The transition of power is imminent. Prabowo Subianto and Hatta Rajasa will square off with Joko Widodo and Jusuf Kalla in the July 9 election. However, a democratic election should be seen not only as candidates or parties fighting for power, but also as a gateway for change at all levels, including political, economic, social, legal, security, etc.

After 16 years of reform, democracy in Indonesia has borne fruit, although there is still much unfinished business that the new president will have to handle. One piece of critical homework is the Security Sector Reform (SSR) agenda. SSR itself encompasses reform in the three major security bodies, that is military reform, intelligence reform and police reform.

Military reform has indeed made progress, yet there are at least three agenda items that should be resolved by the next president, which are military justice reform, restructuring territorial commands and the state’s takeover of military businesses.

The need to reform military justice actually has been mandated by the People’s Consultative Assembly in its decree No. VII/2000 on the role of the Indonesian Military (TNI) and Law No. 34/2004 on Indonesian Military, particularly Article 65, paragraph 2. Without any reform, the military justice system will remain a mechanism of impunity for military personnel who commit violence and human rights violations. Minimum sentences for perpetrators are commonplace and in some cases the military top brass are untouchable.

No less important is territorial command restructuring. The military structure, which spans from regional military command (Kodam) down to district level (Koramil), has become irrelevant to meet the current function of the military. Having a structure that follows the local government structure only reflects the government’s reluctance to sever the military’s political role completely.

No wonder the issue of military involvement always comes to the fore in politics, as happened when Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) chairwoman Megawati Soekarnoputri warned nonS E N S O Rmissioned military officers (Babinsa) against supporting, albeit quietly, a retired military general contesting the Central Java gubernatorial election last year.

The presidential election is no exception. The issue of military support for a particular candidate with a military background has been widely heard. Although this presumption is difficult to be proved, certainty it has sparked anxiety and set a bad precedent for military. Therefore, with the spirit to build a professional and integrated military force, it is critical for the next president to carry out this agenda.

For the military business issue, the reform has already been halfway done along with the enforcement of Defense Law No. 2/2002 that prohibits military involvement in business. However, the other half lies on how the transfer of military business assets to the state can run in a transparent and accountable manner. Until now, the total amount of TNI business assets remains unclear. Though the TNI Business Transfer Supervisory Team (TSTB), said that TNI business assets totaled Rp 3.4 trillion (US$309 million) in 2009, but reports have it that the value is far higher and nears Rp 6 trillion. Transparency and accountability are therefore compulsory to eliminate uncertainty.

As part of SSR, police reform will not be less necessary to our next president agenda. There are still many critical notes on police performance in carrying out their function as protector, guardian and public servant. Unfortunately, the National Police Commission, which is responsible for collecting public complaints on the police, is not equipped with investigative authority.

Without the authority, the commission will always stop with a recommendation to the President rather than taking real action in response to public complaints.

Therefore, providing investigative authority to the commission is pressing, otherwise the public’s oversight mechanism over the police will remain ineffective.

In the intelligence sphere, the enforcement of Intelligence Law No. 17/2011 is certainly a huge step toward reform. While the law is more focused on giving authority to the National Intelligence Agency (BIN), it fails to provide comprehensive legal grounds to endorse intelligence reform. The military’s domination of BIN has left a big question: Why is a civilian intelligence agency like BIN controlled by military officials, while the military itself already has the Strategic Intelligence Agency (BAIS). Strong public scrutiny and organizational restructuring have to be well-maintained in the near future to ensure BIN’s accountability.

Last but not least is the defense industry revitalization agenda. Some experts might categorize this agenda under the second generation of SSR. Since the inception of Defense Industry Law No. 16/2012, the move for defense self-reliance has made great leaps. Somehow it has made the Defense Industry Policy Committee (KKIP) complacent on issues like local procurements, offsets, etc. Yet, the target of narrowing the technology gap seems to be only run partially.

The need for a comprehensive strategy to overcome the technology gap in the defense industry must be in the eye of the KKIP, otherwise its regulation that pushes security actors to buy from domestic defense contractors would weaken national defense capability itself.

All of those circumstances basically point to one main point, which is the urgency of establishing good governance in security through an SSR agenda. We should remember that all changes needed should be put under the context of building professional security actors, so the security of people can be ensured. Improving the welfare of security actors might be one good consideration to minimize their involvement either in business or politics. The question now is whether the next president will do his homework.
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2...sr-agenda.html
======================================================
merah : mungkin sudah seharusnya koramil,korem ataupun kodam diubah jadi satuan tempur.
biru : kalo saat ini kurang tepat dikotomi antara intelejen militer dan intelejen sipil to data dari CIA juga dipake oleh militer bisa juga oleh sipil.