The National Human Rights Commission Said Prabowo was a Very Strong Witness in the 1998 Case
Liputan Net. Natalius Pigai Former commissioner of the National Human Rights Commission said Prabowo Subianto the 2019 presidential candidate was not the perpetrator of human rights violations during the 1998 riots.
according to Pigai, the Komnas HAM investigation said Prabowo was a very strong witness
"The results of the Komnas HAM investigation did not expressly state that Prabowo was the perpetrator and witness of the perpetrator. "Prabowo is a witness, not a perpetrator and witness of the perpetrator," said Pigai
Pigai explained, in accordance with international human rights law and Law Number 26 of 2000 concerning the Human Rights Court, Prabowo was not the party responsible for human rights violations at the time of the 1998 incident and he called the party responsible commander responsibilities
"Who is responsible? Commander responsibilities of events '98 is Wiranto in accordance with international human rights law and national human rights law Law 26 of 2000, "Pigai said
pigai explained about the riots in 1998 which were a national event and responsibility for the incident that was on the shoulders of Wiranto
"Why Commander Responsibilities? Because of the riot of events '98 it was not only localized to the task and authority of a single unit. The riots of events are national riots. Therefore, the responsibility of the national security and defense leadership, namely the Indonesian Armed Forces and Wiranto, "he said
"Wiranto deserves to be suspected of being a person who is very responsible for acting responsibilities. Based on Law 26 of 2000, it is not unexpected, "said Pigai
The dismissal of Prabowo as a TNI soldier was not due to the 1998 riots
"Therefore, the determination of Prabowo, I want to convey one of the stipulations against Prabowo was based on the deployment of troops against Soeharto's liberation in Canada," Pigai said.
"So Prabowo was fired, one of which was fired because of the deployment of Soeharto's liberation forces in Canada. So don't we localize to '98, 'Pigai said
Prabowo's very silent attitude regarding the 1998 periswita for keeping a secret about the event
"Now the question is why has Prabowo been silent? A general keeps a secret because all the orders are always based on written orders, let alone the general's orders there are no verbal orders, all of the documents are always, always, with visuals also available, records also exist, written orders also exist, "Pigai said.
Therefore, to prove the error of Prabowo, the prosecution's Komnas HAM file was always returned by the prosecutor.
"Not only that. Because the determination of a general must have three errors, it cannot be just one mistake. Then during the '98 incident, Prabowo was deploying troops, securing the country's capital. That is why the National Commission on Human Rights investigations always go back and forth to the prosecutor's office, returned again. Because this proof really must be strong if you want to be delegated to the court, "he explained
The National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) in 2012-2017 strongly questioned the current position of the government which he said did not investigate human rights violations during the 1998 riots, and pigai strongly accused the current government of not investigating this case because people in Jokowi's government are now people violation in this country
"Actually the government can have a means of reconciliation and peace. Can. It doesn't have to be in court, you can. But why does the Jokowi government not want it? Because what surrounds Jokowi is those who commit violations, various violations of crime. So those who circle Jokowi Palace are those who commit violations, "Pigai said
according to Pigai, the Komnas HAM investigation said Prabowo was a very strong witness
"The results of the Komnas HAM investigation did not expressly state that Prabowo was the perpetrator and witness of the perpetrator. "Prabowo is a witness, not a perpetrator and witness of the perpetrator," said Pigai
Pigai explained, in accordance with international human rights law and Law Number 26 of 2000 concerning the Human Rights Court, Prabowo was not the party responsible for human rights violations at the time of the 1998 incident and he called the party responsible commander responsibilities
"Who is responsible? Commander responsibilities of events '98 is Wiranto in accordance with international human rights law and national human rights law Law 26 of 2000, "Pigai said
pigai explained about the riots in 1998 which were a national event and responsibility for the incident that was on the shoulders of Wiranto
"Why Commander Responsibilities? Because of the riot of events '98 it was not only localized to the task and authority of a single unit. The riots of events are national riots. Therefore, the responsibility of the national security and defense leadership, namely the Indonesian Armed Forces and Wiranto, "he said
"Wiranto deserves to be suspected of being a person who is very responsible for acting responsibilities. Based on Law 26 of 2000, it is not unexpected, "said Pigai
The dismissal of Prabowo as a TNI soldier was not due to the 1998 riots
"Therefore, the determination of Prabowo, I want to convey one of the stipulations against Prabowo was based on the deployment of troops against Soeharto's liberation in Canada," Pigai said.
"So Prabowo was fired, one of which was fired because of the deployment of Soeharto's liberation forces in Canada. So don't we localize to '98, 'Pigai said
Prabowo's very silent attitude regarding the 1998 periswita for keeping a secret about the event
"Now the question is why has Prabowo been silent? A general keeps a secret because all the orders are always based on written orders, let alone the general's orders there are no verbal orders, all of the documents are always, always, with visuals also available, records also exist, written orders also exist, "Pigai said.
Therefore, to prove the error of Prabowo, the prosecution's Komnas HAM file was always returned by the prosecutor.
"Not only that. Because the determination of a general must have three errors, it cannot be just one mistake. Then during the '98 incident, Prabowo was deploying troops, securing the country's capital. That is why the National Commission on Human Rights investigations always go back and forth to the prosecutor's office, returned again. Because this proof really must be strong if you want to be delegated to the court, "he explained
The National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) in 2012-2017 strongly questioned the current position of the government which he said did not investigate human rights violations during the 1998 riots, and pigai strongly accused the current government of not investigating this case because people in Jokowi's government are now people violation in this country
"Actually the government can have a means of reconciliation and peace. Can. It doesn't have to be in court, you can. But why does the Jokowi government not want it? Because what surrounds Jokowi is those who commit violations, various violations of crime. So those who circle Jokowi Palace are those who commit violations, "Pigai said
Komentar
Posting Komentar