A lawmaker from the House’s commission overseeing security and defense said over the weekend that Indonesia would not revive the New Order’s anti-subversion law amid rising calls for stronger legislation to combat terrorism.

University of Indonesia intelligence expert Wawan Purwanto told a discussion held by think tank Soegeng Sarjadi Syndicate in South Jakarta, Saturday, the government should revive the anti-subversion law to strengthen its efforts to fight terrorism. “The combination of the current anti-terrorism law and the intelligence bill would not be as strong as the anti-subversion law in fighting anti-government movements,” Wawan said.

The anti-subversion law, passed in 1963, was deemed by many to be draconian because it was often abused during Soeharto’s 32-year presidency to silence political activists critical of the government. The law was revoked by former president B.J. Habibie following the New Order’s downfall in 1998.

According to Wawan, a revival of the anti-subversion law would be an effective preventive strategy against terrorism.

“Currently, the authorities are too afraid to apprehend those suspected of terrorist activities because they are afraid of infringing upon human rights,” he said,

TB Hasanuddin, deputy chairman of the defense and security commission at the House of Representatives, doesn’t share Wawan’s sentiment, saying that it would be overkill to revive the law to fight terrorism. “A revival of the law would seriously affect public freedoms,” Hasanuddin said, adding that reviving the law would be no different than reviving the New Order.

The government should uphold current laws to create an effective anti-terror strategy. “If we want a stronger anti-terror strategy, we should only improve the current laws,” he said. “There is absolutely no need to revive the anti-subversion law.”

Coordinator of the Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence, Haris Azhar, said that a revival of the anti-subversion law would emphasize the government’s uncreative ways of thinking about fighting terrorism. “A revival of the law would mean a resurgence of authoritarian tyranny,” he said.

Haris said the government should not focus too much on legislation, but should be more comprehensive in the fight against terror. A comprehensive strategy, he said, would also be comprised of professional field officers and a governmental paradigm that separates politics and security.

“We need this separation so that those who oppose the government would not be seen as enemies,” Haris explained.

He added that the professionalism of field officers is far more important than creating anti-terrorism laws. “No matter how good the laws are, it won’t matter if the field officers are not professional,” Haris said. (mim)