National Security System For Indonesia

National Security System For Indonesia

by David Raja Marpaung S.IP M.Def

(Paper for Ministry of Defense; 2012)

Preface

National security is no longer only synonymous with war between states (inter-state war) but also involves a variety of issues that including the threat of domestic or sectoral control threats. National security must be understood as a comprehensive security (comprehensive security). West Literaur about national security is full of discourse about,  responsibility to protect, military operations other than war, human security, etc. The threats against an individual or society, whether that starts at the level of sectoral and multi-sectoral, it becomes increasingly important, moving "from periphery to the center". Absolutism country become an increasingly visible phenomenon. Various provisions of the new legislation, such as the Anti-Terrorism Actin Britain and the United States, seen as a threat to civil liberties,democracy, and protection of individual rights. .

Since its inception, the conceptualization of national security in Indonesia is always formulated in comprehensive perspective, both as discussed in the context of national security and "state security". The threat from within the country, in various forms and manifestations, is always more prominent in a variety of strategic calculations. Poverty, social pluralism, the gap between political participation and political institutionalization, and the insular character of the geography of Indonesia is part of several factors that cause the predominance of internal threats. But at the same time, the tangible of instruments that can be used to deal with such problems is not updateable, as seen from the level of threat as reflectedin the concept of "threats, challenges, obstacles and interference".

As is known, democracy brought new demands, particularly since the implementation of the national security system must consider the values, principles, rules of democracy. International conventions such\as Syracusa Principle and the Johannesburg Principles, humanitarian law, transparency of government, the procedures that should apply to the armed forces should be the principle,  and the foundation for national security system implementation. In fact, more than that, the national security system settings need to open up space for corrective actions (remedial, restitution, rehabilitation) so for citizens to sue the abuse of authority by police.

Urgency of National Security Bill

The need to establish a comprehensive system of national security, establish an integrative strategy is a must. However it can be questioned whether the "compregrative systra" needs to be poured in a statute. Inauguration of a system of governance, including in relation to national security, the law must be preceded by the adoption of statutory construction as a whole so that can know what will be regulated in a law on national security.

In some countries, national security law (national security laws) only regulates a portion of the national security dimensions, for example, which is directly related to overcoming the threat of terrorism. Some countries use the term national security act only to establish certain institutions, such as the National Security Council and the Central Intelligence Agency (United States) or the Council of National Defense (Romania). A country that does not have a law on national security does not necessarily mean the absence of an agreement on how national security would be held.

In Indonesia, the controversy still going on. Fifhteen years discourse about national security laws as if they hit a dead end.Many people complain about the lack of operational coordination between the TNI and National Police. No less than among those who grumbled about the absence of specific rules to protect the authority of the state as they are known to anti-subversion law (1963) in Indonesia, or the Internal Security Act in Singapore and Malaysia. The government's failure to confront terrorism rapid response is believed to be the absence of legislation on national security. There are still many arguments being put forward to be able to demonstrate pentingngya National Security Act.

But the construction of the draft National Security formulated and debated since the beginning of 2005 tended not solely used to solve these urgent problems. National Security Bill seems more intended to build a national security system. The argument often heard is, among other things, to embody Article 30 UUD 1945, became the starting point for other settings in the field of national security, or to ensure that issues of national security is not just a problem for the defense department but also other ministries.

In other words, the drafting of a law on national security is intended to "once seized a paddle, two and three also exceeded". That is why the draft Law on National Security prepared by the Ministry of Defence often face a variety of resistance, both from those who distorted it as an internal security act, those who want to maintain the status quo, and / or those who would use it as an instrument to blow away the hustle and bustlepolitics, for example, the threat of judicial review if the National Security Bill was not in accordance with the spirit and command of the constitution.

Finally, Build a system that is comprehensive national security is a must,so it is with formulating strategy and handling integrative synergistic. The blue print of national security on three levels should be formulated with the same blueprint in the realm of "national welfare". Certainly the blueprint will at least consist of the national security objectives, the nature and principles of national security, the scope of national security, and management of national security. Being a political question of whether a law on national security will have to give the frame on all of the elements or just focus on the management aspects of national security issues.