The Human Rights City Award: Sociolegal Study

Kurnia Indawati

Magister of Law science and Development, Postgraduate School, Universitas Airlangga

Keywords: Human Rights City, Principal of International Human Rights Law, The Indicator.

Abstract: To motivate the cities in implementing the fulfillment of human rights for the community, the Directorate

General of Human Right , the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights Republic of Indonesia has launched the

Program Kabupaten / Kota Peduli HAM (Human Right Cities Award). The criteria for assessment of cities

for human rights have been established in the Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation covering 7

(seven) basic rights groups with 83 (eighty three) indicators . With the sociolegal method, this study

analyzes the indicators in the criteria of Human Right Cities . From extracting data shows that each

indicators is not in accordance with the principles of international human rights law. The indicators of

human rights cities also do not contain the principle of interdependence and indivisibility where there is

only the fulfillment of socio-economic rights without being offset by the fulfillment of civil rights

politics . As a result, the factual awards for Human Rights Cities do not guarantee an increase in the

fulfillment of human rights for the community, as proven by the abundance of human rights violations in

some areas with the title of Human Rights Cities which has not been resolved yet.

1 INTRODUCTION

The global regency government campaign program

to participate in leading fundamental human right as

one of the most important duty of a country called

Human Rights City which is established to achieve

the idea of ideal life. The idea of human rights city is

an initiation of world campaign to localize the

human right itself.

At present, the program is trying to be

implemented by ministry of Law and Human Rights

of Indonesia. They appreciate the local government

who achieve the criteria of cities/regencies that

prioritize human right. Within ministry of Human

Rights and Law, the central government creates a

measurement tool and criteria to indicate the level of

human rights fulfillment in a certain area.

The appreciation program by central government

to the local one must be evaluated through times by

ministry of Law and Human Rights of Indonesia. In

Indonesia, the appreciation given to a city or regency

is merely a ceremonial without any hesitation of the

exact criteria of the appreciation itself. That is why,

the ministry are always trying to re-evaluate the

criteria they have made for fair and real appreciation

of human right city award as the impact is expected

to be carried out directly by the local people.

From the background above, the study would try

to reveal the indicators of human right city awards

lead by ministry of Law and Human Rights of

Indonesia as well as the law development and the

implementation towards society as support for

development of Human Rights cities criteria.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Human rights city is: 1. Community who dedicates

their work on the honor of human rights, equity, and

non-discrimination. 2. A city that propose human

rights as its fundamental principal and the

administration city regulation. 3. An inclusive and

fair city. 4. A non-discriminative city. 5. A city that

uses human rights as its habit and culture to

associate among citizens and foreigners.

The Indonesian government, through ministry of

Law and Human Rights, consolidate the human

rights campaign for local government to support and

take a significant focus within the principals of

human rights. Since 2013, the government has been

Indawati, K.

The Human Rights City Award: Sociolegal Study.

DOI: 10.5220/0007548306270631

In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference Postgraduate School (ICPS 2018), pages 627-631

ISBN: 978-989-758-348-3

627

giving awards towards several cities and regencies

every year on December 10

. The awards to honor

the regency who prioritize human rights already

stated in ministry of law and human rights regulation

number 11 of 2013 about the criteria of human rights

city and ministry of law and human rights regulation

number 25 of 2013 about the amendment of ministry

of law and human rights regulation number 11 of

2013 about the criteria of human right city. On that

statement, the criteria of human right cities are as

follow: 1) Right to life; 2) right of development; 3)

right of prosperous life; 4) right of feeling safe; 5)

right of spouse. On 2017, the mechanism of human

right city assessment is changing, as stated on

ministry of law and human rights regulation number

34 of 2016 about criteria of human right city. The

criteria will be reevaluated to gain better assessment

and outcome of human rights city. From 5 criteria

within 17 Result indicators, it turns into 7 criteria

within indicators of structures, Result, and Process.

Moreover, the verification will be evaluated from

local to central government.

3 RESEARCH METHODS

This research uses the sociolegal method, because it

uses all approaches to the law. The socio-legal

approach is a combination of approaches within the

clusters of social sciences, including political

science, economics, culture, history, anthropology,

communication and a number of other sciences,

combined with approaches known in law, such as

learning about principles, doctrine and hierarchy of

legislation. The object in this study is the Human

Rights City Award criteria indicators relating to

human rights that are associated with international

human rights law principles for later implementation

in the community.

4 DISCUSSION

4.1 The International Human Rights

Law Principals within Human

Rights City Award Indicators

There are several indicators which do not meet the

ideal principals of international human rights law,

they are as follow:

- Right to Health

The amount of bed mattress must be equal with the

amount of citizens of the current area. It does not

contain the principal of interdependence and

interrelation which is in accordance with agreement

of Ekosob right article 12. Moreover, it does not

concern with objectivity of 3 SDGs which stated that

the guarantee of best service within excellent quality

for society

- Right to Education

The principal of non-discrimination is not found on

this criteria which does not mention the indicator of

school for children with disability or it does not

provide the number of inclusion school. This does

not in line with Children Right Convention article 23

number 3, Children with Disability Right

Convention article 24 objective 4 SDGs about equity

service of education quality for all children.

- Right of Children and Women

Women Right

The equity of this aspect must be revised as it does

not mention the availability of women to participate

in political aspects. It against the visions of SGDs in

gender equity aspects.

Children Right

It does not mention the fundamental law aspect

which states the protection nor responsibility of state

as there is no indicator of a program to empower and

protect homeless children. It against article 20 and

39 about children right convention.

- Right to Demography

The Child Identity card program does not possesses

indicator of availability. It against the child right

convention article 6, 7 and 8 about the one of

indicators within SDGs about equity of law identity

for every citizens. The fact shows that there are so

many children could not easily possess the identity

card especially for homeless children.

- Right to Occupation

There is no significant indicator that states the

chance for people with disability to earn equal

chance of occupation for living in state sector. The

option is limited to government sector. Thus, it

against article 27 of people with disability

convention rights.

- Right to Residence

There is no principle of availability stated on the

criteria. In process indicator, there is a program of

residence provision. Unfortunately, there is no

significant movement on result indicator about this

problem, the idea can not applied without any

further fortification. It does not in line with article

11 of Ekosob Right.

- Right to Sustainable Environment

In 5

indicator, about the development of

accessibility for people with disability is not clearly

ICPS 2018 - 2nd International Conference Postgraduate School

628

mentioned on result indicator. There is no exact

amounts of facilities which is already implemented

and used by people, this is very important to

measure the sustainability of government to provide

its people. Thus, it against article 9 of people with

disability convention right. The principle of state

responsibility is not well reflected on those criteria

as the facility to accuse the violation toward human

right and the number of unfinished cases of it.

4.2 The Implementation of Human

Right City Award

The instruments of human right cities awards are

already provided by the government. But, does the

award really affect on its people and change the life

quality of them? There are many sources stated that

the human right violation is still high after the

corresponding city won the award. Then, is the city

really worthy of such human right award? This

become major controversy of the study.

One of city who possessed the award is

Bandung. The fact remains that Bandung still has a

lot of human right violation to be settled by the

government. Media states that the number of birth

rate and death rate of mother is the highest number

among regencies of western java. One of the factors

is caused by insufficient facilities for pregnant

mothers to access hospital or maternity clinic. Thus,

how could Bandung is nominated to be a Human

Right City as they could not fulfil the Right to

Health criteria. The Alliance of Bandung Society

stated that, at least, the violations of few human

rights still exist. One of the case is about the eviction

of Kolase Village without fair compensation, there

are still several prohibitions to go to seven churches

in Bandung, the promise of 20% city forest which

has not been fulfilled by the government yet and, as

a result, it causes unhealthy water and air provisions.

Thus, some people murmured “Human Right City is

a Newspeak”.

Protests were also raised by the National

Women's Commission, they stated that the award

was not feasible. They objected if the award given to

the Governor of Central Java because there were still

many issues of natural exploitation that were not

resolved in a constitutional and sustainable manner.

This award is different and looks more special

because it is given directly by the President of

Indonesia, Joko Widodo to the Governor of Central

Java, Ganjar Pranowo (Radar Solo, 10/12/2017).

The award was given to the province to obscure the

human rights violations that occurred there. There

are certain problems where the governor himself

violates human rights. The Indonesian Association

of Human Rights Teachers considers that awards are

nothing more than political movements rather than

substantive values. This is related to the election of

the new governor to be held this year, 2018. This

opportunity becomes a serious problem because the

government's commitment is doubted by the people

if the issue of human rights city awards is used as a

true political movement.

Another complaint was raised by MWC, Malang

Watch Corruption. They stated that the award was a

big question toward society, especially for citizens

of Malang City. The award won praise amid several

serious human rights violations among the people of

Malang City. Some cases were left unresolved and

blurred by the local government.

Another award was given to the province of East

Java for its success in leading and educating districts

and cities to respect and respect human rights. In

fact, there are still many violations of human rights

in this province. As stated by media, Eastern Java,

Northern Sumatra, Western Java, Riau, and

Lampung, they are on top five provinces of

Indonesia that possesses agrarian conflicts along

2017, it is 38,5% from 659 cases of human right

violations. Within five years, these provinces have

higher amount of violations than other provinces.

Another source stated that the government must

be ashamed to give away the awards to more than

200 cities/regencies and 21 provinces on Celebration

of Human Right Day, December 10

. The awards

were merely newspeak as the facts show different

results that would tainted the awards.

From the critiques above, it concludes that the

awards do not guarantee the satisfaction or

fulfilment of human rights for society. There are

many unfinished cases of human right violations.

The blurred criteria of the nominations and the

method of verification value which is not transparent

make the awards of Human Right City become less

applicable. The National Commission also asked

Ministry of Human Rights and Law to provide better

criteria verification within more strategic way.

The indicators of Human right city is still

not in depth analysis from the dimension of human

right itself such as civil, politic, economy, social,

culture and the attempt to protect minorities or

special community. The award given to the chosen

city is just merely ceremonial formality without any

concrete action that is beneficial to the people. This

is because there are no clear criteria and no

assistance and explanation of the details. From the

measurement indicator, there is no civil politic right,

that is why, the demand among people become

The Human Rights City Award: Sociolegal Study

629

mixed without any proper sequence. The

government must realize that all rights stated above

are the chain of human right which bound each

other, all must present to make the gear of human

rights working. In international scale of human right,

there is an addition of the development by approving

that there is dependency among all rights. Thus, we

can conclude that there is no single right which is

interdependency and indivisibility, which could end

in the fulfilment of social economy without civic

politic right. It will create serious clash among rights

if such criteria exist in the award of human right city

especially in city with high rate of human right

violations.

As the award is a mere recent event, it is not a

suprise to find many errors on its implementations.

According to mugiyanto, one of senior Internasional

NGO Forum on Indonesia Development (INFID)

researcher, he states that such unhealthy criteria will

lead to unhealthy nomination compete in the awards.

Alghifari Aqsa, director of Law Aid Association,

states that the cities won the awards are measured

with spatial criteria “In some cities we see, the label

of the city of HAM has been given with measures

such as friendly disability or elderly, whereas on the

other hand there are still cases of eviction and

protection of violations of the Rights to the

environment that has not been met”. Therefore,

according to him, there is a need for good

parameters to assess the extent to which local

governments have met human rights standards. Such

parameters must be in accordance with basic human

rights instruments such as civil rights politics, socio-

cultural economic rights to the right to the

environment. “we, as the civil, need to support the

high standardisation of it”. Thus, in order to earn

high standard criteria, all must follow the law

principle and international human right, it must be

reevaluated every time, the assessment must be

transparent within tight verification process from

many sectors to earn excellent indicators and ideal

human right city as the outcome.

5 CONCLUSIONS

The human right city award program proposed by

ministry of law and human right has developed into

significant level by the publication of new regulation

from the ministry in accordance with the assessment

criteria for the nominators of human right city.

Unfortunately, some indicators are not in line with

international human right principality.

The program is still far from ideal as it is not

able to fulfill the rights among society. Moreover,

some awards have an issue of political movement

instead of the award itself, because, the fact states

that the award does not guarantee satisfaction and

fulfilment of the human rights value. It is proven by

the huge numbers of human right violation in the

awarded city. But this program is a good starting

point for the government to motivate and trigger the

local to fulfill the demand for protection,

development, honour, and consolidation of human

rights among society.

REFERENCES

Dibalik Titel ‘Ramah’ HAM, Buletin ASASI, Membangun

Kota HAM, Edisi Januari-Februari 2016.

Fajrimei A. Gofar, dkk, Panduan Kabupaten Kota Ramah

HAM, International NGO Forum on Indonesian

Development Forum (INFID), Jakarta, 2016.

Redaksi Ditjen HAM, Indonesia Harus Memiliki Kota

Ramah HAM, diakses dari http://ham.go.id/indonesia-

ramah-ham/ pada tanggal 5 Februari 2017

Editorial, Kota HAM di Indonesia Jangan Hanya Label,

ASASI, Membangun Kota HAM, Edisi Januari-

Februari 2016.

Antonio Pradjasto H. dkk, PANDUAN SDGs Untuk

Pemerintah Daerah (Kota dan Kabupaten) dan

Pemangku Kepentingan Daerah, International NGO

Forum on Indonesian Development Forum (INFID),

Jakarta, 2015

Siaran Pers : PERINGATAN HARI HAM SEDUNIA KE-

68 “Harmoni dalam HAM: Kesetaraan Dalam

Pemajuan HAM”,

http://www.imigrasi.go.id/index.php/berita/berita-

utama/1218-siaran-pers-peringatan-hari-hak-asasi-

manusia-sedunia-ke-68-%E2%80%9Charmoni-dalam-

hak-asasi-manusia-kesetaraan-dalam-pemajuan-hak-

asasi-manusia%E2%80%9D, 2016, diakses pada

tanggal 27 Desember 2016

Herlambang P. Wiratraman, Penelitian Sosio-Legal Dan

Konsekuensi Metodologisnya,

https://herlambangperdana.files.wordpress.com/2008/0

6/penelitian-sosio-legal-dalam-tun.pdf, diakses pada

12 Januari 2017.

The Human Rights Cities Programme yang dijalankan

oleh People’s Movement for Human Rights Education

(PDHRE) mencakupi pengembangan 30 kota hak asasi

manusia dan pelatihan 500 pemimpin muda

masyarakat di empat lembaga pembelajaran regional

bagi pendidikan hak asasi manusia. Dikutip dari

Naskah Akademik Kota Ramah HAM Kabupaten

Wonosobo.

Arry Ardanta Sigit, Perkembangan Penilaian Kabupaten

Kota Peduli HAM, Materi dipresentasikan pada Rapat

Koordinasi Peduli HAM, 2015

ICPS 2018 - 2nd International Conference Postgraduate School

630

Peraturan Menteri Hukum HAM Nomor: 34 Tahun 2016

tentang Kriteria Kabupaten/Kota Peduli HAM

Tim Humas Kementerian Hukum dan HAM RI, 2017,

Siaran Pers PERINGATAN HARI HAK ASASI

MANUSIA SEDUNIA KE-68 “Harmoni dalam Hak

Asasi Manusia: Kesetaraan Dalam Pemajuan Hak

Asasi Manusia”.

Peraturan Menteri Hukum dan HAM RI Nomor 34 Tahun

2016 tentang Kriteria Daerah Kabupaten/Kota Peduli

HAM

M. Fahrudin A, MCW Rilis Pernyataan Sikap “Paradoks

Penghargaan Kota Malang Sebagai Kota Peduli

HAM”, diakses dari https://sabertipikor.com/mcw-

rilis-pernyataan-sikap-paradoks-penghargaan-kota-

malang-sebagai-kota-peduli-ham/ pada tanggal 12

Januari 2018

Tommy Apriando, 2017, Konflik Agraria Masih tertinggi

2017, Kriminalisasi Warga Terus Terjadi, diakses dari

http://www.mongabay.co.id/2017/12/31/konflik-

agraria-masih-tinggi-pada-2017-kriminalisasi-warga-

terus-terjadi/ diakses pada 24 Januari 2018

Politisasi Anugerah HAM, diakses dari

https://kolom.tempo.co/read/1046853/politisasi-

anugerah-ham pada tanggal 7 Januari 2018

Redaksi FN, 2018, Komnas Perempuan Soroti

Penghargaan Provinsi Peduli HAM yang diterima

Ganjar Pranowo, diakses dari

https://faktualnews.co/2017/12/13/komnas-

perempuan-soroti-penghargaan-provinsi-peduli-ham-

diterima-ganjar-pranowo/50989/ pada tanggal 7

Januari 2018

Muhammad Nurkhoiron, 2017, Mengembangkan Kota

HAM di Indonesia : Peluang dan Tantangannya,

Jurnal Pemikiran Sosiologi Volume 4 Nomor 1.

Dokumentasi HAM, ASASI, Jakarta:ELSAM.

Tim Penyusun, 2013, Pembangunan Berbasis HAM,

Komnas HAM, Jakarta.

The Human Rights City Award: Sociolegal Study

631