesia.  Regulations prohibit the operation of all Chinese
schools for ethnic Chinese, formation of exclusively Chinese
cultural groups or trade associations, and public display of
Chinese characters.  In August the ban on use of Chinese
characters was eased slightly to allow firms working in the
tourist industry to produce Chinese-language brochures,
programs, and similar material for Chinese-speaking tourists.
However, Chinese-language publications, with the exception of
one government-owned daily newspaper, may neither be imported
nor produced domestically.  Private instruction in Chinese is
generally prohibited but takes place to a limited extent, and
since August has been allowed in training employees in the
tourism industry in functional Mandarin.  State universities
have no formal quotas that limit the number of ethnic Chinese.
The law forbids the celebration of the Chinese New Year in
temples or public places, but its enforcement was limited in
1994, and Chinese New Year decorations were displayed in public
shopping areas in major cities.

East Timorese and various human rights groups charge that the
East Timorese are underrepresented in the civil service in East
Timor.  It is difficult to confirm or deny the charges as there
appears to be no registry of the birth place of civil servants,
who can be transferred anywhere.  East Timorese have expressed
concern that the transmigration program could lead to fewer
employment opportunities and might eventually destroy East
Timor's cultural identity.

     People with Disabilities

No national law specifically addresses the problems or status
of the disabled, nor do they receive special programs or
attention.  However, during 1994 the Ministry of Social Welfare
began drafting regulations on treatment of the handicapped
partly based on the Americans with Disabilities Act, and
President Soeharto gave his approval to submission of these new
regulations to the Parliament.  Virtually no public buildings
or public means of transport are designed specifically for
access by the disabled.  They face considerable discrimination
in employment.

The Constitution includes the right of every citizen to obtain
an education.  In 1989 the Government issued regulations
covering education for the mentally and physically disabled.
However, the regulations do not grant a right to public
education for handicapped children.  While there are some
public schools for the handicapped, the Government supports the
concept that education should be provided by the community in
the form of NGO-run private schools that may receive some
public funds.

Section 6  Worker Rights

     a.  The Right of Association

Private sector workers including those in export processing
zones are free to form worker organizations without prior
authorization.  Until 1994 only a recognized union could
bargain on behalf of employees or represent workers in the
Department of Manpower's labor courts.  A new regulation
promulgated in January provides that workers in a single
company with more than 25 employees can join together and
negotiate legally binding agreements with their employer
outside the framework of the All Indonesian Workers Union
(SPSI), the only legally recognized union (see below).  The
Government encourages these plant-level workers associations to
join the SPSI.  While 192 of these plant-level associations
were formed by the end of the year, only one had concluded a
collective bargaining agreement with management.  Current
numerical requirements for union recognition, though lowered in
1993, still constitute a significant barrier to recognition and
the right to engage in collective bargaining.  In addition, the
Ministry of Manpower enforces a regulation that requires a
union be set up "by and for workers" to deny recognition to
groups which include people it considers nonworkers, such as
lawyers or human rights activists, who are involved as labor
organizers.

There is, de facto, a single union system, and it is the
Government's stated policy to seek to improve effectiveness of
the recognized SPSI unions rather than to further the process
for the formation of alternative organizations.  The SPSI began
in 1993 a transformation from a unitary (centralized) to a
federative (decentralized) structure.  Its 13 industrial
sectors are now registered as independent unions.  The only
unions recognized by the Department of Manpower are those which
previously constituted the SPSI's industrial sectors.

Two other labor groups, Setia Kawan (Solidarity), also known as
Serikat Buruh Merdeka (SBM, Free Trade Union), and Serikat
Buruh Sejahtera Indonesia (SBSI, Indonesian Workers Welfare
Union), have been organized but are not registered.  Setia
Kawan, founded 3 years ago, is now essentially moribund.  The
SBSI, created in 1992, claims it has formed the necessary
number of factory-level units to meet the legal requirements
for registration as a labor union, but its most recent request
in November for registration as a trade union was denied.  The
Minister of Manpower has stated that any unions which are
formed should affiliate with the SPSI federation and that the
Government will not recognize any unions outside the
federation.  There have reportedly been tentative overtures to
bring the SBSI into the SPSI.  The SBSI, however, has refused
to accept these offers.

The SBSI also has attempted unsuccessfully three times to
register with the Department of Home Affairs as a social
organization under the ORMAS Law, a prerequisite to recognition
as a labor union.  The Home Affairs Department had not replied
at year's end to SBSI's most recent request of November 17.

The Government considers the SBSI illegal.  Although the
Government has not disbanded it, it has continually harassed
it, especially after large-scale labor demonstrations, which
the SBSI helped to organize in Medan in April, degenerated into
anti-Chinese rioting.  The Government arrested a number of the
Medan SBSI leadership in the spring, and it arrested the
National Chairman of the SBSI, Muchtar Pakpahan, in August.
They were charged with inciting violence in connection with the
riots.  The Director General of the International Labor
Organization (ILO) sent a strongly worded letter to the
Minister of Manpower expressing "serious concern" over the
arrest of Pakpahan.  The Medan leadership received sentences of
between 3 and 15 months in prison.  In November Pakpahan was
sentenced to a 3-year prison term, a sentence that was extended
to 4 years in January 1995 when his appeal was rejected.  It is
widely believed that the Government's actions against the SBSI
leadership are intended to discredit or destroy the
organization.

Also in November, the ILO's Committee on Freedom of
Association, in its conclusions on the complaint made by the
SBSI against the Government, criticized the Government's policy
of recognizing only the SPSI and commented that "beyond the
specific events raised in the present case, the Committee feels
bound to note that the allegations reveal, from a more general
perspective, a situation of a trade union monopoly in practice,
and of heavy involvement of the police and armed forces in
labor matters," and called on the Government to refrain from
showing favoritism toward, or discrimination against, any
particular unions.

Because of past Ministry of Manpower regulations, many SPSI
factory units are led by persons who have little credibility
with their units' members because they were selected by
employers.  A new regulation states that employees must only
notify their employer that they wish to form a union and that
they may proceed if they do not receive a response from their
employer within 2 weeks.  Despite this new provision, strikes
continue to occur because employers attempt to prevent the
formation of union branches.  These strikes are invariably
successful, and the formation of an SPSI unit follows shortly
thereafter.  However, workers who are active in the formation
of the union are frequently dismissed and have no practical
protection by either law or government practice.

Civil servants are not permitted to join unions and must belong
to KORPRI, a nonunion association whose Central Development
Council is chaired by the Minister of Home Affairs.  State
enterprise employees, defined to include those working in
enterprises in which the State has a 5-percent holding or
greater, usually are required to join KORPRI, but a small
number of state enterprises have SPSI units.  Teachers must
belong to the Teachers' Association (PGRI).  While technically
classed as a union, the PGRI continues to function more as a
welfare organization and does not appear to have engaged in
trade union activities such as collective bargaining.

Unions may draw up their own constitutions and rules and elect
their representatives.  However, the Government has a great
deal of influence over the SPSI and its federated unions.  The
head of the SPSI is a senior member of GOLKAR, and he and two
other senior SPSI officials are members of Parliament
representing GOLKAR.  With one exception, all members of the
executive council are members of GOLKAR.  These persons have
been given positions in the new federated industrial sector
unions.  The Minister of Manpower is a member of the SPSI's
Consultative Council.  Numerous regional SPSI officials also
are GOLKAR members, sometimes serving in regional
legislatures.  According to credible reports, the Government
interferes in the selection of SPSI officers, especially by
placing retired military officers in midlevel SPSI positions.
The Government has stated that it will cease the practice of
placing military officers in union positions and eventually
will remove officials with significant GOLKAR connections.

Under the Criminal Code, police approval is needed for all
meetings of five people or more of all organizations outside
offices or normal work sites.  This provision also applies to
union meetings.  Permission is routinely given to the SPSI but
not to rival organizations such as SBSI, which was prevented
from holding several meetings over the last few years,
including its first congress in 1993.  The Government may
dissolve a union if it believes the union is acting against
Pancasila, although it has never actually done so, and there
are no laws or regulations specifying procedures for union
dissolution.

The SPSI maintains international contacts but is not affiliated
with any international trade union organizations except the
association of Southeast Asian nations (ASEAN) Trade Union
Council.

On April 20 the International Confederation of Free Trade
Unions lodged a formal complaint against Indonesia with the
International Labor Organization (ILO), supplementing a
previous complaint filed in 1987, accusing the Government of
denying workers' right to set up unions of their own choosing,
harassing independent workers' organizations, and of taking
other actions contrary to ILO standards on freedom of
association and the right to collective bargaining.

While Pancasila principles call for labor-management
differences to be settled by consensus, all organized workers
except civil servants have the legal right to strike.  While
state enterprise employees and teachers rarely exercise this
right, private sector strikes are frequent.  Before a strike
can occur in the private sector, the law requires intensive
mediation by the Department of Manpower and prior notice of the
intent to strike.  However, no approval is required.  In
practice, dispute settlement procedures are not followed, and
formal notice of the intent to strike is rarely given because
Department of Manpower procedures are slow.  These procedures
have little credibility with workers, who ignore them.  Sudden
strikes, therefore, tend to result from longstanding grievances
or recognition that legally mandated benefits or rights are not
being received.  While strike leaders are not arrested for
illegal strikes, they often lose their jobs and have no legal
recourse for reinstatement.  The number of strikes increased
significantly during 1994 compared to the previous year, with
the most dramatic increases occurring in the first quarter of
the year.

     b.  The Right to Organize and Bargain Collectively

Collective bargaining is provided for by law, and the
Department of Manpower promotes it within the context of the
national ideology, Pancasila.  Until recently only recognized
trade unions, that is, the SPSI and its components, could
legally engage in collective bargaining.  As noted, new
government regulations also permit unaffiliated plant-level
workers associations to conclude legally binding agreements
with employers, though only one had done so by year's end.
Agreements concluded by any other groups are not considered
legally binding and are not registered by the Department of
Manpower.

The majority of the collective bargaining agreements between
the SPSI units and employers are negotiated bilaterally.  Once
notified that 25 employees have joined a registered SPSI or
independent plant level union, an employer is obligated to
bargain with it.  In companies without unions, the Government
discourages workers from utilizing outside assistance, e.g.,
during consultations with employers over company regulations.
Instead, the Department of Manpower prefers that workers seek
its assistance and believes that its role is to protect
workers.  There are credible reports that for some Indonesian
companies, consultations are perfunctory at best and usually
with management-selected workers; there are also credible
reports to the contrary from U.S. companies.  Over half of the
factory-level SPSI units have collective bargaining
agreements.  The degree to which these agreements are freely
negotiated between unions and management without government
interference varies.  By regulation, negotiations must be
concluded within 30 days or be submitted to the Department of
Manpower for mediation and conciliation or arbitration.  Most
negotiations are concluded within the 30-day period.
Agreements are for 2 years and can be extended for 1 year.
According to NGO's involved in labor issues, the provisions of
these agreements rarely go beyond the legal minimum standards
established by the Government, and the agreements are often
merely presented to worker representatives for signing rather
than being negotiated.

Although government regulations prohibit employers from
discriminating or harassing employees because of union
membership, there are credible reports from union officials, of
employer retribution against union organizers, including
firing, which is not effectively prevented or remedied in
practice.  Some employers reportedly have warned their
employees against contact with union organizers from the
unrecognized SBSI organization.  In addition to Marsinah (see
Section 1.e.), several other labor union activists have died
under mysterious circumstances during the past 2 years.  Some
human rights and labor NGO's believe that the authorities have
not adequately investigated these deaths.

Charges of antiunion discrimination are adjudicated by
administrative tribunals.  However, many union members believe
the tribunals generally side with employers.  Because of this
perceived partiality, many workers reject or avoid the
procedure and present their grievances directly to Parliament
and other agencies.  Administrative decisions in favor of
dismissed workers tend to be monetary awards; workers are
rarely reinstated.  The provisions of the law make it difficult
to fire workers, but the law is often ignored in practice.

The armed forces, which include the police, continues to
involve itself in labor issues, despite new regulations
promulgated in January to prohibit military interference when
there is no threat to security.  There is some evidence that
the incidence of such military involvement decreased in 1994,
and some observers credit government security forces with
restraint in restoring order in the Medan riots of April.
However, these perceptions are not shared by all observers.
Workers charge that members of the security forces attempt to
intimidate union organizers and strike leaders and have been
present in significant numbers during some strikes, even when
there has been no destruction of property or other violence.
Members of military intelligence attended and monitored trade
union education seminars run by the Asian-American Free Labor
Institute (AAFLI), even though these programs were approved by
the Department of Manpower.  In 1993 the military command in
Surabaya also halted an AAFLI-SPSI program on legal aid for
industrial disputes approved by the Department of Manpower.  At
year's end the program had not been allowed to resume despite
government assurances.  Military officials occasionally have
been reported present during negotiations between workers and
management.  Their presence has been described as intimidating
by plant-level union officials.  A military officer was among
those convicted in connection with the Marsinah murder case.

Labor law applies equally in export processing zones.

     c.  Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor

The law forbids forced labor, and the Government generally
enforces it.  NGO reports have alleged that some cases of
forced labor in the form of debt bondage by logging companies
exist in Irian Jaya.  The Government says that it is unable to
verify these allegations because they are insufficiently
specific.  No complaints or information on forced labor in
Irian Jaya had come to the attention of the National Human
Rights Commission as of late September.  (See also Section 5,
Indigenous People.)

     d.  Minimum Age for Employment of Children

Child labor exists in both industrial areas and rural areas.
There are an estimated 2.7 million working children between the
ages of 10 and 14, according to a 1994 report of the U.N. Human
Rights Commission.  Indonesia was one of the first countries to
be selected for participation in the ILO's International
Program on the Elimination of Child Labor (IPEC), and signed a
memorandum of understanding with the ILO to guide their
collaboration under this program on May 29, 1992.
Recommendations for a plan of action were developed at a
national conference in Bogor in July 1993.  During 1994, 120
government labor inspectors received ILO-sponsored training on
child labor matters under the IPEC program.

The Government acknowledges that there is a class of children
who must work for socioeconomic reasons, and in 1987 the
Minister of Manpower issued regulation per-ol/men/1987,
"Protection of Children Forced to Work," to regulate this
situation.  This regulation legalizes the employment of
children under the age of 14 who must work to contribute to the
income of their families.  It requires parental consent,
prohibits dangerous or difficult work, limits work to 4 hours
daily, and requires employers to report the number of children
working under its provisions.  It does not set a minimum age
for children in this category, effectively superseding the
colonial-era government ordinance of December 17, 1925, on
"Measures Limiting Child Labour and Nightwork of Women," which
is still the current law governing child labor and sets a
minimum age of 12 for employment.  The 1987 regulation is not
enforced.  No employers have been taken to court for violating
its restrictions on the nature of employment for children, and
no reports are collected from establishments employing
children.

Act No. 1 of 1951 was intended to bring into force certain
labor measures, including provisions on child labor which would
replace those of the 1925 legislation.  However, implementing
regulations for the child labor provisions have never been
issued.  Thus the child labor provisions in the 1951 Act have
no validity.  In September 1993, the Government announced it
would review its child labor regulations with the intention of
tightening enforcement of restrictions on child labor.  At
year's end, the review had not been completed.

     e.  Acceptable Conditions of Work

In the absence of a national minimum wage, area wage councils
working under the supervision of the national wage council
establish minimum wages for regions and basic needs figures for
each province--a monetary amount considered sufficient to
enable a single worker to meet the basic needs of nutrition,
clothing, and shelter.  While Indonesia has succeeded in
dramatically lowering the level of poverty throughout the
country, the minimum wage rates have lagged behind the basic
needs figures.  Minimum wage rates were raised throughout the
country in three stages by province on January 1, April 1, and
August 1.  While in most cases the new rates still did not
equal the basic needs figure, the Government announced in
August that new increases would take place simultaneously
throughout the country on April 1, 1995.  The Department of
Manpower projects that at that time minimum wage rates on the
average will equal 106 percent of the basic needs figure, up
from 97 percent as of August 1, 1994.  Payment of the minimum
wage is another question.  There are no reliable statistics.
The Government's estimate in September, that 96 percent of all