• Tentang UGM
  • IT Center
  • EnglishEnglish
    • Bahasa IndonesiaBahasa Indonesia
    • EnglishEnglish
Universitas Gadjah Mada Center for Southeast Asian Social Studies
Universitas Gajah Mada
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Overview
    • Researcher
    • Partner Researcher
    • Partner
    • library
  • Research
    • Research
    • Clusters
  • Program
    • MMAT (SUMMER COURSE)
      • SUMMER COURSE 2021
      • SUMMER COURSE 2022
      • SUMMER COURSE 2023
    • Symposium on Social Science (SOSS)
      • Symposium on Social Science (2018)
      • Symposium on Social Science (2020)
    • SEA MCA
    • SEA Gate
    • SEA Talk
    • SEA Chat
    • SEA Movie
    • INTERNSHIP
      • DOMESTIC INTERNSHIP
      • INTERNATIONAL INTERNSHIP
      • Intern’s Activities
    • Workshop Kominfo
  • Publication
    • Book
    • Journal
    • Proceeding
  • Academic Essay
    • Culture & Linguistics
    • Digital Society
    • Economic and Social Welfare
    • Education
    • Media & Communication Studies
    • Law & Human Rights
    • Politics and International Relations
    • Article Guidelines
  • Home
  • Academic Essay
  • Tackling Migration Issues: Does Indonesia Provide Adequate Legal Protection to Refugees and Asylum Seekers?

Tackling Migration Issues: Does Indonesia Provide Adequate Legal Protection to Refugees and Asylum Seekers?

  • Academic Essay, Economic and Social Welfare
  • 22 February 2019, 12.24
  • Oleh: pssat
  • 0

In the midst of the global refugee crisis, there has been much discussion regarding the management of refugees and asylum seekers in the developed world, however, this issue has been somewhat overlooked in Indonesia. Historically, Indonesia has been utilised as a transit country, due to its geographical location, archipelago geography, and bureaucratic functioning.   This trend has continued in recent years – in 2016, approximately 13,829 refugees arrived in Indonesia.  However, whilst Indonesia may still be characterised as a transit country, this reality is quickly changing, particularly as both Australia and the United States, two primary re-settlement nations, have decreased their refugee intake.  In 2016, 761 refugees were resettled to the US, and 347 to Australia, almost a 50% decrease in settlement from the previous year.  A drop in re-settlement rates, coupled with an inevitable increase in re-settlement waiting periods, has contributed to the transformation of Indonesia’s role as a country that merely acts as a place of transit, to a destination where refugees are now spending a significant amount of time.  Given these circumstances, the need for a more robust solution in the Government’s approach and attitude towards refugees has become evident.

It should be no surprise that a strong legal protection system is critical to allow for the long-term provision of essential rights such as access to health, education and financial sovereignty.  The 1951 UN Convention on the status of refugees, and the 1967 protocol, are the primary international instruments governing refugee rights, management and processing, however, Indonesia is not yet a signatory to these instruments. Although Indonesia’s most recent legal instrument pertaining to refugees, the Presidential decree 125 of 2016, does provide some clarity regarding the status of refugees and asylum seekers in Indonesia, the decree is still largely limited in its scope, and fails to provide sufficient guidance on refugee rights, an issue that is becoming increasingly vital, given the current decline in re-settlement rates amongst refugees who have reached Indonesian shores.  Furthermore, as Sophie Duxson, research assistant at the Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law at UNSW, discusses, the status and influence of the decree, given that it is not a law, and thus cannot be constitutionally reviewed by an Indonesian court, is also questionable.

 

International Law

The 1951 UN convention relating to the Status of Refugees, and the 1967 protocol, are the primary international law instruments established to protect refugees.  Despite Indonesia’s longstanding role as a transit country, Indonesia has not yet acceded to either of these protocols, and thus has no international legal obligation to take an active role in the management and processing of refugees and asylum seekers that enter its shores.  However, as part of customary international law, Indonesia is bound by the principle of non-refoulement, which prevents states from returning or expelling refugees from their land.  Whilst the principle of non-refoulement does not entail a right of the individual to be granted asylum in a particular state, it does require states to ‘adopt a course that does not result in their removal… to a place where their lives or freedoms would be in danger on account of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.’  Historically, Indonesia has complied with this principle.

Indonesian has also ratified certain international human rights instruments including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights ((CESCR), and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, all of which contain provisions that should, in theory, apply to refugees.  However, evidence has shown that the aforementioned conventions have not been operational, as Indonesia lacks the necessary domestic framework to implement monitoring and dispute resolution mechanisms to facilitate compliance.

 

Domestic Law

The presidential decree 125 of 2016, and the 2010 Regulation of the Indonesian Director-General of Immigration, are arguably the two most relevant legal instruments addressing the current presence of refugees and asylum seekers in Indonesia.  In January 2017, President Joko Widodo signed a presidential decree that would clear up some of the ambiguity regarding the management of refugees in Indonesia. Perhaps the most important aspect of the decree was the adoption of a formal definition of ‘refugee’, based on the definition contained in the 1951 Refugee Convention.   This is an important step forward for the status of refugees in Indonesia, as law previously classified refugees as ‘illegal immigrants’.  As Febi Uneski, Chair of SUAKA, an Indonesian Refugee advocacy organisation explains, the new decree increases the understanding between governments and officials regarding the status of refugees in Indonesia, despite their ‘mode of their arrival’.     In addition, the decree affirms the Indonesian Government’s responsibility in regards to the management of refugees in the realm of search and rescue operations.  It also recognises the ability of government bodies to provide alternative detention facilities for refugees with special needs and vulnerabilities.

However, whilst the decree has arguably improved the status of refugees in Indonesia, it also re-affirms the transitional nature of Indonesia’s refugee program through failing to acknowledge any intention to establish a legal framework for the processing and management of refugees. In addition, the failure to discuss integration has become a particularly pertinent issue given the increased waiting periods for resettlement.  Refugees and Asylum seekers in Indonesia are unable to obtain a legal status permit known as the Kartu Tanda Penduduk, and as a result, they are unable to work.  Uncertainty in their legal status also makes access to health and educational services extremely difficult. The decree also fails to address how and if state finances will be utilised to promote refugee protection- meaning that any funding is likely to be sporadic and poorly distributed.  Overall, the decree fails to implement an overarching legal procedural mechanism relating to the processing of refugees and asylum seekers, thus, legal uncertainty still remains.

In the absence of any substantial procedural laws regarding the processing of refuges and asylum seekers in Indonesia, the 2010 Regulation of the Indonesian Director-General of Immigration has proved crucial.  The regulation grants the right of individuals who meet certain requirements to register with the UNHCR, and stay in the country on a temporary basis, while their applications for re-settlement are processed.    Essentially, this bears sole responsibility on the UNHCR to deal with the management of refugees in–country. As part of the management process, the UNHCR conducts refugee status determination procedures in Indonesia on behalf of the Indonesian Government.  Upon being granted official ‘refugee’ status, a small number of rights are afforded to the individual, including protection against arrest by local law enforcement officers, provided they comply with a number of conditions.  This mandate also allows refugees to receive access to services offered by the UNHCR  partner organisations, including the International Organisation of Migration (IOM), and the Jesuit Refuge Service (JRS).   However, a referral from an immigration official is usually required in order to access these services, and as a result, many people are unable to gain access to such services.

A number of academics have argued that accession to the 1951 Refugee protocol is necessary to ensure the protection of refugees and asylum seekers in Indonesia. However, practically, this may not be the most realistic reform. As Dita Liliansa argues, there are a number of both external and internal factors, which would be particularly burdensome for Indonesia if they were to accede to the convention and the protocol.  Firstly, whilst the UNHCR is currently responsible for the management of refugees in Indonesia, accession to the protocol would transfer this responsibility to the Indonesian government. This would place a significant financial burden on the Indonesian government, who already have limited resources to deal with domestic issues.  Guarantees in relation to the provision of health and education services would also be difficult to achieve, given that many Indonesian citizens are currently unable to access these services.   Therefore, it is clear that Indonesia must enhance its capacity to address the aforementioned issues, before accepting legal obligations for the provisions of such services.

Whilst the implementation of the 2016 Presidential Decree has been a significant step forward in developing a more positive attitude towards refugees in Indonesia,  there is still much progress to be made to ensure adequate legal protection of refugees and asylum seekers. Although Governmental capacity to ensure compliance with international laws may not currently be possible, it is pivotal for the Indonesian Government to establish a strong domestic legal framework to fill the current gaps.  In the long-term, it is not possible for the UNHCR to provide adequate protection for refugees in Indonesia – their services remain restricted to their organisational mandate, which does not cover all individuals whom require international protection.  Therefore, it is critical that Indonesian establishes its own legal framework for the processing of refugees and asylum seekers on its shores, so it is able to provide adequate protection to individuals who are entitled to it.

 

References

(Curwin, 2010) (Sinharay, Puhan, & Haberman, 2010) Curwin, R. L. (2010). Motivating urban youth. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 19(1), 35-39. Retrieved from www.reclaimingjournal.com

(Duxson,  2016)S., Duxson, Filling the Vacuum. Inside Indonesia. (124) (6). Retrieved fromnhttp://www.insideindonesia.org/filling-the-legal-vacuum  (Higo, Tan, Napitupul, 2014)

(Liliansa, 2017) Liliansa,D. Could Indonesia Accede to the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol? Indonesian Law Review. P324-342.

(Missbach, 2017) Missbach, M. (2017)  No Durable Solutions. Inside Indonesia. Retrieved from http://www.insideindonesia.org/no-durable-solutions

(Taylor, 2010) Taylor.S, Difficult Journeys: Accessing Refugee Protection in Indonesia. Monash University Law Review. 138-158

(Tobing, 2018) Tobing.D, A year of Jokowi’s refugee decree: What has changed?. The Jakarta Post. Retrieved from http://www.thejakartapost.com/academia/2018/01/12/a-year-of-jokowis-refugee-decree-what-has-changed.html

(UNHCR, 2007) Advisory opinion in the Extraterritorial Application of Non-Refoulement Obligations under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugee. UNHCR Advisory opinion.1-19. Retrieved fromhttp://www.unhcr.org/4d9486929.pdf

(UNHCR, 2016) Indonesia Fact Sheet (2016). External Relations and Public Information Office. 1-3 http://aprrn.info/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Indonesia-Factsheet_MAR-2017.pdf

(Walden, 2017) Walden.M., (2017). Indonesian President Provides Hope for Refugees. Asain Correspondent. Retrieved from https://asiancorrespondent.com/2017/02/indonesian-presidential-decree-provides-hope-refugees/

Hugo, G. Tan.G, Napitupulu. C,  (2014). Indonesia as a transit Country in Irregular Migration to Australia. Australian Governemnt Department of Immigration and Border Protection. (8) 5-13.

UN General Assembly. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 10 December 1948. 217 A (III). UN General Assembly. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 16 December 1966. United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999, p. 171.

 

—

 

This article was written by Miranda Traeger, an undergraduate student of Bachelor of Law and Arts at the University of Adelaide, while working as an intern at Center for Southeast Asian Social Studies (CESASS).

Recent Posts

  • Sharing Session “Sustainable Agriculture in the Philippines” by Wiweko Rahadian Abyapta
  • SEACHAT #39: Towards a Transnational View: Pencak Silat in the United States of America by Dyny Wahyu Seputri
  • SEA CHAT #38 – Beauty Pageant to the Philippines: Will the Global Influence Stop Along with the Winning Streak? By Yumna Amalia Maghfirah
  • Sharing Session “Reflection on Childhood” by Phoo Wai Yan Myint
  • CESASS Welcomes Guests from National Chengchi University (NCCU), Taiwan

Archives

  • March 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • May 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • November 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015

Categories

  • Academic Essay
  • activities
  • Activity
  • Book
  • Conference and Symposium
  • Culture & Linguistics
  • Digital Society
  • Economic and Social Welfare
  • Education
  • Intern's Activities
  • internship
  • Journal
  • Law & Human Rights
  • Media & Communication Studies
  • Politics and International Relations
  • Proceeding
  • research
  • SEA Gate_eng
  • SEA Movie_eng
  • SEA Talk_eng
  • Uncategorized
  • workshop_eng

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • web instansi
Universitas Gadjah Mada

Center for Southeast Asian Social Studies
Universitas Gajah Mada

Gedung PAU, Jl. Teknika Utara
Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta 55281
pssat@ugm.ac.id
+62 274 589658

Instagram | Twitter | FB Page | Linkedin | 

© Universitas Gadjah Mada

KEBIJAKAN PRIVASI/PRIVACY POLICY

[EN] We use cookies to help our viewer get the best experience on our website. -- [ID] Kami menggunakan cookie untuk membantu pengunjung kami mendapatkan pengalaman terbaik di situs web kami.I Agree / Saya Setuju