ISIS crimes from Makar, Terrorism, to Human Rights Violations

Three Crimes of ISIS Starting to Makar, Violations of Human Rights and Terrorism When there was a discourse of repatriation of ex-members of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), PBNU through its Chairman KH Said Aqil Siroj was most keen to reject it. He conveyed it in various forums, in public lectures among NU itself, to his guests and to the media. Finally, Kiai Said conveyed this to the Indonesian Foreign Minister.

Kiai Said asserted that repatriating ex-ISIS combatants for harm was greater than the benefits. Even the Qur'an commanded the Prophet Muhammad to drive out people who make noise in Medina. For Kiai Said, the verse is a strong basis for not accepting them. Just making noise can be sentenced to exile, let alone this to kill, rob, terrorize and want to destroy the country. PBNU Deputy Secretary General, H.M. Imdadun Rahmat gave a detailed explanation about PBNU's attitude, which was so stubbornly unwilling to accept the former ISIS. According to Imdad, until now, Indonesia does not yet have a powerful mechanism to deal with people like the former ISIS. The proof, when 700 former Afghan combatants returned to Indonesia, the bomb explosion could not be avoided. According to Imdad, supporters of ISIS ideology are far more radical than ex-Afghan combatants, so the level of danger is also far greater. Because of various groups' rejection of the discourse of returning ISIS, the government knocked the hammer, deciding not to accept ex-ISIS citizens back to the country. This decision was taken exactly one day after the meeting of Kiai Said and the Minister of Foreign Affairs at PBNU. To find out who and how ISIS members in terms of law and humanity, Abdullah Alawi from NU Online interviewed M. Imdadaun Rahmat. The following excerpt: What about the government issue that gives the possibility of former ISIS members returning to the country? First we have to clearly understand who the people who asked for repatriation were. They are people who consciously left Indonesia by going against the law, leaving Indonesia by manipulating their permission to leave. There are work permits, tourist permits, but in fact went to Syria and then joined ISIS. It was reported that they had burned his passport and took allegiance and oath of allegiance to being an ISIS citizen with different roles. There are those who become soldiers, fight with weapons, others become chefs, equipment, and become wounded nurses. This means they are part of ISIS's war activities. So indeed the indications are strong they are no longer eligible to be called as Indonesian citizens. That has a very strong basis because indeed from the beginning this group did not recognize the validity of Indonesia. Our government is called the Thaguth, the country is called an infidel state and they are against the existence of this country.

So normatively, they no longer want to become Indonesian citizens and they become foreign troops. Well, in Law No. 12 of 2006 concerning Citizenship, one of the reasons people lose their citizenship is when they become members of a foreign army. This is found in article 23 letter d. There is no mention here of a foreign country. Indeed in letters e and f there is the word country. But in the letter d said it was enough to "enter the service of foreign troops". So, normatively, their status is ISIS citizens who are "stateless" without citizenship. After ISIS collapsed they became "stateless" people. Secondly, who are they in terms of law and human rights? They are part of an organization that is involved in violence and war and commits human rights violations. Lots of research and monitoring results of UN agencies that can be trusted that the practices carried out by ISIS are already outside the limits of humanitarian law. So, it can be called into the category of war crimes. For example how they should treat civilians, people who have surrendered or taken prisoners and so on. There are rules and they don't pay attention to them. So from a legal standpoint they have committed many violations. So, ISIS is a war criminal. In terms of human rights, human rights, what ISIS has done is included in the category of perpetrators of crimes against humanity, committing gross human rights violations. There are two gross human rights violations against humanity or crimes against humanity and genocide. According to a study team formed by the National Human Rights Commission, when I was the Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission, ISIS crime was analyzed with a case matrix that is commonly used in assessing whether a crime belongs to the category of serious violations or not, it fits all, fulfills these elements . There was an element of attack, obviously they were aggression, an attack on the civilian population. Those attacked were not only the military, but civilians, women and children. There is a systematic element. There is a leadership policy. Indeed the pattern is so. Perform ways to win the war by using actions that fall into the category of crime against humanity. Massive. We know, it is massive because the territory they control is vast and covers two countries. Structured, systematic and massive elements are fulfilled. Then what is the element of action? Clearly, killing of civilians. We find a lot of evidence collected by the United Nations, in video format and so on. There are murders, disappearances (kidnappings), detention and imprisonment of people without trial, without due process, rape, sex slavery, murder of children. It fulfills all the criteria of acts of crime against humanity, and that is not a few victims. So that was earlier, structured, massive, and systematic. Even in certain cases related, for example to the minority Yazidi they have entered into the category of genocide. Because Yazidi was considered a non-Muslim, enemy, he became a special target to be destroyed. So, if the UN later brings ISIS to international court, both of them can be crimes against humanity and genocide. Crime against humanity to anyone, all of its enemies and genocide to the Yazidi group.

Whose Yazidi group?

Yazidi is a Kurdish Shia sect who according to ISIS is no longer Muslim. His children were slaughtered, his women made into sex slaves. It has reached the level of genocide, which is destroying ethnicity, etnic cleansing. Now, from the legal side, they are the rebels. This ISIS is a rebel who plots against two legitimate states at once, to Syria and to Iraq. In international law, in the norm of international law, legitimate countries have the authority to enforce laws based on the laws in force in each country. So, their status, it's not only refugees, but also perpetrators involved in crime against humanity, genocide, treason to a country, and also involved in terrorism. Because the UN agencies also issued a statement that ISIS is a terrorist organization. Now, this is the status of ISIS. How are Indonesian citizens involved in what ISIS did in the three crimes; human rights crimes, terrorism crimes, and treason crimes. They are suspected perpetrators. Then there must be a trial against them. Later the court will decide each other's crime and sentence. There are adult men, women there are children. This can be stratified by its role. For men involved in holding weapons, what role will they see. For women it needs to be seen. Should the woman not be involved? Not like that. Because in the latest developments, women's participation in violence and terror is not only passive, but active. Women become special legions who also commit violence and crime. Children, can also be hit. So, women and children do not necessarily have impunity, impunity, impunity. Even though in human rights, the perpetrators of crimes against women and children receive special measures to alleviate them. The treatment of children is lighter compared to adults, women are lighter than men. We must put their position in the right position. It is true that they are refugees because currently the country they support collapsed and they came they came to refugees, registered as refugees, but refugee status did not eliminate their criminal status. Therefore, the legal case was settled first.

Where to settle their legal cases? Chances are yes those three. One, the UN raised the ISIS case in an international court, whether it was war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide. Or second, the local governments of Syria and Iraq. Give him the authority to enforce the laws of their country, according to the laws they have whether they are convicted of treason or convicted of terrorism. They have their own mechanism which must be respected by Indonesia. That is an honorable way in relations between countries. So, not just because Indonesian citizens, then we save them without law enforcement. It shows the international world that Indonesia practices impunity. Now, if the UN agency, for one reason or another, they can not prosecute this former Indonesian citizen combatant in Syria, or the local government of Syria or Iraq can not prosecute, because of conditions that are not yet stable, Indonesia can take steps in the legal process first. Can you or no? What can you do? With allegations of gross human rights violations. If it goes for treason, it can't, because ISIS did it there, Syria and Iraq. Now, with gross human rights violations of law enforcement we can reach other countries' jusrisdiction. Indonesian citizens who have committed serious violations in other countries can be investigated, investigated, prosecuted and tried here. That's the first choice. Second, use the Terrorism Law. The new Terrorism Law provides a door to articles that can ensnare people, Indonesian citizens who commit acts of terrorism in other countries. So, I really understand why PBNU refused the repatriation of former ISIS combatants. I strongly support that attitude. Because there are rights of fellow human beings, in religious terms the rights of adamy are required, which must be upheld first. They were involved in murder, imprisonment without trial, rape, slavery, and it was all done massively. The rights of the victims are called adamy rights. The law must first be upheld. Now only to ask later, what are the obligations of the state in the process of law enforcement? Yes advocating for Indonesian citizens, providing legal assistance. What order? In order for their crimes to be decided by the court as fairly as possible, no more no less. That is the duty of the state to provide assistance so that they be tried fairly.

What if the citizen involved feels trapped?

That later will prove and decide it is a court. Not us, not the perpetrator's confession. Because there are facts that are enough to be the basis of their allegations of participating in a crime, it must be processed by law. Even though they admitted that they were forced to, that proved the court. So, a sense of humanity and protection of citizens is a noble value, but it must be upheld properly. If the Indonesian government's attitude is there a signal to repatriate them? I have no right to judge. Until there is info to cook for ISIS repatriation? If in my opinion it remains, first enforce the law, the rights of victims, the rights of adamy. The second homework, after they could be repatriated, either because they were not proven in court, or forgiven by the Syrian and Iraqi governments and so on, only later will we see the benefits and mafsadatnya. Obviously, they are people who are exposed to our ideology of violence, terror and anti-national principles. I do not want to judge the attitude of the government, I just want to say a perspective that I believe is right and beneficial for this country. Do not rush to take action because this is a big risk. Learn from the experience of the emergence of a series of terrorist acts from 2000 to the present day due to the terror network that was formed after the return of ex-Afghan combatants. His name is Jamaah Islamiyah under the spiritual leadership of Ustadz Abu Bakar Ba'asyir who is affiliated to Al-Qaeda. These are people who oppose our country's system, then migrate to Afghanistan in the name of defending Afghanistas from Russia. There they also trained and made preparations (i'dad) to fight against terrorism in Indonesia. Now, the government experiences tremendous difficulties both in terms of counteracting their actions, counteracting the ideology they spread and healing the radical ideologies that have entered their minds and souls. So I say Indonesia is overwhelmed. The proof is that the series of bombings continues. That means the state does not have enough ability to save its citizens from the cruelty of these people. These groups also have influence in society. Many people who support and have the same ideology as them, the principles of nationalism. From there they want this country to dissolve and be replaced with a new form within the framework of the Greater Malay Islamic State or within the framework of the Khilafah State. If JI only covers Indonesia, Malaysia, South Philippines, South Thailand, Brunei and Timor Leste, that will be transformed into a Greater Malay Islamic State. There are more broadly, want the khilafah. Want this country to disperse, then replace it with a new one. In what way? By means of violence. Violence against whom? Against anyone who stands in their way. What kind of violence? From the most lenient, verbal violence, to carrying out acts of terror. What is an act of terror? An act of cruelty with a high degree of killing or staging that has a wide-ranging impact in a brutal manner and causes massive fear. That is terrorism and they use methods ranging from soft threats to terror. Well, this causes all citizens to become potential targets. The potential target that I mean is, the ideology of violence they have, the ideology of jihad, justifies the blood of most of the Indonesian citizens. If ISIS members were repatriated to Indonesia,

what would the ex-Afghan combatants possibly do?

Most likely yes. Let alone after they returned home with the provision of training and new terrorism, wong when his friend went to Syria, ISIS sympathizers who here just carried out an attack. The Mako Brimob case, the attack in Surabaya in Mapoltabes, and several churches, followed by the one in Medan, and others. That was done by Jemaah Ansorud Daulah, JAD which was affiliated with ISIS. JADini is a new organ from JI that was led by Oman Abdurrahman who was a student of Ustadz Abubakar Ba'asyir. When the ISIS style came up harder, they considered the ideology of Ustadz Abubakar Ba'asyir to be less violent so they sought even harder. Then came JAD as a fraction of JI. This ISIS follower is more dangerous than JI. Why? They have the ideology of takfiri, salafi takfiri. This new genre in the ideology of terror in Indonesia and the Islamic world. Al-Qaeda and its branches in Indonesia are called salafi jihadi. ISIS is salafi takfiri. ISIS itself is a fraction of Al-Qaidahlho. So JAD, which sent Indonesians to Syria, is a fraction of JI too, but it has brought a new ideology, salafi takfiri. What's the difference? If the ideology of jihadists, the teachings of Ustadz Abubakar Ba'asyir, this country is thaguth, must be rebelled or opposed. Then the people of the government are their enemies and their halal blood. That includes high-ranking officials who make decisions. Well, what is not a high ranking official? That's two statuses. He is an infidel and a Muslim. You are a member of the police, but your rank under the captain, yes, sergeant, or soldier, is an individual Muslim, may not be killed, because you are forced to obey the same commander, boss, but when wearing a uniform then you are infidels. So, kafir in terms of status, as a state apparatus he is kafir. So do not become a target. The targets are the president, parliament, ministers, high-ranking officials and police or military officers. Well, ordinary citizens who are Muslims are not halal blood, should not be attacked. Besides that, the only ones who can be attacked are non-Muslims, whoever they are are enemies. Also the West, America, Europe, Russia, Australia and so on, are all enemies, called distant enemies. If JI is prioritized attacking distant enemies first, when it is settled, then close enemies, namely Muslims who are considered apostates and the Muslim government itself. So many of the JI attacks were churches, foreigners, foreign hotels, foreign symbols, foreign embassies. Rarely attacks on officials because this is number two. But when they did the bombing, for example in Bali, there were East Javanese people, Muslims who were killed, why they didn't apologize. They say, yes we save them, soon enter heaven and they will be eternal in heaven because they are part of the struggle. How about takfiri? Same, forbidding this country. In all Muslim countries, the 58 members of the OIC are the states of the war that must be attacked and torn down and replaced with Islamic states or khilafahs. The difference is that the Salafi Takfiri have no elite or non-elite status, all state apparatus are halal. Therefore, what they attacked, ranging from ordinary police at the posts, were attacked by bombing, shot, stabbed to large people like Pak Wiranto. Because in their eyes everything is halal blood. All Muslims are no longer haram blood, all halal, except those who join them. So not picky. Another difference is, if JI is a distant enemy first, non-Muslims are attacked first, the West is attacked first, then the people themselves. If JAD reverses, the enemy is close first, terrorizing his own country, controlling the country first, then if he has power, the enemy will be far away. More extreme, more radical. This is why the ex-ISIS combatant is more dangerous than the ex-Afghan combatant because it is undergoing a process of radicalization.

Well, in Indonesia, a lot of his subordinates Abubakar Ba'asyir joined ISIS because of the failure of the de-radicalization process in Indonesia. They were arrested, tried, sentenced to prison, uh, instead of recovering, they even invited their friends to the same ideology and their tendency to escalate went up to be extra radical and very extreme. Because, for people who are exposed to radical ideology or terror, the more radical the more interesting. The harder the more virtuous. The challenge is there. If Indonesia only handles JI groups helter-skelter, it is proven by the insistent bombardment. JI members, both those imprisoned and those who have been released, are also difficult to get on the right path. Many cases of terrorist prisoners' residifis, after leaving join again. Their numbers are increasing, because there are new recruits. The counter of radicalization and deradicalization we have been very heavy. This will add another 600 people from Syria, that's not an easy thing. Well, obviously, as a person who is engaged in this field, I researched for a long time, I taught in terrorism studies at the University of Indonesia, yes I came across with former JI combatants, with friends who did de-radicalization both from the BNPT and institutions NGO, I conclude that the counter radicalization and deradicalization that we are doing have failed. Our activist friends in this field also admit that our achievements have only made them unemployed, not doing charity. So, persuading in various ways, threatening in various ways, building, yes, various efforts that make them unable to carry out their actions, just disengagement, but their ideology does not shift. Is BNPT recognized? BNPT activists admit it, but I haven't heard BNPT officially disclose it is impossible to say that. The challenge is still heavy. Of which ISIS and ex-combatant Afghanistan? Afghanistan, in the 700s or 600s, is not much different. Now, in terms of deradicalization, what method can eliminate the ideology of someone who has ISIS? Can ideology not be eradicated? Factually, there is a process of enlightenment. Repentant terrorists exist. Terrorists who do admit, "I'm on the wrong path" consciously realize then take the moderate path. There is, but not much. Many fail because of this, the initial difficulty is because they do not trust anyone, except the leader. So, there is a dividing door. What he hears from others he will not receive. Like we fill water, we close the bottle. So it's only wet outside. Now, while their friends who have experienced enlightenment and are expected to resuscitate their former friends experience the same blockade because they have been labeled as traitors. So, someone from the Ministry of Religion or MUI kiai came there, he was only listened to, but not respected, and was not trusted as a teacher. That is why the process of deradicalization through the method of enlightenment of religious propositions does not work. Unless they do their own reflection process, and that's difficult.

In addition, the existing punishment also does not make a deterrent. Why? Because this is the weakness of our prison system. Many terrorist prisoners are gathered by fellow terrorists. So, they actually strengthen each other and they can be visited by anyone, including those who act as ideologists. So, imprisonment cannot tame ideology, it can only isolate ideology a little, or reduce the intensity of contact with people or their supporters outside. However, between prisoners of terrorism, imprisonment instead becomes an arena for preaching, mutually reinforcing, radicalizing each other. So, the military became more recidivist and even experienced a high escalation in its level of radicalism, and even became a teacher for other maritime prisoners. In fact, there were a lot of new actors who proved that he was a student of prisoners, prisoners of terrorism. Our imprisonment has instead produced new potential terrorists because we do not have an ideal imprisonment system so that the deradicalization programs have not yet produced results and are increasingly heavy. Why do you achieve accomplishment management? Yes, because they can only be invited to make peace in the sense of "taken heart" with the economic assistance approach. "Instead of you doing charity again, later you will go to jail again, sorry for your child, sorry for your wife, yes you already repent, no need to play" firecrackers "again" like that. So, this is only disengagement, making them just not happy to do the work. This isn't permanent. Once they feel left out, play "firecrackers" again. What is effective to eliminate their ideology? Yes, there is not yet one big case which can then be used as an example of a success story. What other countries are considered successful in deradicalizing the system? I am not there yet, I must ask BNPT, which is funded by the state, to conduct the study. This is the homework that we hold until now, the burden that we still bear, especially if we add 600 from ISIS. There is something more dangerous. There is a discourse they will be fostered, de-radicalized. Remember the existing de-radicalization pattern, heavy. Now, do we want to adopt a more intensive pattern like China did by including them in deradicalization camps. As we treat the citizens of Wuhan who were suspected of carrying the corona virus, they were quarantined. Well, is Indonesia ready to be paraded with accusations of human rights violations like what China did in the Uyghur. In the Uyghur there is a resistance group called the East Turkistan Liberation Front, which carries out terror, attacks, bombings, suicide bombings. They were intensely radicalized in such camps. Crowded right, accusations of human rights violations? This is the difficulty, it's not easy. Especially the discourse of hiring former ISIS combatants in SOEs. I wonder. Wong, who was imprisoned, could still teach others to be radical and even become terrorists, but instead he wanted to be employed at a BUMN. Adding to the threat of SOEs, now in SOEs there is such a broad view of intolerance and radicalization that spreads to its employees. Please read the results of the research, don't keep it in a drawer. Regarding ISIS children and women, what is the more appropriate handling for them? What are the limits? This indeed must be sought a mechanism that is fair to all. I said earlier that we were unilaterally sending them back to practice impunity.

What does impunity mean? Harming the right to justice of the victims. The language of religion is adamy rights. If for example the government goes there, through a diplomatic process asking for forgiveness for women and children, then the Syrian or Iraqi governments grant, please send the children and women home, please be picked up. That means the right to justice has been resolved on the part of the victims, the right of adamynya those who lost their families, children, wives, lost the future. The authority of the jurisdiction of the people must also be respected. If you don't have it, don't do it. For Indonesia to set an example, this should set a good precedent for international relations. An example is that Indonesia is a country that is responsible for the behavior of its citizens who are treasonous, violate human rights, and become terrorists in other countries. For the people of Indonesia, this is important to be a lesson that going to another country, being a rebel in another country, being a criminal in another country is not impunity. There are consequences of difficulties that must be faced. Well, on the contrary if we play carelessly like that, the education given to citizens is the opposite. Next time if there is a rebellion in another country, just go there, later if it is pressed, lost, then it will be repatriated, safe, comfortable, free, given a job at BUMN. Can be a cleric in SOEs, undermine the state while still being paid by the state. Yes, those who are unemployed have joined radical groups, going there and going back to being a worker at BUMN. Is that delicious? Is that so?

Well, now we see the current conditions, there are around 200 Indonesian citizens who register as residents of UN refugee camps, info from the Indonesian branch of UNHCR, women and children in difficult situations. You see, the UN agencies are responsible in the name of the legality of the UN serving anyone, who is wounded treated by the red cross, who has been displaced into the refugee camp. From the side of UNHCR, we have shouted, we are not strong enough to serve so many people. They ask the countries concerned to take it. But yes, take it, don't let it go without the diplomacy process, it must be done with diplomacy in the context of forgiveness. If this is related to women and children, if later the country concerned is forgiven, through the UN agency, please take it home. Formally, women and children, law enforcement is complete. That is if no victim or other party is suing. Including the baby too huh? People are treated according to their actions. The baby is passive, depending on the mother. Is it then when the baby is brought home, is the mother not? It's not that simple. Babies must be with their mothers. If the mother has a problem, the baby is frowned. That is why many babies who live in prison because they can not be separated from the mother who was convicted. The baby is not wrong, but he follows his mother, the source of his life. So, there are problems that cannot be released between children and adults. Our children brought here, who nurtured him? The problem is complex. It must be calculated carefully too.

Source: https://www.nu.or.id/