Munir and BIN's future

The Aug. 23 edition of The Jakarta Post carried a front page report on the latest revelations in the ongoing investigation into Munir's murder. The revelations sparked further questions about the position of the National Intelligence Agency (BIN) in the case.

Like it or not, the Munir case could soon force the government to confront the issues of whether BIN has a continuing role to play in Indonesian affairs, now that Indonesia has moved from being a quasi-autocracy to being a quasi-democracy, and, if so, what that role should be.

The first issue will surely be answered in the affirmative as even the most democratic countries usually accept the need for an intelligence service in order to address legitimate national security concerns. In this regard, Indonesia is not likely to be any exception.

The second issue is far more difficult, however, and gives rise to at least three subsidiary questions.

First, is it still appropriate for BIN to be concerned with the activities of domestic and foreign critics of the Indonesian Government if no actual breach of the law is involved?

Second, in the case of the activities of domestic critics which do involve a breach of the law, why is this not a matter for the National Police as opposed to a matter for BIN to handle?

Third, to what extent should BIN be held publicly accountable for its actions?

It will not be surprising if the government has to struggle long and hard with these three questions before arriving at a solution which strikes the right balance between protecting national security on the one hand and allowing democratic activities to flourish on the other hand.

The question of accountability could be particularly troublesome depending upon just how the Munir Case plays out.

The United States wrestled with these very same questions, in the context of the FBI and the Cold War, when the United States was already a much more mature democracy than Indonesia is today.

WILLIAM A. SULLIVAN
Jakarta