Denying Atrocity? Making Sense of the 1998 Jakarta Mass Rape of Ethnic Chinese Women as Genocide

AuthorWinibaldus Stefanus Mere
Denying Atrocity? Making Sense of the 1998 Jakarta Mass Rape of
Ethnic Chinese Women as Genocide
Winibaldus Stefanus Mere
Eighteen years ago, hundreds of ethnic Chinese women were raped during three days of mob violence
in May 1998 in Jakarta and other areas of Indonesia prior to the downfall of the Soeharto regime. No
legal action has been taken to hold the perpetrators to a ccount and to provide justice to the victims.
What has happened so far is that despite the evidence of the tragedy having been documented and
publicized by reliable sources, the government, military and police, as well as some religious groups
that were accused of being responsible for the atrocities have strongly denied the occurrence of the mass
rape. (They instead took advantage of victim’s reluctance of publicly coming forward with their claims
as evidence that the mass rape tragedy was mere a rumour wi thout proof. Furthermore, the stories
provided by some victims to humanitarian and human rights activists were labelled as lies that were
nothing more than political propaganda to discredit Indonesia as a nation.) Members of the Indonesian
parliament and Supreme Court have even suggested that the tragedy, including mass rape of ethnic
Chinese, should be considered as ordinary crimes. In contrast to this suggestion, this paper argues that
the Jakarta mass rape tragedy was not only a crime against humanity, but also a crime of genocide, as
a particular group of Chinese descent women were intentionally targeted with intent to destroy them
because of their ethnicity, race and religion.
Introduction
Nineteen years have passed sinc e the tragic mass rapes of hundreds of ethnic Chinese women in
three days of mob violence in May 1998 in Jakarta and other areas of Indonesia prior to the
downfall of the Soeharto regime. However, th e manner in which the government and the courts
have previously and c ontinue to han dle the atrocities remains mysterious and opaque. This is
because despite evidence of the tragedy having been documented and publicised by reliable
sources;
12
the Government, military, police, along with certain religious groups allegedly
responsible for the atrocities have strongly refuted the occurrence of mass rapes.
3
Instead, these
groups took advantage of victims’ reluctance to come forward, and the reluctance of witnesses to
the tragedy to come forward due to security concerns, as counter-evidence to instead counter-
claim that the mass rapes were mere rumour without proof, and further labelled the stories
Editors Note: All names and identities have been modified for security purposes.
1
Tim Relawan Kemanusiaan, ‘Dokumen Awal No 3 Tentang Perkosaan Masal dalam Rentetan
Kerusuhan Puncak Kebiadaban dalam Kehidupan Bangsa’, 13 J uly 1998 (The Volunteers Team for
Humanity, “Early Documentation No. 3, the Rapes in the Series of Riots: The Climax of an Uncivilized
Act of the Nation Life), Sandyawan Su mardi, ; Joint
Fact-Finding Team, ‘Final Report of The Joint Fact-Finding Team on 13–15 May 1998 Riot’, 23 October
1998
2
Ibid.
3
Sri Muryono, ‘Benarkah Terjadi Pemerkosaan Massal?’ (‘Is it true that mass rape took place?’) Antara,
2 August 1998; Amy Chew, ‘Indonesia Military Says No Proof of Riot Rapes’, Reuters, 29 June 1998
provided by some victims to humanitarian and human rights activists as lies that were nothing
more than political propaganda to discredit Indonesia as a nation.
4
As a result, it is not the victims or fact-finding agencies that have determined the truth of the rapes,
but powerful criminal actors who by doing so are actually trying to obscure the fact, meaning,
and magnitude of the criminal acts of rape; not only to eliminate the record thereof but also to
avoid any legal accountability. As the title of an article in the Jakarta Post correctly points out,
“Power dictates whether evidence o f rapes exists”.
5
Despite clear evidence pointing to instances
of rape, as this power dictated that the evidence did not exist, members of the Indonesian
Parliament and Supreme Court have even suggested that the May tragedy, including the m ass
rapes of ethnic Chinese, should be considered ordinary crimes.
6
In contrast to this suggestion, some have considered these rapes crimes against humanity.
78
While
there is some truth in this contention, this article goes even further and argues that the Jakarta
mass rapes were crimes of genocide, where a particular group of women of Chinese descent were
intentionally targeted with the intent to destroy them because of their ethnicity, race, and religion.
This intent is the core aspect that distinguishes genocide from crimes against humanity, an d will
constitute the main concern of this paper. The paper begins with an overview of the general
understanding of genocide, compared with crimes against humanity. This is followed by an
exploration of the notion of rape as a crime against humanity in comparison with rape as genocide
in the light of the relevant conventions, statutes, and jurisprudence. The paper then points out and
examines the genocidal aspects of the Jakarta mass rape tragedy, focusing on the actus reus and
mens rea requirements of genocide.
Understanding Genocide and Crimes against Humanity
The notion of genocide as an international crime first emerged following reactions of shock toward
the evil of the Holocaust, itself aimed to exterminate a particular ethnic minority during the Second
World War. Even though the practice of the extermination of national or ethnic minorities was not
new, it was only in 1944 that the term ‘genocide’ was first introduced by Raphael Lamkin to
describe the attempted extermination of the Jewish people by the Nazis as specific type of atrocity
4
James T. Siegel, ‘Thoughts on the Violence of May 13 and 14, 1998, in Jakarta’ in Benedict R. Anderson
(ed.), Violence and the State in Soeharto’s Indonesia (Cornell South East Asia Publication 2001) 114; Human
Rights Watch, ‘The Damaging Deba tes on the Rapes’ (1998)
Accessed 25 October 2017.
5
Julia I. Suryakusuma, ‘Power Dictates whether Evidence of Rapes Exists’, The Jakar ta Post, 17
September 1998
6
Ridwan Max Sijabat, ‘Six years after, May 1998 tragedy still unresolved’, The Jakarta Post, 13 May
2004.
7
Steve Kuan, Alien Tort Claims Act Classifying Peacetime Rape as an International Human Rights
Violation’ 22 Hous. J. Int’l L. 451(2000).
8
‘Indonesia: Stop Scapegoating Minorities, Ordeals of Ethnic Chinese Women’ (1998) Asian Human
Rights Commission: Asia Pacific Solidarity Network http://www.asia-pacific-
solidarity.net/southeastasia/indonesia/netnews/1998/and26_v2.htm> accessed 26 October 2017.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT