EMPOWERING ACCESS TO JUSTICE |

MAJU

ANNUAL REPORT (INCLUSIVE OF QUARTER 15)

OCTOBER 1, 2018

TO

SEPTEMBER 30, 2019

ON NOVEMBER 1, 2019 SUBMITTED BY:

2

COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT OVERVIEW Name of Grantee : The Asia Foundation Title of Program : MAJu – eMpowering Access to Justice USAID Cooperative Agreement No. : AID-497-A-16-000002-MAJu Period of Award : March 14, 2016 – March 13, 2021 Total Amount of this Program :US $10,000,000 ($7,400,000 DRG Office funds,

$1,500,000 Environment Office funds; $1,600,000 Health Office funds)

Obligated Amount :US$ 9,517,382 ($7,716,816 DRG Office funds,

$600,566 Environment Office funds, $1,200,000 Health Office funds)

3

KEY INDIVIDUALS USAID: Democracy & Governance : Walter L. Doetsch Agreement Officer : Ms. Alexis McGinness Agreement Officer’s Technical Representative : Mr. Dondy Sentya The Asia Foundation: Asia Foundation Country Representative : Dr. Sandra Hamid Chief of Party : Ms. Renata Arianingtyas Deputy Chief of Party : Mr. Rino Subagyo

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS 4

A. PROJECT BACKGROUND 6

B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8

C. FINANCIAL 10

D. IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECT ACTIVITIES/OUTPUTS 10

OUTCOME 1: Increased Access to Justice for Poor and Marginalized Citizens 10 Intermediate Outcome 1.1: Improve the Capacity of Civil Society Organizations to Protect the Rights of MAJu Target Groups 11 Output/Activity 1.1.1: Provide Experiential Learning and Internships with Universities 11 Output/Activity 1.1.2: Provide Technical Support for National Non-Governmental Organizations 12 Output/Activity 1.1.3: Promote Collaboration and Cross Learning Between Legal Aid Organizations and Civil Society Organizations 13 Output/Activity 1.1.4: Promote Joint Advocacy between Legal Aid Organizations and Civil Society Organizations 18 Output/Activity 1.1.5: Embed Paralegals and Human Rights Defenders in Legal Aid Organizations 25 Output/Activity 1.1.6: Integrate Gender throughout MAJu – Not Just in Programs Specifically Focused on Women 27 Output/Activity 1.1.7: Support Access to Legal Identity 29 Output/Activity 1.1.8: Encourage Pro-Bono Services by Private Law Firms and Law Schools 30 Output/Activity 1.1.9: Strengthen the Organizational Capacity of Civil Society Organizations and Legal Aid Organizations 34 Intermediate Outcome 1.2: Increase the Number of Legal Aid Organizations Accredited to Provide Legal Aid 35 Output/Activity 1.2.1: Facilitate BPHN Accreditation 36 Output/Activity 1.2.2: Widen the Funding Base for Civil Society Organizations and Legal Aid Organizations 38 Intermediate Outcome 1.3: Strengthen the Capacity of Civil Society Organizations to Develop Applications and IT Solutions 40 Output/Activity 1.3.1: Develop or Improve Case Tracking/Reporting Systems 41 Intermediate Outcome 1.4: Develop the Capacity of Provincial Universities to Provide Quality Training and Research Services to Legal Aid Providers and Human Rights Defenders 41 Output/Activity 1.4.1: Expand the Indonesian Network for Clinical Legal Education (INCLE) and Link Its Members with Civil Society Organizations Working with MAJu Target Groups 42

OUTCOME 2: Strengthened Ability of the Government of Indonesia and State-Auxiliary Bodies to Protect Citizen Rights Via Evidence-Based Decision Making 43 Intermediate Outcome 2.1: Increase the Quality and Management of Data on Human Rights Violations against Target Groups through a Unified Database 46

5

Output/Activity 2.1.1: Ensure an Integrated Human Rights Database is institutionalized 47 Output/Activity 2.1.2: Foster Ownership and Engagement across Key Institutions 49 Output/Activity 2.1.3: Improve Data Management Capacity of Other MAJu Partners 50 Intermediate Outcome 2.2: Strengthen the Information Management and Analytical Capacity of the Government of Indonesia, State-Auxiliary Bodies, and Civil Society Organizations to Produce Reliable and Verifiable Human Rights Data 51 Output/Activity 2.2.1: Improve the Analytical Capacity of Komnas HAM, Legal Aid Organizations, and Civil Society Organizations 51 Output/Activity 2.2.2: Enable a Dialogue within the Government of Indonesia about Data Findings 52 Intermediate Outcome 2.3: Increase Awareness of Citizen Rights within the Government of Indonesia, State-Auxiliary Bodies, and the Private Sector 53 Output/Activity 2.3.1: Use Data and Analysis to Help the Government of Indonesia to Address Specific Human Rights Capacities 55 Output/Activity 2.3.2: Encourage Private Sector Involvement 56 Output/Activity 2.3.3: Utilize Data for Advocacy and Public Campaigns 56

OUTCOME 3: An Improved Enabling Environment for Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) to Effectively Promote Protection of Citizen Rights 58 Intermediate Outcome 3.1: Develop the Knowledge and Capacity of Local Civil Society Organizations on the Evolving Regulatory Environment for Non-Governmental Organizations 59 Output/Activity 3.1.1: Broaden and Strengthen the Network of Civil Society Organizations Addressing the Regulatory Environment for Non-Governmental Organizations 62 Intermediate Outcome 3.2: Build Networks among Local and Jakarta-Based Civil Society Organizations 65 Output/Activity 3.2.1: Enhance Informed Exchanges and Advocacy on Freedom of Association 65 Intermediate Outcome 3.3: Build Alliances among Civil Society Organizations, Academics, and the Government of Indonesia to Advocate for an Improved Enabling Environment 66 Output/Activity 3.3.1: Encourage Practical Action to Improve the Enabling Environment 66

E. MONITORING, EVALUATION, AND LEARNING 68

F. ACTIVITY LOCATION DATA 69

G. CONCLUSION – GOING FORWARD 69

ANNEX 1 – APPROVED REVISED M&E INDICATORS 71

ANNEX 2 – MOU BETWEEN LBH APIK JAKARTA AND PASAR MINGGU HEALTH CENTER 73

ANNEX 3 – REPORT ON NATIONAL LEGAL AID CONFERENCE I 79

ANNEX 4 – REPORT ON NATIONAL LEGAL AID CONFERENCE II 107

6

ANNEX 5 – EXAMPLE OF REASSIGN OF LEGAL AID STATE FUND 129

APPENDIX I – ACTIVITY LOCATION DATA 131 ATTACHMENT II – ACTIVITY LOCATION DATA

A. Project Background The eMpowering Access to Justice (MAJu) project seeks to enhance the ability of marginalized citizens to access justice, and the capacity of the Government of Indonesia (GOI) to protect their rights. Indonesia’s National Strategy on Access to Justice defines access to justice as “a condition and process whereby the State guarantees the fulfillment of citizens’ basic rights afforded by the 1945 Constitution and the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” Therefore, Indonesia has an advanced regulatory framework to uphold human rights but faces challenges in implementation. MAJu partners with strategic legal aid and civil society organizations, as well as with key GOI counterparts focusing on four discrete target groups: (1) religious and ethnic minorities (REM); (2) indigenous people; (3) marginalized women and (4) other marginalized individuals. High levels of poverty in these groups is attributable to stigma and discrimination, and human rights abuses include, but are not limited to, gender-based violence, restrictions on freedoms of association and expression, the lack of legal identity, limited rights over land and natural resources, and discrimination against those receiving public resources. For individual marginalized/member key population of HIV/AIDs and REM communities, exclusion and discrimination is often fueled by religious groups that shape conservative political discourse. For indigenous communities, challenges arise when private sector business interests collide with forest-dependent communities. For women, deep-seated gender discrimination is a historical issue.

7

Data on human rights is scattered across multiple GOI agencies and ministries as well as across civil society organizations (CSOs), and therefore it is often inaccessible or unreliable. The quality and scope of human rights data varies by issue, with data stove-piped across various government institutions. Furthermore, the disparate management of data and access to it makes comprehensive analysis difficult and puts into question the integrity of the data. CSOs play a crucial role in promoting human rights and access to justice. They also play an important watchdog role and provide crucial inputs to support policy development. However, their capacity is often stretched as they respond to a range of problems and challenges inherent to Indonesia’s evolving democracy. For CSOs to operate effectively, they need better data, improved advocacy skills, and an environment that supports innovative thinking. CSOs also face constraints in their management capacities and lack access to stable funding which limit the services they can provide to marginalized communities. Development solutions to the human rights and access to justice issues faced by Indonesia’s marginalized communities are not simple. Those who need assistance the most lack power. Institutional and political resistance to change is significant, and too many of those who can make a difference are disengaged given the broader contestation of political power ongoing in Indonesia. Through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), MAJu has been well-vetted with central government counterparts, and this legitimacy is a major asset to the project. The Asia Foundation (TAF) has been working closely with USAID to ensure ongoing support from central government ministries responsible for access to justice and human rights. TAF also puts emphasis on ensuring that a strong gender perspective is integrated into MAJu by considering the roles, needs, and social status of men, women, and other marginalized individuals who may have different gender identity individuals at each phase of program design, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. MAJu’s activities are organized geographically and target all provinces in Java, and Papua where the USAID LESTARI project is working. MAJu’s target districts in West Java also include Jakarta and areas near Jakarta such as Depok, Bogor, Tangerang, and Bekasi. In Central Java, activities also expand to Yogyakarta. In Papua, the project will work in areas where the USAID-LESTARI project is active, particularly in Jayapura and Cyclops. MAJu is partnering with strategic CSOs in the geographic areas mentioned above, as well as with GOI ministries and agencies. The partners outlined in the below table are recipients of grants and contracts, beneficiaries of MAJu’s assistance, and/or collaborating stakeholders in MAJu achievements. The table is updated quarterly.

Central Government

National/ International

Jakarta Bogor Depok Bekasi

West Java Central Java

East Java

Papua

Komnas HAM YLBHI LBH Jakarta LBH Bandung

LBH Semarang

LBH Surabaya

AlDP

8

National Legal Development Agency

PERADI

LBH APIK Jakarta

DPC PERADI Tasikmalaya

LBH Yogyakarta

LBH Papua

Ministry of Law and Human Rights

Law Faculty of University of Atmajaya

LBH Masyarakat

Rifka Annisa

Komnas Perempuan Perkumpulan Suara Kita

Hukum Online

Ombudsman GWL-INA LKK NU

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

YAPPIKA

Ministry of Finance ELSAM

Ministry of Environment

MaPPI FHUI

Ministry of Home Affairs

PERADI

AMAN

Law Faculty of University of Indonesia

Forum Pengada Layanan

Impartial Mediator Network

IICT

Ogilvy

Table 1- MAJu GOI Counterparts, Contributing CSO Partners, and Grantees by Location

B. Executive Summary Among the most historic and significant moments in Indonesia’s justice sector took place during this reporting period: the attempt of parliament to pass the revision of Indonesia’s Criminal Code. After fifteen years in the making, the bill was pushed forward only to meet fierce opposition from students as well as civil society organizations. The main concern of those opposing the bill is the potential further limitation on civil liberty, and the strong punitive regime of the bill. The Foundation’s partners and larger networks of CSOs actively sought what otherwise could be limited access to monitor the deliberation, provided input to protect democratic principles, provided recommendations for changes to the RKUHP. They focused on Living Law, the oppressing articles on blasphemy, as well as promoted alternative sentencing. In particular the

9

advocated for better protection of the rights of the MAJu target groups. The network actively created public discussions and conducted public campaigns. This year, MAJu has developed various activities that are aimed at simultaneously expanding legal aid and bringing it closer to those communities that need it. The strategies pursued this year include the following:

Strengthening community paralegals and encouraging them to act as agents of change in their communities through the establishment of paralegal posts and legal aid posts managed by paralegals.

Increasing the involvement of newly accredited LAOs and LAO Forum members in defending the rights of MAJu target groups.

Increasing the number of law firms and individual lawyers providing pro bono legal aid services.

Pro bono Movement Expanding - MAJu continues to support the pro-bono initiative by working together with law firms and PERADI. Pro bono guidelines are being finalized and disseminated to law firms and bar associations. Human Rights Database Development Ongoing – MAJu has issued a letter of support and has started the process of developing SIPKUMHAM into a human-rights and legal database. The draft grand design for evidence-based policy making and draft dataset for law and human rights have been finalized. Engagement with private sector on going – Small-scale initiatives for involving the private sector in the MAJu program have been undertaken, such as LBH APIK Jakarta’s collaboration with Facebook; and to promote pro bono, MAJU also involves private law firms to encourage an expansion of pro bono work. MAJu Monitoring and Evaluation Indicators Revised –USAID finally approved the revisions of the Monitoring and Evaluation Indicators. At the same time, USAID approved the Annual Implementation Plan FY2020. MAJu will use the revisions for further MEL activities. Project Leadership Transition Ongoing –This year, the project Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP) is assuming the position of Chief of Party (COP). MAJu launched a recruitment process to find a new DCOP, and finally Rino Subagyo was approved as the new DCOP by USAID on 17 September 2019. He will have taken up his duties by 1 November 2019. Empowering underutilized local partners – While MAJu’s strategy in the first 3 years involved a combination of grant assistance and capacity building through non-grant work, this quarter MAJU focused on providing assistance solely through grants or sub-awards or sub-contracts, with local partners being encouraged to take the initiative in managing programs, administration and financial matters. This will result in a reduction in the spending target, while at the same time MAJu will be able to focus more on strengthening its partners. Looking ahead, MAJu will evaluate the process so that the disbursement rate remains good while at the same time further enhancing the capacity of underutilized partners.

10

Limited Financial Review – The LFR by USAID Finance Office was conducted over 8 working days, and an informal exit meeting was held, during which a number of recommendations were highlighted related to TAF oversight of sub-recipients; the excessive cost of meals during meetings; the use of rental cars and travel autorizations; and the use of transfers and cash payments. MAJu will follow these up with the partners as well as internally.

C. Financial Name : The Asia Foundation Title of Program : eMpowering Access to Justice Project Cooperative Agreement No. : 497-16-00002 Period of Performance : March 14, 2016 - March 13, 2021

Period of this Report Covers : July 01, 2019 - September 30, 2019

Amount of This Grant : $10,000,000 TAF Ref : 31951 USAID-MAJU

Financial Report Q4 FY 2019 in USD

Description

Actual Expenses March 14,

2016 - June 30,

2019

July-19 August-

19 September-

19

TOTAL

Actual Actual Projection

Democracy, Human Rights and Governance Fund

4.732.905

48.889

94.722

111.642

4.988.158

Biodoversity & DRG Fund*

855.614

25.751

4.030

1.153

886.549

Health Fund

739.463

55.004

11.069

149.337

954.873

Sub total

6.327.982 129.644 109.822 262.132 6.829.580

D. Implementation of Project Activities/Outputs OUTCOME 1: Increased Access to Justice for Poor and Marginalized Citizens MAJu applies a multi-dimensional approach or strategy that consists of the social inclusion approach and the rights-based approach. In practical interventions, the grants awarded to LAO partners cover coalition and network-building among LAOs and CSOs located in MAJu’s project areas. They also cover the provision of cross-learning spaces (both physical and virtual) for communities of target groups to meet and interact with each other, as well as joint advocacy by them. So that the integration of the rights of target groups is addressed by LAOs, with the support of CSOs, MAJu encourages each LAO partner to collaborate with CSOs working on issues related

11

to REM, marginalized women, indigenous people and other marginalized individuals when developing their concept notes for grant activities. Intermediate Outcome 1.1: Improve the Capacity of Civil Society Organizations to Protect the Rights of MAJu Target Groups Bringing legal assistance to villages/regions and communities. MAJu, through LAO partners, has successfully supported the establishment of legal aid posts or paralegal posts. LBH APIK Jakarta succeeded in developing paralegal posts in 3 regions (Bogor, Depok, Ciracas). In the particular case of Bogor, the paralegals were very active and successfully developed MOUs with district and village administrations. This quarter, just one legal aid post was launched (in Ciracas, East Java). LBH APIK Jakarta continues to hold its regular discussions with assisted communities in Depok, Bogor and East Jakarta. DPC PERADI Tasikmalaya has also successfully developed modalities for legal aid posts in 8 villages after providing training to 5 paralegals from each village in Singaparna Village, following by the development of legal aid post SOPs. Meanwhile, LBH Jakarta continued its mobile legal aid program among target-group communities, especially in remote areas that are far removed from legal-aid access, such as the Thousand Islands. They were most recently asked to provide legal aid services to a community of people with mental health issues. The presence of community paralegals has successfully brought about better protection for the rights of victims from marginalized and poor groups. MAJU and LBH partners have positioned paralegals as agents of change to expand access to legal assistance for marginalized groups. As discussed with the Ministry of Village Affairs, MAJu now expects to escalate the benefits of the community paralegals program by having it included in a Ministry of Village Affairs’ program that envisages the deployment of paralegals in every village. Involvement of pro bono lawyers in protecting the rights of marginalized and poor groups – MAJu, through its partners, continued to work with and involve pro bono laywers. This year, MAJu is focusing its pro bono effort on increasing their engagement through a variety of initiatives and activities. Output/Activity 1.1.1: Provide Experiential Learning and Internships with Universities Subject-matter experts for freedom of religion/belief – YLBHI, with MAJu support, has launched a new initiative with CRCS UGM to create and then expand a network of academics focused on freedom of religion/belief. The idea for this initiative came from YLBHI, who regularly need the support of academics as expert witnesses in court. While this first iteration of the program is supported by CRCS UGM, as well as other donors, MAJu sees potential for universities in the MAJu network and other MAJU partners to become involved in the program next year, and also to replicate the same strategy so as to increase the number of expert witness available for cases related to minorities with different gender identities or expressions, and HIV/AIDS. Meanwhile, YLBHI is using the program as a basis for seeking out experts to help with issues related to natural resources and indigenous communities.

12

Kalabahu (Legal Aid Work Training) - Kalabahu training is provided routinely by LBHs in the YLBHI network. Kalabahu is a legal and human rights training program that has been underway since 1980. It provides a space where LBHs can seek out suitable legal aid workers. Through Kalabahu training, participants are introduced to advocacy work and the values that are championed by LBHs. Participants also receive training on such things as ideology, litigation and non-litigation advocacy, the issues handled by LBHs, law enforcement practices, and human rights advocacy. Participants are expected to be final-semester college students and must not be serving members of the armed forces. Kalabahu also provides a vehicle for selected students to gain practical knowledge related to legal aid. This year alone, through MAJu support, 10 Kalabahu training courses were held (Bandung, Bali, Malang, Semarang, Yogyakarta, Central Kalimantan, Manado, Pakanbaru, Jakarta and Surabaya). (See Output 1.1.9) Collaboration with Universities for Advocacy – MAJu, through its partners, encourages collaboration with universities, not only so as to bring about change in the universities but also to encourage change in the LAOs themselves. This year, LBH Surabaya signed a Memorandum of Understanding with 17th August University for the placement of student interns to participate in the work of LBH Surabaya. To date, six law students are serving internships at LBH Surabaya to assist public lawyers during legal consultations and court proceedings, as well as with the drafting of legal documents. All of the student internship activities are supervised by LBH Surabaya. MAJu has also collaborated with MaPPI FHUI to encourage monitoring by LAO paralegals of the application of Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA) No. 3/2017 in the courts. In addition, MAJu has supporting LBH Semarang to hold a “Legal Aid Festival” at Diponegoro University’s Law School. The Legal Aid Festival was aimed at introducing the values of social justice to university LAOs and to encourage them to obtain BPHN accreditation so as to be able to access legal aid funds. Output/Activity 1.1.2: Provide Technical Support for National Non-Governmental Organizations Komnas HAM Support - Komnas HAM is undergoing an internal reform process that has resulted in changes at the first and second echelon levels within the organization. This has given rise to a lack of clarity as regards the future direction of the program. In response to this, MAJu warned that it would need to make a decision soon for the better planning of spending, and that, consequently, Komnas HAM would need to provide a plan. Komnas HAM and MAJu met several times to discuss priorities as regards IT infrastructure, IT-based knowledge management, and the holding of a Human Rights Festival and events to mark Human Rights Day. In the end, MAJu stated that it would like to prioritize support for the development of a blueprint or roadmap for IT-based knowledge management. In the previous quarter, it was hoped that support for Komnas HAM could be provided promptly. However, the anticipated TOR for the IT Roadmap was not provided to MAJu. Meanwhile, the Human Rights Festival, for which a funding request had been made to MAJu, was also not followed up by Komnas HAM. Problems in communicating with Komnas HAM have made this collaboration difficult. MAJu will only wait until the end of this year to terminate the collaboration. Overall in this financial year, MAJu supported a Human Rights Festival in Wonosobo in November 2018, which was themed "Maintaining Diversity, Growing Solidarity for an Inclusive

13

and Just Indonesia," which was followed by support for Human Rights Day. A set of policy recommendations was also produced for President Jokowi, which were presented to Vice President Yusuf Kalla that covers on addressing 10 significant past human rights abuses, agrarian reform and agrarian conflict, and discriminatory regulation for tolernace and religious freedom. In relation to Output 3.1.1., MAJu has been supporting YAPPIKA for its collaboration with Komnas HAM on developing standards and norms related to freedom of assembly and association. The standars and norms have been finalized and disseminated for public feedback through the website. Development in Knowledge Management Related to Structural Legal Aid – Despite YLBHI being in existence for 48 years, its overall advocacy strategy was only recently set out in writing and compiled in a single document. This “Guide to Structural Legal Aid (BHS)” will help accelerate the advocacy work of LBH offices under the auspices of YLBHI as legal aid workers will no longer have to search for advocacy strategies from scratch but rather will be able to use the guide so as to quickly identify appropriate strategies. Support to enhance the consolidation of national networks of CSOs/LAO – This year, MAJu has supported consolidation meetings between YLBHI and 15 offices spread across 15 provinces. In addition, MAJu supported a meeting of members of Forum Pengada Layanan (Service Provider Forum – a forum of women crisis centers) from all of Indonesia’s provinces. These two meetings provided an opportunity for the participants to reflect on their work having regard to the current situation, to discuss organizational restructuring and to develop organizational and work programs for the next 3 years. Output/Activity 1.1.3: Promote Collaboration and Cross Learning Between Legal Aid Organizations and Civil Society Organizations Social inclusion approach to community organization – MAJu seeks to encourage LAOs to network and collaborate with CSOs working for MAJu target groups. As reported in the previous quarters, this approach is novel for LAO partners as it requires them to encourage meetings with target groups, which are all made up of victims from minority and vulnerable communities, with a view to creating mutual acceptance and generating mutual support. This process is not easy, and objections to collaboration with particular target groups are not infrequent. This is also the reason that MAJu provides training for partners on community organizing so that they can improve their strategies by incorporating the social inclusion approach. An interesting account of the results of this process in the case of the Ahmadiyah (JAI) community in Tasikmalaya is related by DPC PERADI Tasikmalaya in the box below. (See Box 1)

Box 1 JAI CITIZENS BECOME INVOLVED IN VILLAGE ACTIVITIES

Kersamaju Village, Cigalontang District, Tasikmalaya Regency, has an Ahmadiyah community (Jemat Ahmadiyah Indonesia/JAI). The village is directly adjacent to Garut Regency and also

14

borders on the village that has the largest JAI community in Tasikmalaya, namely, Tenjowaringin Village, Salawu District. One of the problems faced by JAI residents in Kersamaju is the strong stigma of “heresy” that some attach to JAI. As a result, for decades JAI residents have been ostracized, and have been excluded from village activities, the public space, policy making and local development planning. Erna is a JAI woman who has experienced discrimination and persecution in Kersamaju Village. She is a living witness to how the National Police, local public order police and the Local Leaders’ Forum (Muspika) forcibly closed down the JAI mosque in Kersamaju Village. She also remembers how a Local Marriage Registration Officer (P3N) in the village refused to register the marriage of a JAI resident. Various efforts have been made so as to improve the lot of JAI residents in Kersamaju Village. However, many challenges have been faced, particularly as regards religious leaders, who are prejudiced against JAI residents. JAI residents strive to strengthen their relations with the majority community, including the village government and religious leaders. The goal is clear – to bring discrimination against JAI to an end. "Thanks to these efforts, we began to be invited to attend village religious meetings. Of course, we welcomed the invitations as it meant that the village government was starting to recognize us." Finally, Erna and 4 other JAI women representatives decided to attend a religious meeting. However, things did not go according to plan. The preacher denounced JAI in front of the congregation of more than 200. The JAI women felt very uncomfortable, but Erna encouraged her friends to stay. "It was difficult, but we decided to stick it out to the end.” After the meeting, we asked the village government to invite more level-headed preachers rather than preachers who misled people." Given what had transpired at the first meeting, many JAI women were unwilling to attend the next one. However, Erna convinced them that they should do so in the hope that the preacher would not be like the previous one. “Our voices were heard and the village government complied with our request to invite a calmer preacher. He wasn’t provocative and didn’t discuss differences in beliefs,” Erna said. The following day Mr. Punduh came to ask JAI representatives to become members of the Elections Committee (KPPS) in the village. At first Erna and the other JAI residents were not sure as this would be something entirely new for them. However, opportunities like this are rare, and eventually Erna and 4 other JAI residents decided to join the committee. "To date, we have 5 JAI members who are on the KPPS, namely, me, Anisa, Elin, Gina, and Dede, all women. In the past, nobody was involved in activities like this," said Erna. She says that the situation in the village is much better now, with space being provided for participation by JAI residents. Moreover, if JAI residents become even more active in village affairs, then even more opportunities will open up. JAI residents are now participating in a wide range of village activities, including the monthly religious meetings.

15

Thanks to the improvements that have taken place in the village, especially the fact that a village official has become paralegal, the potential for conflict in the village level has significantly diminished. Finally, JAI residents are being included and involved in village activities. In addition to Erna, another JAI resident, Anang, is involved in the distribution of Non-Cash Food Aid (BPNT).

Legal Aid for marginalized individual by LAO Forum - In April 2019, a victim that is assisted by LBH Yogyakarta became caught up as a suspect in a criminal malpractice case. The case began when someone asked her to administer a breast collagen injection. While she had previously administered collagen injections, she initially refused as she had not done it for a long time and knew that it was a high-risk procedure. However, she was eventually persuaded to do so. While she was in the process of administered the injection, the police burst in, catching her red-handed with the syringe still in chest of the person receiving the injection. She was then arrested and named a suspect for criminal malpractice. Feeling that there were irregularities in her arrest and that she had actually been set up, she sought legal assistance from LBH Yogyakarta. During the legal process, from questioning by the Police up to the handing down of judgment, LBH Yogyakarta and the LAO forum provided her with legal assistance. The LAO Forum is a network consisting of several LAOs in Yogyakarta that were formed based on a LBH Yogyakarta initiative as part of the MAJu program. The forum was originally established by LBH Yogyakarta to assist LAOs throughout Yogyakarta during the BPHN accreditation and verification process. As a result, many LAOs in Yogyakarta were successfully accredited and became eligible to access state legal aid funds. After the accreditation process was completed, the LAO network grouped in the forum took the initiative of formalizing the forum by establishing a structural organization (this process was described in the previous quarterly report). The LAO Forum continues to hold regular meetings, coordinated by LBH Yogyakarta. In addition to discussing the issue of state legal aid, the LAO forum also provides social justice training and discusses issues related to MAJu target groups. One of the goals of the establishment of the LAO Forum is to provide legal assistance to marginalized groups. When LBH Yogyakarta provided legal assistance in this case, they asked for support from the LAO Forum to participate in the legal-assistance process. For the marginalized individuals, it is almost impossible to access free legal assistance in criminal cases that befall them. Many LAOs will simply refuse to provide assistance to them. The reasons for this include stigma against individuals, misplaced perceptions in handling cases, and the fear of damaging their reputations. In that case, the legal assistance provided by LBH Yogyakarta was both group and structural in nature as the case involved violations of the right to practice one’s religion. For the criminal malpractice case described earlier, LBH Yogyakarta not only provided assistance but also coordinated the participation of LAOs grouped in the LAO Forum in the provision of legal assistance to the suspect/defendant by assigning legal counsel during the trial, something that had never happened before. The approach adopted by LBH Yogyakarta has helped to develop an awareness among the members of the LAO Forum as regards advocating the rights of marginalized groups, including marginalized individual that also member of key population of HIV/AIDS. This was far from easy, especially as LBH Yogyakarta was in the midst of an internal regeneration at

16

the time. The case ended in September 2019 with a conviction. However, thanks to the legal assistance that had been provided, the defendant was sentenced to only 7 months in prison (less the 6 months already spent in pre-trial detention), rather than the 15 years sought by the prosecution. Improved legal and human rights literacy of MAJu target groups - One of the main strategies for improving the bargaining power of target groups is to organize various activities such as community discussions and paralegal training, in order to create a supportive environment at the community level so that MAJu target groups can enjoy even greater protection. LBH Masyarakat continued to hold routine discussions with the community through Yayasan Pesona Jakarta (YPJ), OPSI, Suara Kita, and others. LBHM also invited interested members of communities to monitor the trying of cases being handled by LBH Masyarakat and to participate in the provision of outreach in detention centers. The objective is to provide communities with a better understanding of criminal-procedure practice on the ground. LBH Masyarakat also conducted outreach activities to improve the legal literacy of marginalized and high-risk individuals and groups (sex workers) through the Pojok Informasi (Information Corner) initiative that provides space for consultation and other relevant activities. ALDP and LBH Papua conducted paralegal training (Refer to Output 1.1.5) in their program areas, and followed by village discussions. The meeting discussed about the winning of a citizens’ suit at the Public Information Commission, and also addressed several issues that the villagers felt should be conveyed to government. During the meeting, the villagers acknowledged the role of ALDP in improving their legal knowledge, including as regards legal problems involving private companies, and expressed appreciation for ALDP’s involvement in increasing their capacity to find solutions of their legal problems.

LBH Papua also conducted mobile legal outreach and recording of identity and citizenship documents. This activity was aimed at increasing legal awareness and enhancing rights in Sereh village. LBH Papua’s workers visited all of the neighborhoods in Sereh village, which has a highly diverse population made up of people from the indigenous Sentani and Jayawijaya communities, and migrants from other parts of Indonesia. The process also focused on building an awareness of the importance of developing Legal Aid Posts in Sereh Village, and on various cases of violence against women that have traditionally been rarely addressed. The work of the LBH Papua paralegals may be viewed on Youtube https://youtu.be/6Adtlzj_jM0 Support-group development at the community level - MAJu continues to support Perkumpulan Suara Kita (PSK) to increase the number of its Sahabat Kita workers (individuals who commit to providing services or links to services for vulnerable and marginalized groups, such as legal, health, and other services) that are providing various support services to key population of HIV/AIDS , including legal, medical and counseling services. At present Perkumpulan Suara Kita has 231 Sahabat Kita in in Greater Jakarta, Yogyakarta, Bandung and Lampung. Coming from a variety of backgrounds, they include academics, religious leaders, advocates, doctors, psychologists, housewives and students. To increase the capacity of the Sahabat Kita in providing

17

assistance, Perkumpulan Suara Kita has sent Sahabat Kita to attend trainings conducted by other MAJu CSO/LAO partners. In addition, Perkumpulan Suara Kita has worked with LBH APIK Jakarta and LBH Masyarakat by placing Sahabat Kita as interns at the two LAOs. During their internships, the Sahabat Kita participated in the legal outreach programs conducted by the two LAOs in prisons and also attended court trials. These activities provided opportunities for the Sahabat Kita to meet with law enforcement officials -- opportunities they did not have previously. By meeting and communicating with law enforcement officials, the Sahabat Kita gained more confidence about dealing with law enforcement officials when providing assistance in the community. With the support of Sahabat Kita, PSK received 141 cases for which referral processes are now underway. They also now have 4 full-time volunteers who provide counselling and other assistance to people in need from the key population of HIV/AIDS communities. MOU with the Pasar Minggu Puskesmas (Community Health Center) – Following International Women’s Day 2019, LBH APIK Jakarta resolved that it was important to develop and integrate Puskesmas services for women victims of sexual violence with the early detection of HIV/AIDS. Of course, such services cannot be focused solely on health services but also need to be integrated with psychosocial services. In addition, they need to be provided in a friendly and sensitive manner. Consequently, in accordance with Outputs 1.1.3, 1.1.6 and 3.3.1, LBH APIK Jakarta signed an MOU with the Pasar Minggu Puskesmas for the development of an SOP on the provision of non-discriminatory and user-friendly services. The MOU can be found in ANNEX 2 – MOU BETWEEN LBH APIK JAKARTA AND PASAR MINGGU HEALTH CENTER

Photo 1 - The signing of MOU between LBH APIK Jakarta and Puskesmas Pasar Minggu

18

Output/Activity 1.1.4: Promote Joint Advocacy between Legal Aid Organizations and Civil Society Organizations National Legal Aid Conferences - Together with BPHN and the civil society coalition, the MAJu program supported the holding of two National Legal Aid Conferences (KNBH) in August and September 2019. Each KNBH had its own goals and involved different participants. The first KNBH took place over two days (August 20-21, 2019) in Jakarta. It was attended by around 386 participants from 33 provinces, consisting of representatives of Legal Aid Organizations, paralegals, legal aid recipient communities, universities, legal aid support institutions, advocates’ organizations, law firms, and legal aid administrators at the central and regional levels. Themed "Expanding Access to Justice by Optimizing the Provision of Quality Legal Aid Services", the Jakarta KNBH was organized by a civil society consortium consisting of YLBHI, Asosiasi LBH APIK, ILRC, PBHI, LBH Masyarakat, LBH Jakarta, LBH APIK Jakarta, and MaPPI FHUI. Supported by a MAJu grant to YLBHI, the Jakarta KNBH focused on formulating recommendations for Government based on findings in the field so as to bring about:

1. Expanded access to legal aid, including legal aid services, legal aid funding, distribution of legal aid providers, and number of recipients of legal aid;

2. Improvement in the quality of legal aid services through the adoption of legal-aid service standards, utilization of information technology, and oversight of legal aid services;

3. Greater integration, consolidation and synergy as regards legal aid policies and programs as between legal aid administrators, legal aid providers, law enforcement agencies, and other legal aid program stakeholders;

Held over the course of two days, the first KNBH consisted of plenary sessions and working group sessions, with the details being as follows:

1. Day 1 Plenary consisted of a panel discussion on the on the roles of and synergies between legal aid resources in the realization of access to justice. The discussion involved speakers from the National Development Planning Agency, the National Legal Development Agency, the Supreme Court, the Ministry of Home Affairs, the National Police’s Criminal Investigation Agency, the Ministry of Research and Technology, the Attorney General's Office, YLBHI.

2. Meanwhile, the Day II Plenary focused on "Quality Legal Aid Services for the Poor and Marginalized," with the speakers being from Stikubank University’s Legal Assistance and Consultation Institute, paralegal representatives from LBH Papua, representatives from the communities assisted by LBH APIK Jakarta, and the BPHN.

3. In addition to the plenary sessions, the conference featured 10 working group sessions that focused on specific themes related to policy issues and the implementation of legal aid. Based on the working group sessions, a number of recommendations for improvements were made, which were submitted by civil-society representatives to the Government at the Bali KNBH.

The working group sessions addressed the following topics:

1. Paralegal Policies, which discussed the following issues: Definition of paralegal; Recognition of various paralegal models; Competency standards; and the scope of paralegals’ work.

19

2. Legal Aid Database and Information System, which discussed the following issues: System capacity and human resources; Substance of data; Media/platform; and Synergy with legal aid organization information and documentation systems.

3. Legal Aid Funding, which discussed the following issues: Funding system; Funding allocation and reimbursement system; Expansion of legal aid funding allocation; The need for funding allocations to take account of geographical conditions in specific regions.

4. Synergy between state legal aid resources, which discussed the following issues: The BPHN’s legal aid scheme; The Supreme Court’s legal aid scheme; Regional Government legal aid schemes; Other legal aid schemes.

5. Legal Aid Education, which discussed the following issues: Competency standards for legal aid providers; Legal aid education system.

6. Role of Regional Governments in Legal Aid, which discussed the following issues: Regional legal aid regulations; Allocation of Regional Government funding for legal aid; Expanded provision and receipt of legal aid; Support coverage for legal aid needs.

7. Expansion of Legal Aid Activities and Recipients, which discussed the following issues: Litigation legal aid; Non-litigation legal aid; Enhancement of legal education and awareness; Policy advocacy; Vulnerable groups.

8. Legal Aid Service and Quality Standards, which discussed the following issues: Service coverage; Legal aid standards and quality: procedural or substantive; Oversight; Deviations in the provision of legal aid.

9. Verification and Accreditation of legal aid organizations, which discussed the following issues: Criteria for legal aid organizations; Verification and accreditation procedures; Verification and accreditation timeframes.

10. Legal Aid as a Movement, which discussed the following issues: The role of legal aid as an accelerating or moderating movement; Formalization of legal aid - strengthens or weakens legal aid? Social movement: for whom?.

The Jakarta KNBH formulated a number of recommendations for Bappenas, the Ministry of Law and Human Rights (including BPHN), Regional Governments, Legal Aid Organizations, Universities, and Law Enforcement and Legal Institutions (Police, Attorney's Office and Supreme Court) which essentially supported a number of regulatory synergies, expanded legal aid service coverage, and additional legal aid funding. The recommendations were conveyed by representatives of civil society to the Bali KNBH, which was held on 10-13 September 2019. The report of Jakarta KNBH can be found in ANNEX 3 – REPORT ON NATIONAL LEGAL AID CONFERENCE I The Bali KNBH focused on discussing the recommendations from civil society to policy makers, which consisted of Bappenas, BPHN, Supreme Court, National Police, Attorney General’s Office, Ministry of Village Affairs and Ministry of Home Affairs, for the purpose of producing a declaration confirming their common commitment:

1. To develop a common understanding as regards policies, planning, funding, synergy and supervision for the legal aid program;

2. To promote integration, consolidation and synergy in legal aid policies and programs as between legal aid administrators, legal aid providers, law enforcement agencies and legal institutions, and other stakeholders in the legal aid program;

20

3. To administer legal aid services through the regulation of legal aid service standards; 4. To provide legal aid services in accordance with the legal aid quality standards; 5. To develop a legal aid system that is predicated on integrity, simplicity and

accessibility; 6. To conduct continuing supervision and evaluation of legal aid services; 7. To develop and strengthen the institutional capacity of those involved in legal aid,

including human resources capacity; 8. To act in an integrated manner on the recommendations formulated by the National

Legal Aid Conference.

The above commitments expressed by policy makers will need to be continually monitored byb LAOs, legal aid recipients and civil society. The result of Bali KNBH can be found in ANNEX 4 – REPORT ON NATIONAL LEGAL AID CONFERENCE II

Photo 2 – The first panel of first session take picture together with the Konfenas Participants during opening session on 20

August 2019, in Cibubur, East Jakarta.

Improving the Legal Aid System for Access to Justice - One of the major achievements of the MAJu program this year has been its support for various activities focused on formulating recommendations based on input from legal aid providers and recipients so as to improve the country's legal aid system. MAJu's activities over the past year through the Legal Aid Conferences, workshops organized by MAJu partners with the LAO network and regional offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, as well its experiences as regards legal aid provided by the State, have successfully documented a number of findings and remedial notes for preparing a policy paper on the state legal aid system. Some important points that should be considered by the government as the administrator of the legal aid system are as follows:

1. The need for increased legal aid funding and a reimbursement system that is responsive to the situation on the ground;

2. Paralegal functions need to be promoted and managed so that they can maximally assist the work of LAOs;

3. The scope of legal aid should be expanded in terms of the criteria for receiving legal aid and the legal aid services provided;

21

4. Legal aid funding from outside the state budget should be encouraged, such as through local government budgets, third party donations, and other sources;

5. Greater synergy needs to be encouraged as regards the policies of legal aid stakeholders, namely, as between the Ministry of Law and Human Rights (through BPHN) and state law enforcement and legal institutions (Police, Attorney General’s Office and Supreme Court), the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Village Affairs, Bappenas, etc.;

6. The quality of legal aid services needs to be enhanced through the adoption of service standards;

7. LAO capacity needs to be developed and the capacity of legal aid providers improved; 8. The verification, accreditation, and reimbursement systems need to be improved so that the

legal aid provision is in accordance with the aim of increasing access to justice. The above recommendations were summarized by civil society and submitted to the Government through BPHN as the administrator of the state legal aid system. They have been acted on by BPHN by its facilitation of the coming together of ministries and institutions at the Bali KNBH, where BPHN encouraged the stakeholders to follow up on the recommendations. Consequently, the MAJu Program has played an important role in promoting legal aid policies that are responsive to the needs of marginalized communities as justice seekers.

Photo 3 – Mr. Yunus Affan from the BPHN opens the Konfenas 2 in Bali on 9 September 2019 in Bali.

Legal Assistance for Minority Groups – Over the reporting period, LBH Yogyakarta and LBH Semarang provided legal assistance to religious minority groups, especially as regards the construction of houses of worship. In July, LBH Yogyakarta provided assistance in connection with the revocation of the Building Permit (IMB) for the Java Sedayu Christian Church in Bantul Regency by the Regent of Bantul. The first response has been non-litigation in nature, namely, a mediation process involving CSO partners and the LBH Yogyakarta paralegals. This mediation was restricted to 45 days after the IMB was revoked so that the legal object of the dispute (the Regent’s head's decree revoking the IMB) would not expire if the mediation process proved unsuccessful. As of the time of writing, LBH Yogyakarta was continuing to pursue mediation, while at the same time making preparations to take action in the State Administrative Court. Case Referral System – As part of the effort to encourage the expansion of legal aid for MAJu target groups, it is important that a referral system be developed. Through the paralegals, support

22

from village governments, officials in the community, support groups, LAOs and CSOs, a case referral system can be developed more effectively and broadly. In this regard, LBH APIK Jakarta has established paralegal posts in 3 regions (Bogor, Depok and Ciracas). To ensure that these posts can work effectively, LBH APIK Jakarta has established collaboration with a local health center and works with village and district governments. At the national level, LBH APIK Jakarta has developed a mechanism for referring cases to the National Commission of Women (Komnas Perempuan), PSMP Handayani (Ministry of Social Affairs) and the East Jakarta Religious Court. Through collaboration with LBH Anshor, the process of institutionalizing the role of paralegals was expanded through the establishment of legal aid posts in villages, with the support of village administrations. DPC Peradi Tasikmalaya and LBH Anshor then assisted paralegals with developing SOPs for the operation of these legal aid posts. The SOP has been reported in previous quarter. Policy Advocacy – This year, MAJu has supported its partners with their advocacy on various issues, including the Criminal Procedure Code Bill, Indigenous Peoples Bill, and a local government regulation (Perda) to formalize the FPIC (Free-Prior-Informed Consent) process in Jayapura Regency. Advocacy on Criminal Procedure Code - Discrimination against MAJU target groups is

frequently experienced during the criminal justice process, starting with the process of collecting evidence at the police level and continuing up to the penitentiary level. While judicial institutions should be able to be used by victims to have their rights vindicated and to get justice, the reality is that judicial institutions in Indonesia are frequently guilty of stigmatization, discrimination and violations of human rights, especially in the case of marginalized people. There are many examples of cases that have been tried and decided in violation of the principles of a fair trial, the rule of law, and equality before the law. The role of the judiciary and the other institutions involved in the criminal justice system, such as the police, prosecution service and correctional institutions, is important for increasing access to justice. Therefore, through a grant to YLBHI, advocacy for the revision of the Criminal Procedure Code and improvements in judicial oversight processes is being strengthened by consolidating the efforts of CSOs in this regard. There are many organizations involved in the process, including YLBHI, ICW, LEIP, ICEL, CDS, and ICJR.

Advocacy on the Indigenous Peoples Bill - In the last quarter, YLBHI and the Coalition for Indigenous Rights submitted a request to meet with the State Secretary to discuss the Indigenous Peoples Bill, to submit its inventory of problematic issues (DIM), and to propose a new version of the Bill that they had prepared. Unfortunately, there has been no response to date. Accordingly, the coalition will continue to monitor the progress of the National Legislature’s deliberations on the Bill, which currently appear to have stalled.

Advocacy on the Sexual Violence Bill – Over the course of the reporting period, LBH APIK Jakarta and Rifka Annisa continued to advocate for the enactment of the Sexual Violence Bill. The two organizations are also members of the Jaringan Kerja Prolegnas Pro Perempuan (JKP3), a network that is focused on ensuring the enactment of the Bill into law.

23

Advocacy on Regional Government Regulation on Legal Aid - This advocacy was carried out in Jakarta by LBH Jakarta and LBH APIK Jakarta. At present, the draft regulation has been submitted and is still waiting for a response from the Jakarta Government. At the same time, LBH Surabaya is conducting research related to the implementation of the Legal Aid Law, especially as regards MAJu target groups.

Regional Government Regulation on FPIC Recognition - This advocacy was carried out by ALDP after successfully winning a freedom of information dispute in the Jayapura Public Information Commission. FPIC is an important process to ensure that investments in an area are first consulted with citizens based on correct information with a view to securing their informed consent. A policy brief on the regional government regulation on this has now been completed, but the process of public consultation prior to the finalization of the policy brief has constrained by the conflict that broke out in Jayapura due to an incidence of racism that angered the LAO and drew a negative response from market participants.

Collaboration with National Ombudsman – Over the reporting period, YAPPIKA has completed its facilitation to the National Ombudsman for the preparation of Guidelines on Community Participation in the Prevention of Public Maladministration. These Guidelines are aimed at (1) improving the performance of the National Ombudsman in preventing maladministration in the provision of public services; (2) increasing public confidence in the Ombudsman; (3) improving the quality of services provided by public bodies, especially to women, people with disabilities and other vulnerable groups. As one of the strategies to strengthen the capacity of CSO counterparts/members of gender/sexual minority communities and PLWHA (People Living with HIV/AIDS) in supervising public sector health services, YAPPIKA has provided training on monitoring and advocating for public sector health services for gender minority groups and PLWHA to GWL INA, Perkumpulan Suara Kita, Organisasi Perubahan Sosial Indonesia (OPSI), Transvoice Bogor, the Atmajaya HIV/AIDS Research Center, the Ikatan Perempuan Positif Indonesia (IPPI), and Srikandi Patriot. YAPPIKA has also facilitated the development of monitoring tools for public services in HIV clinics in community health centers (puskesmas) and hospitals. The findings of monitoring results were then reported to the National Ombudsman as part of the effort to reduce discrimination in the provision of public health services to gender/sexual minority groups and PLWHA. Through the above program, MAJu partners, especially YAPPIKA and GWL INA, have collaborated and work together to advocate for better public health services for gender minority groups and PLWHA. The two organizations have different skills and strengths that ultimately complement each other. GWL INA has the resources to monitor and evaluate public services through their peer leaders. The data obtained is then analyzed and processed by YAPPIKA so as to formulate policy proposals to be conveyed to policy makers. YAPPIKA has also introduced the National Ombudsman to GWL INA. Creative Campaign on the Issues Affecting MAJu Target Groups - To encourage the acceptance of MAJu target groups in society, as explained in Output 2.3.3., Ogilvy was hired to produce creative campaign materials for MAJu partners. Currently, Ogilvy is conducting assessments of all MAJu partners to see how they currently campaign.

24

Commemoration of Special Days that are relevant to MAJu Target Groups - a. International Women Day (IWD) – MAJu supported LBH APIK Jakarta to hold an IWD event

titled “Comprehensive Protection and Prevention of Violence Against Women Living with HIV/AIDS”. The IWD successfully attracted 330 participants from 28 provinces, with the event being opened by a keynote speech from a representative of the Ministry of Health. The former Director of AIDS Response, Ms. Nafsiah Mboi, criticized the policies of local governments in closing down official prostitution areas, and that these policies had not been challenged by the national government. These policies have hampered the prevention of HIV/AIDS, she said. She also said that the number of housewifes infected with HIV/AIDS was the highest among both MSM and injecting drug users, with most cases being transmitted by men. She said that it is important to address this through policy, and more importantly to change the mindsets of men and work with them to change things.

b. Women’s March - LBH APIK Jakarta, together with its assisted communities, co-organized a women’s march at the Monas Aspiration Park in April 2019 so as to highlight the issue of “Women and Politics” and elicit the views of legislative and presidential candidates on women's issues.

c. Human Rights Day – as explained in Output 1.1.2. d. AIDS Day –

1. DPC PERADI Tasikmalaya conducted a one-day event in collaboration with the District Health Office in Tasikmalaya, HIV community groups, Lakpesdam NU Tasikmalaya, PKBI/Perkumpulan Keluarga Berencana Indonesia and the local office of the Indonesian Aids Commission (Komisi Penanggulangan AIDS Indonesia–Daerah/KPAID) to provide free health and legal-aid services with the aim of heightening awareness of and preventing HIV/AIDS, and of creating inclusive services for everyone regardless their identity or background.

2. Forum Pengada Layanan conducted a one-day seminar on improving access to justice for women living with HIV/AIDS who are victims of discrimination and gender-based violence. The seminar produced several findings based on the presentation made by IPPI (Ikatan Perempuan Positif Indonesia/Indonesian HIV/AIDS-Positive Women’s Association). These included that the perpetrators of violence are often the victims’ partners, women face multiple forms of violence, women at risk often deny problems with their partners for the sake of their children; many see their problems as personal matters, thus inhibiting them from reporting the violence they experience; and society often views violence between husband and wife as a domestic matter. Women with HIV/AIDS face multiple forms of discrimination that puts them in an even worse situation and denies them better access to health services. Unfortunately, early VCT (Voluntary Counselling and Testing) of HIV/AIDS and early treatment in cases of violence against women, especially rape, are not mandatory, which can delay detection and thus increase the risk of onward transmission. This is an urgent issue that needs to be addressed, alongside efforts to increase HIV-risk awareness.

Legal Assistance – MAJu supports its partners to also fulfill their own mandates as legal aid organizations. Thus, it is important that LAO partners still have the time and energy to focus on their original objectives.

25

Output/Activity 1.1.5: Embed Paralegals and Human Rights Defenders in Legal Aid Organizations Paralegals are the closest resources with knowledge of the law in the community. Currently, 477 paralegals have been involved in MAJu programs through various interventions such as capacity building for paralegals, paralegal trainings, consolidation meetings, etc. Community empowerment supported by MAJu paralegals – This process continues through the holding of regular meetings by MAJu partners. LBH APIK Jakarta holds discussions every 3 months with paralegals from the sex-worker community, HIV-positive community, domestic workers’ community, East Jakarta community, Depok community, Bogor community and North Jakarta community. These discussions are also used to conduct evaluation and prepare follow-up plans. Meanwhile, LBH Jakarta continued its mobile legal aid program among target-group communities. They were most recently asked to provide legal aid services to a community of people with mental health issues. The LBH Papua paralegals network in Kampung Sereh has been very active and has taken a number of initiatives to address problems, such as legal identity. LBH Yogyakarta provided regular assistance to their paralegal network in Kulon Progo, Bantul and Gunung Kidul. Paralegal Posts or Pos Bantuan Hukum- (Refer to Intermediate Outcome 1.1.) LBH APIK Jakarta has established a new paralegal post in Ciracas Sub-district, East Jakarta. The new post is supported by the local authorities, namely, the Heads of the RT/RW and also the sub-district. Since its establishment, the paralegals at the Ciracas post have provided assistance in 3 cases. With the support of MAJu, LBH APIK Jakarta currently has 3 Paralegal Posts, located in Depok, Bogor and East Jakarta. However, LBH APIK Jakarta paralegals operate in five regions, namely North Jakarta, East Jakarta, Central Jakarta, Depok, and Bogor. Looking ahead, LBH APIK Jakarta plans to establish a new Paralegal Post in North Jakarta. DPC PERADI Tasikmalaya has established 8 Legal Aid Posts (Posbankum) since last year in Singaparna District. This year, the Regent of Tasikmalaya has been supporting the work of DPC PERADI, and has asked DPC to establish Posbankum in 29 other villages. At present, DPC is also developing a draft local government regulation on legal aid that envisages the provision of legal aid funding down to the village level. Paralegal Empowerment – The empowerment of paralegals can take various forms, depending on the needs of the community being assisted. LBH Yogyakarta is assisting 3 communities – one each in Gunung Kidul, Bantul and Kulon Progro. The needs of each community are different – the Gunung Kidul community needs help with spatial planning issues; the Bantul community on the issue of informal labor; and the Kulon Progo community on the acquisition of land for a new airport and a mining project. LBH APIK Jakarta also provides various types of assistance, such as assistance to paralegals from the sex-workers community and victims of sexual violence. Currently LBH APIK Jakarta is collaborating with Facebook to provide training to paralegals and survivors. The training is aimed at developing the capacity of paralegals and survivors to utilize social media for campaigning and advocacy purposes. Paralegals are also provided with knowledge on how to safely use social

26

media, and how to develop creative content using applications that are available on social media platforms. Paralegal Training/School – LBH Bandung, LBH Yogyakarta and LBH Surabaya provides training to paralegals using a combination of in-class and out-class learning sessions. This year, the trainings was provided to paralegals from the communities they have organized. LBH Surabaya provided capacity building to its paralegals through advanced paralegal training for those paralegals who had already received some paralegal basic training and been involved in providing assistance to their communities. In this training, LBH Surabaya combined all paralegals from MAJU target groups and other paralegals they have been assisted on other issues such as fishing, farming, worker and street-vendor communities. With this, they are expecting the paralegals can get to know each other and support each other. Meanwhile, LBH Papua conducted training of trainers for paralegals who will act as facilitators and trainers for paralegal training, and advanced paralegal training for the Kampung Sereh, HIV/AIDS and indigenous communities. ALDP also provided basic paralegal training for 3 program villages. Unlike other LBHs, LBH Bandung is very careful and diligent when recruiting participants for paralegal training. As mentioned in the previous quarterly report, LBH Bandung uses an assessment tool to identify suitable participants. During the reporting period, LBH Bandung visited a number of communities to conduct assessments with a view to commencing a new paralegal training program in July 2019. LBH Masyarakat has also developed a training program called Legal Aid Forum for Diversity (FBHUK) Training, which members are lawyers from and work for marginalized individuals, and the training is aimed at strengthening case-handling, advocacy and documentation capacity. Meanwhile, LBH Jakarta has just signed an MOU for handling cases and rights education with 17 paralegals from 17 communities, namely, the Serikat Pekerja Danamon, Himpunan Falun Dafa Indonesia, Himpunan Wanita Disabilitas Indonesia, Indonesia Peduli Anak Gifted, Arus Pelangi , Federasi Buruh Lintas Pabrik, Milah Abraham, Forum Peduli Pulau Pari, Solidaritas Perempuan, Yayasan Budaya Mandiri, Yayasan Budaya Mandiri, Komunitas Nelayan Rakyat Indonesia, Forum Masyarakat Kampung Benteng, Lembaga Masyarakat Peduli Lingkungan Indonesia, Kebon Sayur Ciracas, Kebon Tebu Muara Baru, Paguyuban Masyarakat Rumpin, and Tim Sukses Guji Baru. National Paralegals Gathering in November 2018– Paralegals are the people with legal knowledge who are closest to their communities. There were, 308 paralegals (148 female, 139 male and 21 other gender identity individuals) had been involved in MAJu programs through various interventions, such as capacity-building for paralegals, paralegal trainings, consolidation meetings, etc. In collaboration with the Ministry of Law and Human Rights (Kemenkumham) and USAID, MAJu organized a four-day National Paralegals Gathering, which brought together paralegals from Java and Papua, on 7-10 November 2018. Approximately 200s people attended the gathering and participated in activities designed to provide space for them to share, be inspired, be empowered, be strengthened in capacity, and to network.

27

Photo 4 - A group picture of paralegals during field trip to transgender community base, Transgender Islamic Boarding School Al-Fatah in Yogyakarta during National Paralegals Gathering.

This year, the initiative was continued but using a different format that also involves LAOs and Government. As explained in Output 1.1.4, the Legal Aid Conferences I and II in Jakarta and Bali had different objectives. The success of the conferences was the result of close collaboration between CSOs/LAOs, and government support. Paralegals Code of Ethics – During the National Paralegals Gathering in 2018, MAJu facilitated a process through which paralegals could develop a code of ethics that identify the “dos and don’ts” for paralegals, and define the relationships between paralegals and the community; paralegals and their clients; and paralegals and LAOs. The code of ethics is available upon request. Output/Activity 1.1.6: Integrate Gender throughout MAJu – Not Just in Programs Specifically Focused on Women Improving gender-sensitive public services – as explained in Output 1.1.3. LBH APIK Jakarta signed an MOU with the Pasar Minggu Community Health Center (Puskesmas) to provide integrated services to women victims of violence, including psychological counseling, legal counseling, and health interventions, including medical examinations and early VCT for HIV/AIDS. YAPPIKA conducted Public Health Sector Monitoring and Advocacy Training for Gender Minorities and PLWHA. This training was followed by a practical intervention in the form of a meeting between YAPPIKA, GWL INA and OPSI and the Ombudsman Republic of Indonesia (ORI), during which they highlighted issues related to health-sector services that were experienced

28

by minority groups and PLWHA, and informed ORI about the establishment of a health service advocacy group focused on the rights of minorities and PLWHA. This meeting was followed by focused group discussions with ORI to develop a mechanism through which minority gender communities could participate in improving public services. The meeting recommended that focus be placed on the issues of citizenship administration, health services (especially BPJS), and a mechanism for the submission of complaints. Integrating the handling of cases of violence against women with other MAJu issues - This quarter, Rifka Annisa completed their work in publishing three modules for paralegal in relation to the following issues: (i) violence against women related to gender and sexual diversity; (ii) violence against women with HIV/AIDS; and (iii) violence against women related to freedom of religion and belief. This will be followed up next year by training this to all Forum Pengada Layanan (FPL – a national network of women crisis centers) members. Gender Training for LAOs - Rifka Annisa and FPL members have provided gender awareness training to LAOs in West Java and in Bantul. The training, which was aimed at improving the gender awareness and sensitivity of LAOs when handling cases of violence against women, was attended by 16 participants from various LAOs in West Java. In Bantul, the training was attended by PERADI-member LAOs as a follow-up from the MOU between Rifka and PBH PERADI Bantul. The participants agreed to develop cooperation between FPL and LAOs for the provision of services and capacity building so as to improve the handling of cases of violence against women. In addition, a draft mechanism for service provision and referral was prepared for the handling of cases of violence against women by FPL and LAOs in location. Integrating the issue of violence against women with the issue of HIV/AIDS - One of the lessons that emerged from Forum Pengada Layanan learning process concerns the issue of sexual violence against women and its relation to HIV/AIDS, namely, that initial testing of women victims of sexual violence is very important to reducing the spread of HIV/AIDS. Rifka Annisa is one of the MAJu grantees that integrate the issue of violence against women and the issue of HIV/AIDS in its programs. Yogyakarta Province has already issued local regulations on HIV/AIDS through Yogyakarta Regulation Number 12 of 2010 on HIV/AIDS Prevention in Yogyakarta and Yogyakarta Governor's Regulation Numbers 37 and 39 of 2012, which mandates that all sectors must play an active role in the efforts to overcome and prevent HIV/AIDS in Yogyakarta. So far, Yogyakarta Province has conducted various programs as part of the effort to tackle HIV/AIDS, but there is still much that needs to be done if these efforts are to succeed. Yogyakarta also has a Victims of Violence Protection Forum (FPKK). This is a coordinating forum for handling victims of violence against women and children, which works on a network basis. The forum consists of institutions that provide services (including in the health, psychological, legal, social and economic sectors) to women and child victims of violence. Currently, FPKK has 60 member institutions, both governmental and non-governmental, including the Regional Office of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, the Appellate Court, Prosecutor’s Office, Regional Police, Social Services Agency, Health Agency, Manpower Agency, Bappeda, hospitals, LAOs and CSOs that provide services to women and children, including Rifka Annisa. Because they see it as strategic, Rifka Annisa is advocating for HIV/AIDS prevention strategies to be integrated with the efforts to protect women and child victims of violence. Their advocacy has received a

29

positive response from FPKK. This can be seen from a request from FPKK to Rifka Annisa to facilitate the process of reviewing a handbook for services to women victims of violence, which will include information on services for women living with HIV/AIDS. The handbook should indirectly encourage capacity building among service providers, including paralegals, in Yogyakarta as regards the provision of services to women living with HIV/AIDS. Monitoring justice for women in contact with the law - This year, MaPPI has developed a monitoring tool for court cases involving women in contact with the law. In addition, MaPPI has also finished compiling a curriculum and manual for paralegals who assist women in contact with the law in criminal and civil cases. MaPPI has used the handbook to train service providers for women victims of violence (Women’s Crisis Centers), legal aid organizations and paralegals from Yogyakarta, Central Java, West Java and Greater Jakarta. During the training, the participants were introduced to Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA) No. 3/2017 on guidelines for the handling of cases of women in contact with the law. MaPPI involved the LPSK (Witness and Victims Protection Agency) in the training so as to provide material on restitution and testifying by means of teleconferencing. Among the important issues covered by LPSK were definitions, how to submit claims, the types of compensation that can be applied for as part of restitution and victim testimony by teleconferencing.

Output/Activity 1.1.7: Support Access to Legal Identity Access to ID documents and BPJS for marginalized individuals – YAPPIKA has assisted GWL INA in preparing a policy brief on the findings of a 2017 survey conducted by GWL INA on access to ID documents and the BPJS social security scheme for marginalized individual. This policy brief has been used as a tool for advocacy to the ORI. The policy brief was presented in the previous report. Related to this, Perkumpulan Suara Kita (PSK) received 10 cases involving the legal identity of marginalized individual. PSK, through its community members, successfully helped them to obtain ID cards with the support of Sahabat Kita and the assistance of the local neighborhood head and a sub-district official, both of whom they know well and are willing to help;

Legal identity in Jayapura – This year, LBH Papua and Forum Paralegals Kampung Sereh conducted two public events to invite people in Kampung Sereh, Jayapura Regency and its environs to register their legal identities. In February-March 2019, those whose details were recorded in December 2018 received updates on the process. It was found that of the 173 individuals whose details had been recorded, 18 had multiple ID cards; 21 were problematic; two individuals were requested to reregister their details; seven had dual identities (under another name or the name of another person), while ID cards were issued for the remainder. In addition, 67 Family Registration

Photo 5 - Legal Identity Second Event – June 2019 in Kampung Sereh

30

Cards were also successfully issued. Of the population documents that have yet to be issued, three are death certificates, 11 are marriage certificates and 122 are birth certificates. In June 2019, the Civil Registry Office and the paralegals conducted the second event in Kampung Sereh. This time around, 127 people registered for family cards and 139 for ID cards; 56 children registered for child identity cards; 4 couples for marriage certificates; and 96 people for birth certificates. It turned out that there was a high demand for legal identity documents among both indigenous and non-indigenous people in the area. Unfortunately, MAJu has exhausted all of the funding from USAID’s Environment Office and has limited funding remaining from USAID’s DRG Office for work in Papua. Therefore, MAJu is working with its partners in Papua so as to be able to continue its strategic engagement until the end of the project. Output/Activity 1.1.8: Encourage Pro-Bono Services by Private Law Firms and Law Schools Building Commitment through Pro Bono Clearing House – The availability of free legal-aid services is essential, even in more developed areas like Jakarta. MAJu is not only working with bar associations and law firms, but is also supporting, through a grant, the initiative by LBH Jakarta to develop a pro bono clearing house system that invites private-practice lawyers and law firms, bar associations, legal aid organizations and the BPHN to build and promote a commitment among lawyers to delivering pro bono services to vulnerable and marginalized people. The pro bono clearing-house initiative is also aimed at connecting private lawyers with justice seekers through a joint forum. Meanwhile, LBH APIK Jakarta has 10 pro bono advocates to help them with legal outreach in women’s prisons and to provide legal aid to women victims of violence. They hold monthly meetings with their pro-bono lawyers to review and evaluate cases, as well as refine advocacy strategies. Engaging law firms – Since last year, MAJu has engaged law firms to support the pro bono movement by suggesting their participation in structured roundtable discussions. MAJu collaborates with Hukum Online, which has experience in organizing pro bono roundtables with law firms, with the aim of promoting and strengthening the pro bono movement among private lawyers and to link private lawyers and law firms with referral systems that will connect them to LAOs and CSOs working with poor and marginalized citizens. Several roundtable discussions with law firms have been conducted. After a number of interventions, these roundtables regularly attracted up to 11 law firms. Through live-streaming on the Hukuomonline website, one attracted 1,933 viewers, 1200 viewers on the IG platform, and 112 people who shared the posts on the roundtable with their networks on Facebook. The program has also linked with LBH Jakarta, which has launched its own pro bono clearing house initiative. The roundtables have raised several fundamental issues, such as whether legal services in Indonesia can really be free of charge? Quoting from HukumOnline: “Are there courts in Indonesia that are ‘free’? This fundamental question arises as an autocritique of the practice of justice in this country, which continues to be tarnished by illegal levies. This question becomes increasingly

31

intriguing when the practice of levies in the Indonesian courts comes up against the rights of the poor to access pro bono services. ‘We once handled pro bono cases but the prosecutors wanted to be paid sixty million,’ said one of the advocates who attended the discussion.” The dilemma of pro bono services and the practice of a corrupt judiciary are things that need to be addressed. Aside from that, the provision of pro bono services should be encouraged among lawyers at all levels, including young lawyers. It should also be enlarged to cover not only individual cases but also cases affecting vulnerable groups. The roundtables provide a forum where cases received by Legal Aid Organizations may be referred to private-practice lawyers and law firms. LBH Jakarta and LBH Masyarakat have stressed that the support of private-practice lawyers and law firms is essential for expanding access to legal aid for marginalized groups. The topics discussed by the participants at the most recent roundtable were as follows: Pro bono concept and form: participants offer diverse legal skillsets and so the types of legal

assistance provided to pro bono clients also varies. The different types of pro bono legal services that can provided by the participants include helping with the establishment of CSOs as legal entities, provision of legal outreach in remote areas, negotiating with companies on consumer-related issues, delivering lectures at universities, serving as trainers for international legal debating competitions, providing assistance on civil and divorce cases, conducting research, providing legal opinions to the media, etc.;

Criteria for pro-bono clients: participants agreed that pro-bono clients should not be limited to those categorized as financially poor but should also include marginalized and vulnerable groups with minimal access and groups that are structurally disadvantaged. A client screening or appraisal mechanism is also needed, even where criteria already exist, so as to ensure that the pro bono services provided are on target and focused;

Pro bono funding: pro bono refers to the provision of free legal assistance services. In terms of operational funding for the provision of pro bono assistance, some law firms charge this to their clients or cover the cost at the firm level (rather than requiring individual advocates to cover the cost). Some law firms also set aside special funding for pro bono services;

Most law firms provide pro bono services in a sporadic, unsystematic or unstructured manner, and are dependent on their founders;

Pro bono operations: participants stated that effective guidelines and monitoring were required on the part of the bar associations;

For further information, see: www.hukumonline.com/berita/baca/lt5c6f717c7eedc/dilema-advokat-japan-pro-bono--adakah-yang-gratis

32

Engaging bar association – Apart from the responsibility of bar associations to uphold pro bono requirements among their members, they can also create linkages and serve as clearing houses. DPC Peradi Tasikmalaya has increased the knowledge of its members on issues affecting MAJu target groups and conducted events that connect its members to MAJu target groups. Rifka Annisa has developed collaboration with DPC PERADI Bantul for the provision of free legal aid services to women victims of violence, and to connect them with the Women Victims of Violence Protection Forum (Forum Perlindungan Korban Kekerasan terhadap Perempuan/FPKK), a multi stakeholder forum that works to protect women victims of violence in Yogyakarta (See Output 1.1.6). MAJu will continue to support such engagement. Pro Bono Manual for Advocates and Law Firms – From July to early August 2019, the MAJu program, in collaboration with Hukumonline, held three focused group discussions (FGD) on the contents of PERADI's pro bono manual with legal practitioners and officers, such as judges, advocates in corporate and litigation law firms, academics, and government representatives. The objective was to ensure that the contents of the manual are relevant to the current situation and can be used as references by both lawyers and law firms. The topics of the three FGDs were as follows: a. First FGD on 9 July 2019 discussed Concepts, Scope, and Criteria for Pro Bono Recipients; b. Second FGD on 23 July 2019 discussed Pro Bono Implementation Procedures; c. Third FGD on 6 August 2019 discussed the Role of Stakeholders in Supporting the Pro Bono

Movement.

As a result of the FGD process, a number of new things were identified that make the contents of the manual that resulted from the FGDs different from the previous PERADI manual, ranging from the procedures for applying to the actual process of providing pro bono services. The PERADI version of the manual reflects the procedures inherent in the functions of an advocates’ organization, while the manual resulting from the FGDs is more general in nature and can be used by both advocates and law firms.

Photo 6 - Hartati (Executive Director of Rifka Annisa) signed MOU with Moh. Fadli SH, MH (Chief of PBH PERADI Bantul)

33

To facilitate the dissemination of the pro bono manual, Hukumonline prepared five infographics that illustrate the concepts and stages involved in pro bono delivery, namely: a. The Public Are Entitled to Pro Bono

Services; b. The Public Has Right to Access both Pro

Bono Litigation and Non Litigation Services;

c. The Poor Have a Right to Pro Bono Service;

d. Pro Bono Provision and Implementation Process;

e. Developing a Pro Bono Culture. This infographics are aimed at making the public aware that advocates have a responsibility to provide pro bono services and that the poor and marginalized can request these services. The five infographics have been disseminated through

Hukumonline’s social media accounts (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter) and have elicited a good response. After the FGDs, Hukumonline produced two outputs, namely, the manual based on the FGD findings, and the PERADI manual with a commentary or input based on the FGD findings. This FGD-based manual was then disseminated through Hukumonline's website and distributed to approximately 200,000 lawyers and law firms who have subscribe to the Hukumonline newsletter. Pro Bono Networking Meeting - After the series of pro bono roundtables that promoted the importance of pro bono services, the FGDs, and the finalization of the FGD-based manual, the MAJu program then organized a Pro Bono Networking Meeting aimed at linking requests from the public for free legal assistance that had been received through MAJu partner LAOs with advocates and law firms looking for pro bono clients. The original target of 50 participants was greatly exceeded, with 72 participants showing up, consisting of individual advocates, and representatives of private law firms, advocates’ organizations, and LAOs. In a rare moment of unity among Indonesia’s advocates’ organizations, all of them (including PERADI, KAI, AAI, and PPKHI1) expressed their commitment to supporting the pro bono movement.

1 PERADI (Perkumpulan Advokat Indonesia), KAI (Kongres Advokat Indonesia), AAI (Asosiasi Advokat Indonesia), PPKHI (Perkumpulan Pengacara dan Konsultan Hukum Indonesia)

Image 1 - One example of Infographics produced by HukumOnline on Pro Bono campaign, disseminated through their website and social media www.hukumonline.com.

34

After the meeting, a number of advocates from PERADI and AAI connected with LBH Jakarta (a MAJu LAO) with a view to becoming involved in the provision of free legal assistance. This success in connecting an LAO with private-practice advocates so as to expand free legal aid services to the community is a significant achievement for the MAJu program. Reports on the meeting may be accessed at:

https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/bacafoto/lt5d8db6f2243b4/ketika-para-advokat-bertemu-dalam-pro-bono-networking-session/

http://mappifhui.org/2019/10/04/pro-bono-focus-networking-session/ Output/Activity 1.1.9: Strengthen the Organizational Capacity of Civil Society Organizations and Legal Aid Organizations This activity corresponds to Outcomes 1.1 and 1.2. The project is providing support to LAOs and CSOs to improve their organizational management capacity and their ability to raise funds. Thus far, grants have been provided to 18 LAO and CSO partners, with more grants to be awarded over the coming quarters. Strategic training workshops by MAJu are enhancing the financial management and operational management of these organizations to ensure the successful implementation of their grants and to strengthen their own performance and delivery of services. Capacity building on issues related to target groups - LBH APIK provided training to its paralegals so as to increase their knowledge and strengthen their capacity as regards HIV/AIDS and gender-diversity issues. They also provided training on the importance of social media. Meanwhile, the FPL has developed and tested a paralegal module that focuses on the issues facing women with HIV/AIDS; women victims of violations of the freedom of religion/belief; and women victims of gender-based violence. LBH Masyarakat conducted training related to case documentation, advocacy and case handling for their network. Skills enhancement - LBHM has developed a number of capacity-building programs for the HIV/AIDS community and key affected populations, such as advocates’ professional training, and training on effective report writing, writing for the HIV community, and preparing policy briefs. Writing training for the HIV community and its support organizations is intended to develop the writing skills of community members by combining training on basic writing techniques with a

Photo 7 - Pro Bono Networking Session 27 September 2019

35

story telling approach so as to allow them to write op-ed and feature articles that meet media publication standards. Through the training, participants are encouraged to write articles for the media so as to build positive narratives on HIV/AIDS and gender/sexual minority issues. Three writings by the trainees are now posted on the Magdalene website, and can be accessed at the following links:

A. https://magdalene.co/story/ktp-bak-harta-karun-bagi-komunitas-transpuan; B. https://magdalene.co/story/perjalanan-penerimaan-diri-sebagai-seorang-gay; C. https://magdalene.co/story/penutupan-lokalisasi-bukan-solusi.

Safety and Security Training - MAJU provided safety and security training to MAJu partners. Since then, MAJu partners in Jakarta have built a joint protection network and mechanism. In addition, MAJU works with Protection International for safety and security purposes, and to develop a Security Operational Plan for 5 MAJu partners in Jakarta, namely, GWL INA, Perkumpulan Suara Kita, LBH Masyarakat, LBH Jakarta, and LBH APIK Jakarta. Legal Aid “KALABAHU” (Karya Latihan Bantuan Hukum) Training - As explained in Output 1.1.1., this year 10 KALABAHU trainings have been conducted. Community Organizing Training - This training is conceived for MAJu partners after it was realized that the organizing processes engaged in by MAJu partners vary greatly, and that some also do not have specific strategies to meet the special needs of MAJu target groups. This year, MAJu has asked Emilianus Kleden to act as CO mentor for partners by providing assistance to them one by one. Over the course of 4 days, he will hold discussions with the partners and also members of the public who receive assistance from the partners and paralegals so as to gain an understanding of and explore how partners identify problems, formulate targets for change, and develop organizational strategies, and how they learn from these processes. The partners who have benefitted from the training to date say that it is important as it encourages them to reflect on their work strategies by paying attention to the unique problems of the people whom they assist. Intermediate Outcome 1.2: Increase the Number of Legal Aid Organizations Accredited to Provide Legal Aid Indonesia has 26,582,990 economically disadvantaged people who are officially entitled to free legal assistance from the state under Law No. 16/2011 on Legal Aid. Based on BPHN data per the end of 2018, the country has 405 LAOs with some 2,070 accredited advocates and 2,130 paralegals. This is woefully inadequate: in Jakarta, where there are a relatively large number of LAOs, each LAO has to handle at least 9,000 cases.

36

Image 2 Distribution Gap of LAOs represented with comparison of number of Kabupaten

(taken from BPHN presentation during Pro Bono Award 2018)

However, based on the TOC with partners, there are a number of options that could go some way towards resolving the problem. These include the establishment of village legal aid posts staffed by paralegals, enlarging the role of law students in providing legal aid services through interneships and legal clinics, the establishment of a pro-bono clearing house, and engagement with private law firms. Output/Activity 1.2.1: Facilitate BPHN Accreditation Widening LAO support for MAJu target groups – In our report for the previous quarter, it was explained how the social-inclusion approach facilitated the bringing together of justice seekers and legal aid providers. This allows target groups to directly seek legal-aid services from LAOs. The establishment of the LAO Forum has also resulted in many LAOs committing to provide services to marginalized groups. This year, that commitment has been acted upon. DPC PERADI Tasikmalaya and LBH APIK Jakarta established Village/Community Legal Aid Posts (Pos Bantuan Hukum Desa/Komunitas) to serve poor and marginalized people, espeically religious and ethnic minorities and women. LBH Medan, with the guidance of YLBHI, has started to improve their organizational and programmatic management, as shown by the marginalized individual cases that they have accepted.

37

LAO accreditation process – MAJu provided support to the LAO Forum (Forum OBH), which consists of previously accredited, newly accredited and non-accredited LAOs. A total of 161 LAOs were reached by MAJu’s main LAO partners. Having regard to the capacity of LAOs to satisfy the accreditation criteria and their visions, only 10 of these LAOs were eventually accredited. The verification process in 2018 involved in-depth verification of each LAO that applied. MAJu supported the BPHN in conducting sampling for factual verification in six provinces where MAJu operates (Jakarta, West Java, East Java, Yogyakarta, Central Java and Papua), with a total of 36 LAOs being verified. A list of previously and newly accredited LAOs that are part of the MAJu network can be found in Annex 4.

Overall, 864 unaccredited LAOs applied to participate in the verification and accreditation process for the 2019-2021 period, which was conducted in 2018. Of these, 512 supplied the required data. However, only 192 passed the final verification process. As for previously accredited LAOs, 332 out of 405 were re-accredited. Thus, a total of 524 LAOs successfully passed the verification and accreditation process. Their accreditation for the 2019-2021 period was officially confirmed on 27 December 2018 through the issuance of Minister of Law and Human Rights Decree No. M.HH-01.HN.07.02 TAHUN 2018. Among the MAJu partners that were newly accredited were PBH Peradi Tasikmalaya and LBH Masyarakat. Expansion of Legal Aid Coverage - One of the problems affecting legal aid in Indonesia is the lack of legal aid service providers compared to the number of those who need it, as well as the uneven distribution of legal aid services. YLBHI, as one of the organizations that pioneered legal aid in Indonesia, is helping to overcome this problem by opening new LBH offices in areas that suffer from a lack of LAOs but which are home to many people who need legal aid, as well as legal issues facing the community, such as Central Kalimantan and Malang. YLBHI worked with LBH Surabaya to reopen their Malang Post, which had been closed for some time. They held a workshop to develop a work program and SOPs, with various stakeholders from Malang being invited to attend, particularly alumni and representatives of CSO networks.

Photo 8 Verification and accreditation related activities in Jayapura conducted by BPHN and team

38

In the case of LBH Kalimantan, YLBHI launched its 16th office in Central Kalimantan. This is one of the places in Indonesia where indigenous peoples have been drawn into agrarian and environmental conflicts with corporations due to expropriation of community lands. The adverse consequences of land management that ignores the legal regulations and environmental impact analyses is haze from wildfires and environmental destruction. In this situation, women and children are in a particularly vulnerable prosecution conditions due to issues related to air and water pollution, sanitation, access to food, and other problems. In addition to land conflicts and environmental damage, the Central Kalimantan region is also vulnerable to ethnic conflict, such as between the Madurese and Dayaks. After several months of preparation and identifying resources, both human and material, YLBHI successfully opened the Palangkaraya LBH office in Central Kalimantan in July 2019. As a new LAO, LBH Palangkaraya does not yet have any advocates, and YLBHI continues to provide essential assistance so as to strengthen its organization. After the office was officially opened, LBH Palangkaraya prepared a work plan and program for the following 3 months. The main strategy that LBH Palangkaraya will have to focus on is how to expand its network, especially among students, practitioners, academics, and indigenous people. LAO Forum Meeting – The LAO Forum pioneered by MAJu partners held a meeting and discussion to evaluate the LAO verification and accreditation process conducted by the BPHN in the previous quarter, which saw 864 unaccredited LAOs apply to participate in the process for the 2019-2021 period. The LAO Forum also invited representatives of Regional Offices (Kanwil) of the Law and Human Rights Ministry who were involved in the verification and accreditation process to attend the evaluation meeting. Based on the results of the meeting, the MAJu partners identified several problems, mostly of a technical or administrative nature, such as the problems posed by poor internet connectivity, incomplete documentation, and the inputting of inaccurate information, such as incorrect office addresses, etc. In addition, the BPHN, which conducted the verification, raised a number of other issues, such as the naming of fictitious LAO offices and the falsification of documents by a number of LAOs. As regards the technical and administrative problems faced by some LAOs, MAJu partners can play an important role by providing ongoing assistance so that the same mistakes are not made in the future. Good communication between the LAOs and the Regional Offices of the Law and Human Rights Ministry is also important so that information on government legal aid funds can be accessed. MAJu’s partners can be of significant assistance in facilitating such communication. Legal Aid Conference Recommendations for Accreditation Process – As informed in Output 1.1.4, the accreditation process was also evaluated during the Legal aid Conferences in both Jakarta and Bali. However, the Bali conference, which focused more on government’s experiences, a greater number of policy recommendations were generated with a view to ensuring that the accreditation process is open, takes local needs into account, and is based on clear criteria. consequently, it is very important to prepare verification-and-accreditation technical guidelines that are more rigid, and are clearer as regards the standard criteria, assessment procedures, and knowhow. Output/Activity 1.2.2: Widen the Funding Base for Civil Society Organizations and Legal Aid Organizations LAO Forum and its advocacy for pro-bono services – As described in the previous report, to encourage LAO Forums to continue to develop and to provide quality legal aid services to the poor

39

and marginalized groups, all MAJu partners provided training on social justice last year to all members of LAO Forums. This year, MAJu partners are continuing to strengthen them by facilitate regular meetings and involving them in defending the rights of MAJu target groups.

LBH Surabaya created an LAO Forum in East Java that consists of LAOs from various districts. Similar interventions are being undertaken by PBH Ikadin Jember, LBH Takawida and OBH Paham (all based in Jember), which have established a district-level LAO Forum that currently consists of nine LAOs (six accredited and three non-accredited). The Jember LAO Forum covers not only the district of Jember but also Bondowoso, Banyuwangi and Situbondo. It meets every month and advocates and discusses issues such as reimbursement for cases by GOI, the quality of services provided by LAOs, etc. To increase the accountability of LAOs and advocates, the Jember LAO Forum has adopted the "integrity pact" approach, meaning that the LAOs and their advocates sign declarations expressing

their commitment to not accepting material rewards or “kickbacks” for legal-aid services provided to the poor, particularly as regards cases that will be reimbursed by the BPHN. These declarations are signed by LAO clients and the advocates representing them. They also received one referral case from LBH Surabaya related to an individual who has different gender identity, who is now being assisted by LBH Takawida. The Jember LAO Forum is successfully working with the Jember District Government to implement the local government’s newly issued legal aid regulation (Perbup No. 2.3/2018 on Implementing Guidelines for the Provision of Legal Aid to Poor and Vulnerable People in Jember Regency). This regulation is available upon request. The Jember LAO Forum has been particularly active in promoting free legal aid for the poor and marginalized groups. At present, the East Java LAO Forums are working to forge collaboration with the LAO Forums established by the East Java Regional Office so that legal aid funds that have been allocated for stage 5 of the criminal justice process (case review) can be reallocated. If this funding is only applied up to stage 2 of the criminal justice process, the remaining funds can be reassigned to new cases at the investigation stage (stage 1) and trial stage. The example of new-reassignment of funding can be found in ANNEX 5 – Example of Reassign of Legal Aid State Fund LBH Semarang also holds regular discussions in Semarang with PELITA for the purpose of sharing information on cases involving intolerance. At the same time, DPC Peradi Tasikmalaya

image 3 - Snapshot of the Implementing regulation for Jember Local Ordinance on Legal Aid supported by LBH Surabaya

40

has provided anti-corruption training to LAO staff for the purpose of ensuring LAO commitment to corruption eradication, and also regularly holds thematic discussions with MAJu target groups. As already explained in Output 1.1., LBH coordinates LAO network members that are grouped in LAO Forums to provide legal assistance to marginalized individual as legal counsel during the trial process in malpractice cases. This has provided greater understanding to LAO network members and encouraged them to start opening up to the marginalized individual. State Budget – There are many possibilities for accessing state funds for legal aid. Apart from the legal-aid fund, village funds and the social fund (both of which are financed by the state budget) can also be tapped. However, while it is not legally required under the Mass Organizations Law (UU Ormas), district government officials from Political and National Unity Agency (Kesbangpol) offices often insist on the submission of a Registration Certificate (SKT) by those who wish to apply for state funding (or even permission to hold an event). They claim that this is so that beneficiaries can be precisely identified for accountability purposes. Consequently, YAPPIKA and the Freedom of Association Coalition considered it very important to gain a solid understanding as to how social-fund and state-budget grants could be accessed and properly managed. Accordingly, YAPPIKA held meetings with the Center for Social Studies (AKATIGA) and Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) to learn more about the issues involved, inlcuding the risks and benefits of accessing such funds, and how the Mass Organizations Law and the SKT requirement could be fulfilled so as to ensure greater access to funding, as well as improve accountability. (Refer to Output 3.1.) Intermediate Outcome 1.3: Strengthen the Capacity of Civil Society Organizations to Develop Applications and IT Solutions Knowledge management system for structural legal aid cases and advocacy – YLBHI has pressed ahead with its plan to develop a documentation and data portal for structural legal aid cases by holding a meeting with the Wikimedia Foundation in April 2019, and providing training in May 2019. The development of this system will involve 15 LBHs under the auspices of YLBHI for the purpose of developing content for a data portal like the Wikipedia system. It is expected that this data portal will serve as a central repository for information and data on structural legal assistance and human rights cases referred by various LAOs and CSOs. To achieve this goal, there will need to be a written document setting out a uniform understanding as between YLBHI and the 15 participating LBHs regarding the definition and structure of the data that will be made available on the portal. This document is important so that the administrator who will manage the portal can display data accurately. In May 2019, YLBHI organized training by representatives of the Wikimedia Foundation on the Wikipedia data collection system and subsequent processes up until the display of information on the website's pages. This training was aimed at enhancing the capacity of YLBHI as regards the skills involved in data collection, processing and presentation prior to the development of the data portal by YLBHI and the 15 LBHs. This activity was followed by a joint working meeting between YLBHI and the 15 LBHs for the purpose of reaching agreement on the definition and structure of the data that will be made available on the portal. This activity also contributed to Output 2.3.2.

41

Output/Activity 1.3.1: Develop or Improve Case Tracking/Reporting Systems Case tracking and reporting system – In relation to Output 2.1.3. MAJu is supporting Suara Kita to develop an IT-based application that can be used by the public to report cases related to marginalized individuals especially key population of HIV/AIDS. Through this application and Sahabat Kita network, a total of 141 cases have been received. Suara Kita identified that 71 cases involved health issues; 21 were legal cases; 39 were counseling cases, and 10 were legal-identity cases. Meanwhile, LBH APIK Jakarta’s case tracking system has increased the effectiveness of their work in defending the rights of defendants, as well as their advocacy work. Information dissemination and online counselling through website - GWL INA, with MAJu support, regularly uploads information on HIV/AIDS issues to their website (www.guebisa.org), including information on health services for people with HIV/AIDS, the rights of people with HIV/AIDS, and tips on healthy living for people with HIV/AIDS. This online platform also provides an online consultation service managed by a full-time doctor and 1 counsellor. Since February 2019 to date, GWL INA has handled more than 700 online consultations. Meanwhile, Perkumpulan Suara Kita has developed an Android-based application (the “Sahabat Kita App”) which can be used to report cases affecting marginalized individuals especially key population of HIV/AIDS. Last quarter, LBH Masyarakat developed a digital library (www.kolektiva.site) that contains research reports, journals, articles, and other documents related to HIV/AIDS and human rights. The new website was launched on 30 November 2018. Currently, 150 documents are accessible. LBH Masyarakat will continue to upload new documents, and have also produced a tutorial video for those who wish to use the digital library. Intermediate Outcome 1.4: Develop the Capacity of Provincial Universities to Provide Quality Training and Research Services to Legal Aid Providers and Human Rights Defenders Restrictions on the human right of freedom of religion/belief – MAJu, YLBHI and Gajah Mada University’s Center for Religion and Cultural Studies (CRCS UGM) continue to collaborate closely as a follow-on from last year’s conference on restrictions on the human right of freedom of religion/belief. The results of the conference have now been published by CRCS UGM (with support from many donors) in a book titled: “Restriction without Violating the Freedom of Religion and Belief”. The book is currently being disseminated to all YLBHI offices and MAJu partners. A combination of knowledge and practical skill is important for advocacy. The book can be downloaded here: https://crcs.ugm.ac.id/mtt/ Linking HIV/AIDS Communities with Legal Clinics - Atma Jaya Catholic University, through its PPH (HIV/AIDS Research Center) and PKBH (Legal Aid Consultation Center) have developed a module on improving access to justice for marginalized individuals, including people living or affected by HIV/AIDS . There are four topics covered by the module, namely: (i) basic rights and fundamental human-rights principles; (2) the right to legal proportionality on the part of marginalized groups; (3) the right to health services; and (4) social rights and welfare for people with HIV/AIDS. The module is intended to be used by human-rights teachers and trainers, students, paralegals, and community facilitators.

42

Output/Activity 1.4.1: Expand the Indonesian Network for Clinical Legal Education (INCLE) and Link Its Members with Civil Society Organizations Working with MAJu Target Groups Networking with Universities – One of the main strategies of LBH Semarang is to network with universities and academics. In the past year, LBH Semarang has pursued this strategy by approaching universities to encourage them to collaborate on such things as seminars, training, discussions, and research. One of the universities that is now collaborating with LBH Semarang is Diponegoro University, which teamed up with LBH Semarang to organize a Legal Aid Festival.

Photo 9 - Opening of Legal Aid Festival conducted at the Diponegoro University

The majority of participants at the event were law students from various colleges in Semarang, and they appeared quite enthusiastic about becoming involved. The participants were free to attend those classes that were of particular interest to them. The most popular class turned out to be environmental advocacy, which drew a total of 25 participants. This was followed by labor advocacy, with had around 15 participants, and then the gender advocacy class, which drew 12 participants (mostly women). All of the classes were presented in an interesting manner, and proved useful to the students as the materials discussed are not generally taught as part of the formal law-school curriculum. Thus, the participants were provided with food for thought and new insights and ways of thinking about human rights issues. Developing Legal Clinics - In the context of expanding the reach of legal aid services, LBH Semarang has forged collaboration with the Nahdlatul Ulama Islamic University (UNISNU) in Jepara for the purpose of developing a legal clinic on the university’s campus so that final-year students can gain practical experience and develop a social justice perspective. The assistance provided by LBH Semarang covered a number of activities that commenced in July 2019. LBH Semarang, along with the senior staff from the university’s Shariah and Law School and the Chair of the Shariah and Law School’s Institute for Education, Research and Legal Aid (LPKBH) met to set up a legal-clinic course and arrange legal clinic activities focused on the provision of legal aid to the poor and oppressed.

43

The LPKBH, which is as yet unaccredited, has the potential to be developed and used as a forum for final-year students to serve internships and provide legal aid services. LBH Semarang has strongly encourage the Shariah and Law School to involve students in the provision of legal-aid services through LPKBH so as to help inculcate concern for the poor and marginalized among its graduates, and also provide them with practical experience of legal work. After the meeting, the Shariah and Law School, accompanied by LBH Semarang, conducted hearings and paid a study visit to the University of Indonesia’s Law School (FHUI), which operates a legal clinic program and is a member of INCLE. During the visit, Shariah and Law School representatives met with the head of the Legal Laboratory, which oversees the FHUI law-clinic program, to learn firsthand about how the legal-clinic program benefits the university’s law students and how it can be integrated with the provision of legal aid by LKBH. It was explained that the legal-clinic program was included as part of the FHUI curriculum and applied a selection mechanism to screen students who could take the legal-clinic course. It was also explained that evaluation tools were necessary so as to assess students and also to assess the performance of the university as the provider of the legal-clinic program. Evaluation is an important part of a legal-clinic program as beneficiaries and CSO/LAO partner organizations need to be involved in developing clinical activities and exploring the impact of clinical activities on the community so as to ensure that social justice is positioned as a key part of the program. In addition, LBH Semarang and representatives of the Shariah and Law School visited a MAJu partner that also participates in the the University of Indonesia legal-clinic program, namely, MaPPI FHUI, to discuss the legal-clinic approach to anti-corruption. At the time of writing, LBH Semarang was continuing to provide the Shariah and Law School with assistance to develop a legal-clinic program as part of its curriculum. The establishment of a legal clinic is expected to afford greater access to justice and benefits for the people living in the vicinity of the Nahdlatul Ulama Islamic University, as well as to provide the university’s students with legal skills and an appreciation for social justice. OUTCOME 2: Strengthened Ability of the Government of Indonesia and State-Auxiliary Bodies to Protect Citizen Rights Via Evidence-Based Decision Making As mandated under Presidential Regulation (Perpres) No. 75/2015 on the National Action Plan on Human Rights, a database on the implementation of ratified international conventions by government agencies is essential to track the progress of implementation and to identify areas where improvement is needed. However, the existing databases for human rights violations that are scattered across the GOI and CSOs are fragmented, and data sharing is lacking. The development of an integrated database is challenging due to the high cost involved, limited institutional capacity, and entrenched bureaucratic culture that poses a challenge to effective data management and the sharing of information, both within organizations and externally with end-users. Following up on the result of the IT assessment conducted to find the host for a human-rights database, this year MAJu commenced collaboration with the Ministry of Law and Human Rights’ Research and Development Department (Balitbang KumHAM) to improve their human rights and law database (known as SIPKUMHAM/Law and Human Rights Problems Information System).

44

After several meetings with the leadership of Balitbang KumHAM, in February 2019 the head of Balitbang KumHAM finally agreed to support the database development by issuing an internal directive appointing 23 Balitbang KumHAM staff members to a team to take charge of the project (Balitbang KumHAM Directive No. PPH-776.TI.06.03 of 2019 on the Appointment of an Implementation Team for the Development of a Database on Legal and Human Rights Issues in Collaboration with The Asia Foundation). In response, on 24 April 2019, MAJu issued a letter of support for the improvement of SIPKUMHAM and the development of a grand design for evidence-based policy making using IT. Outcome 2 assumes that there is a need to have one human-rights database, and also assumes the existence of data and information, albeit scattered and fragmented, that can be used for evidence-based decision making for the protection of human rights. The objective of the establishment of the human-rights database is for end-users (GOI, CSOs, LAOs, and the public) to have access to the data it contains and for stakeholders to be able to better identify and map human rights violations across Indonesia. Analysis of the data will assist both the GOI and CSOs with identifying policies that need reform or that need better implementation/enforcement. Outcome 2 will not only strengthen advocacy for increasing access to justice of marginalized people, as mandated in Outcome 1, but will also provide legitimate grounds for improvements in the enabling environment for CSOs to work as mandated in Outcome 3. As highlighted in the previous reports and information that has been provided, the principal challenge is that an integrated human-rights database is not actually needed by the Government of Indonesia. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which is responsible for preparing UPR and other UN reports, has its own system, which is considered sufficient for these needs. Komnas HAM, which was originally expected to manage the human-rights database, suffers from serious organizational problems, with the result that their priorities are institutional reform and knowledge management. Balitbang KumHAM’s SIPKUMHAM, which has the greatest potential for development as a human-rights database, is actually intended to cater to the Ministry of Law and Human Rights’ internal needs. In addition, the proposed data search methodology is not sufficiently robust. Further, they only plan to crawl trusted online media and sources, rather than cases and primary information. MAJu consulted with USAID on the challenges that had arisen during the preparation stage of this collaboration. In April 2019, MAJu met with and informed USAID of the various challenges that had been encountered. This included a meeting between Anders Mantius, Acting Director of DRG of USAID, Dondy Sentya (MAJu AOR) and Johanna Gardjito (OAA). USAID said that they understood the situation and, although they regretted that the information had not been provided earlier to Acting Director of DRG, they nevertheless appreciated TAF’s efforts to take the collaboration forward and make it work. In response, MAJu requested that the indictors in the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (ME Plan) be amended, particularly those related to Outcome 2, given the various challenges that had been encountered and anticipated target changes. USAID agreed and requested MAJu to submit an amended ME Plan. MAJu submitted the revised ME Plan to AOR on 1 April 2019 and now is being approved by October 2, 2019. The revised ME Plan can be referred to ANNEX 1 – APPROVED REVISED M&E INDICATORS

45

Going forward, the assumptions will remain relatively the same. However, it is important to acknowledge the challenges, and also that SIPKUMHAM was previously intended solely for the internal use of Balitbang KumHAM, especially researchers, and thus SIPKUMHAM was designed for manual data entry based on monitoring conducted by staff in the Ministry of Law and Human Rights’ provincial offices. MAJu and Balitbang KumHAM envision that the improved SIPKUMHAM will contribute to the needs of the Ministry for evidence-based policy making on human rights, law and the public services provided by the Ministry. The monitoring of sentiment and trends related to public services is important so as to allow the Ministry to measure their performance. Therefore, the more data and information available in SIPKUMHAM, the more useful SIPKUMHAM will be to Balitbang KumHAM in particular and the Ministry in general. Addressing this, MAJu and Balitbang KumHAM agreed to improve SIPKUMHAM by adding an online media-crawling feature; a data-exchange feature that will enable SIPKUMHAM to exchange data with other institutions, and a search-engine feature to facilitate users in accessing data. In addition, SIPKUMHAM’s content management will be improved so as to provide greater coverage of human rights, legal issues and the Ministry’s performance in delivering public services. MAJu and Balitbang KumHAM have also agreed to develop a grand design for “Evidence-based Policy Making Using IT,” which will also cover the sustainability of SIPKUMHAM through its incorporation into the Ministry’s strategic plan and the National Medium-Term Development Plan (RPJMN). This is necessary so that further funding can be secured from the state budget. As regards data exchange, MAJu acknowledges the difficulties posed by weak digital security and also the lack of mutual trust among the organizations, agencies and institutions which maintain human rights and law data. These issues could hamper the exchanging of data. Therefore, MAJu and Balitbang KumHAM have agreed to use crawling as the main tool for obtaining data from a variety of accountable and verifiable online sources, including, for example, the websites of MAJu partners, online journals, the Komnas HAM website and online media, so as to populate SIPKUMHAM. The data collected through crawling will be cleaned by the Balitbang KumHAM team so that it can be used for policy analysis and policy making. Consequently, capacity building on human-rights data and analysis for the Balitbang KumHAM staff and staff in the Ministry’s provincial offices who input and analyze data forms will play an integral role in the development of SIPKUMHAM. Specifically as regards the public services provided by the Ministry, MAJu has emphasized that this area is not a MAJu priority. Nevertheless, MAJu is aware that piloting the database for public-service issues could be a good way of convincing the Ministry as to the importance of the database’s development. In addition, MAJu and Balitbang KumHAM have agreed that the SIPKUMHAM development project will serve as the basis for the development of a more complex IT and e-governance system for evidence-based policy making. This envisions the use of machine learning and artificial intelligence by SIPKUMHAM, which will benefit the Ministry in the long run by making it easier for the Ministry to effectively perform its principal roles in law and regulation making, and in ensuring the harmonization of legislation. The TOR explaining the support of MAJu for Balitbang KumHAM had been reported in previous quarter.

46

In relation to the changes and refocusing of the MAJu effort in supporting SIPKUMHAM, which will now only serve internal Ministry needs, MAJu consulted with USAID about the likelihood that the results of Outcome 2 will be different from those originally anticipated, namely, that SIPKUMHAM would serve the public and be supported by data sharing. USAID responded by stating that they understood the situation and supported the initiative. Similar to the above initiative, MAJu has agreed to continue supporting Komnas HAM based on the previous assessment conducted by ELSAM, as well as other assessments. After several meetings, MAJu has concluded that it would like to support the development of a roadmap document for an IT-based human rights knowledge management system in Komnas HAM. MAJu envisions that this system will provide Komnas HAM with data and information that will be helpful to it in fulfilling one of its principal mandates, namely, to provide policy recommendations for addressing human-rights violations and human-rights protection. Intermediate Outcome 2.1: Increase the Quality and Management of Data on Human Rights Violations against Target Groups through a Unified Database Kick Off Meetings with Balitbang KumHAM – To start the process, Balitbang KumHAM and MAJu conducted two kick-off meetings. The first kick off meeting, to which all units in the Ministry were invited, was chaired by Asep Kurnia, the head of Balitbang KumHAM. Participants included the Head of the General Secretariat’s Planning Unit, and the secretaries and representatives of the public relations sections in all units of the Ministry. The meeting explained the history of the collaboration, how the project would be conducted, and what the roles of each Ministry unit would be. Aman Riyadi, the head of the Ministry’s SIPKUMHAM working team, delivered a presentation on the vision for the system and how it would contribute to the Ministry, while Machyudi, the head of Balitbang KumHAM’s IT team, provided explanations on the IT design for the improved SIPKUMHAM. The responses from the participants were good. In particular, the head of the Ministry’s Planning Unit responded positively as regards the need for additional servers for SIPKUMHAM.

Photo 10 - Kick-Off Meeting 17 May 2019 and Balitbang KumHAM covered by official Instagram channel

47

Output/Activity 2.1.1: Ensure an Integrated Human Rights Database is institutionalized Balitbang KumHAM support – Development of Grand Design for Evidence-Based Policy Making – MAJu has finalized the Grant Design Draft with full support from the Balitbang KumHAM team. The grand design draft is now ready to be presented to all units in the Ministry for obtaining final confirmation, and then Balitbang KumHAM will advocate it to the Minister in order to have it adopted as an internal regulation and included in the Ministry’s five-year strategic planning program. The grand design process started with an assessment of all units in the Ministry on May 2019. The grand design team (consisting of the MAJu consultant and Balitbang KumHAM representatives) interviewed 13 stakeholders from 11 key units in the Ministry, namely, the Directorate General of Human Rights; Directorate General of Intellectual Property; Directorate General of General Law Administration; Directorate General of Immigration; Directorate General of Correctional Facilities; National Law Development Agency (BPHN); Human Resources Development Agency (BPSDM); Directorate General of Laws and Regulations; Inspectorate General; Data and Information Center (Pusdatin); Public Relations and Cooperation Bureau at the Secretariat-General; and the Planning Bureau at the Secretariat-General. The grand design assessment process was conducted in parallel with an assessment by the IT and human rights dataset team which had similar questions for the units. On 28 June 2019, MAJu and the consultant team presented the findings of the assessment to members of the SIPKUMHAM team, led by the team’s head, Aman Riyadi, who is also the head of Balitbang KumHAM’s Policy Center. Overall, the findings may be summarized as follows:

1. The 11 units of the Ministry agreed that evidence-based policy making using IT and the development of the database is important and necessary.

2. The current infrastructure and business processes do not facilitate evidence-based policy making using IT as the Ministry’s units have difficulties in sharing information both internally and with other units, while data collection, data analysis and data management has yet to be integrated.

3. SIPKUMHAM is intended to be used for internal purposes by Balitbang KumHAM and by researchers (the principal anticipated users of SIPKUMHAM).

4. SIPKUMHAM currently suffers from methodological and dataset weaknesses. 5. Two different datasets need to be developed: a human rights and law database, and a public-

services database (needed primarily to facilitate the assessment of the Ministry performance in delivering public services).

6. In the case of the human rights and law database, data crawling, data exchange with other institutions, and manual entry are needed to analyze legal and human rights issues; while in the case of the public-services database, Balitbang KumHAM needs to be aware of and to monitor public sentiment and trends in relation to the Ministry’s performance in delivering public services. Presentation slides on these findings is available upon request.

In August 2019, MAJu and the Balitbang KumHAM team finalized the first draft of the Grand Design and presented it to the Head of Balitbang KumHAM. Apparently, there was disagreement

48

over the style of writing of the Grand Design and thus MAJu and the Balitbang KumHAM team revised the draft into academic-paper style, as demanded by the Head of Balitbang KumHAM. In September 2019, the final draft was approved by the Head of Balitbang KumHAM and is now ready to present and consult to all units in the Ministry. The final draft of the Grand Design in Bahasa Indonesia is available upon request. Balitbang KumHAM Support – Development of Dataset for Human Rights – As explained in the TOR, MAJu and Balitbang KumHAM agreed to improve SIPKUMHAM by adding an online media-crawling feature; a data-exchange feature that will enable SIPKUMHAM to exchange data with other institutions, and a search-engine feature to facilitate users in accessing data. For this to be possible, it is essential that dataset structure, methodology, and keywords be developed. The development of the dataset structure, methodology and keywords started with a small kick-off meeting with the Dataset Team appointed by Balitbang KumHAM to work with MAJu. At the outset, there were about 10 people in the team and they mostly consisted of researchers. However, by the end of the process, only around 4 people remained fully focused on this effort. Dataset development will need more time due to the difficulties encountered in getting the Balitbang KumHAM team to come together and coordinate. MAJu’s consultant team finally took the initiative of proposing the first draft to them to review. This only happened at the end of August, which was one month behind schedule. While waiting, MAJu reported the difficulties to the Head of Balitbang KumHAM, who agreed to push the work forward. The second draft has now been finalized but again MAJu has faced difficulties in getting Balitbang KumHAM to do a final check due to time constraints. As a result, the work is running one month behind schedule once again. The final draft of the methodology, dataset structure and keywords for human rights and law issues in Bahasa Indonesia is available upon request. Balitbang KumHAM support – IT system development – MAJu and the Balitbang KumHAM IT team worked hard to assess and create the IT architectural design, which explains SIPKUMHAM and how the system needs to be developed to achieve the expectations of Balitbang KumHAM. The design was completed in one month and the document was then used to procure an IT vendor to develop the improved system. The IT architectural design document in Bahasa Indonesia is available upon request. The procurement of the IT vendor was conducted over the course of 2 weeks. MAJu conducted a bidder’s conference, where MAJu presented the system’s architectural design to the bidders so that they could address it in their proposals. There were a total of 7 bidders for the IT solutions component and 3 bidders for the law and human rights training component. For the IT solutions component, MAJu produced a shorlist of 3 bidders based on the levels of administrative and technical compliance with the RFP. The best three applicants for the IT component were invited to present their proposals to the selection committee, which consisted of two representatives of Balitbang KumHAM, 1 from TAF, and 1 from the MAJu consultant for the IT and human rights dataset. On 27 August 2019, the panel conducted a one-day meeting to listen to the proposals and select the winner. However, after listening to the 3 bidders, two bidders were found to be very similar in terms of suitability. Consequently, the panel decided to conduct a second selection round involving only these two bidders, which were requested to make more thorough presentations on the systems they envisaged, with a particular emphasis on addressing the RFP, coaching plan and

49

knowledge transfer methodology. The panel also agreed that for the second round, Balitbang KumHAM would select the winner as it would be the main user and client. On 30 August 2019, the second round was conducted at Balitbang Kumham, which resulted in the selection of Alutechno as the winner – this is an IT company that had more experience in data crawling and system analysis, in line with the needs of SIPKUMHAM. They have two basic engines that are ready to use and ownership of these will be transfered to the Ministry of Law and Human Rights to form the basis of the new SIPKUMHAM system. Balitbang KumHAM support – Public Service Component in SIPKUMHAM - In the meantime, to get buy-in from the new Minister of Law and Human Rights, Balitbang KumHAM requested SIPKUMHAM to also capture public feedback on the quality of the public services provided by the Ministry. It is expected that information on public services can be added as an additional page in SIPKUMHAM. Actually, this was a key priority for Balitbang KumHAM when selecting the IT vendor for SIPKUMHAM, namely, that they would prioritize the development of a dashboard for the Minister that will show the functions and benefits of SIPKUMHAM for evidence-based policy making. Most importantly, this dashboard will show the Ministry’s peformance in the delivery of its key public services, namely, immigration, registration of organizations, and correctional facilities. For this, Balitbang KumHAM requested that the initial product be ready in 100 days of the Minister taking office, which will be at the end of December 2019. For this effort, MAJu hired another consultant to develop the methodology, dataset structure and keywords for the crawling of feedback on public services from online media and social media. This is likely to be more difficult when it comes to gathering data from social media as the language structure and grammar used is often very different from formal Bahasa Indonesia. Balitbang KumHAM support – Human Rights Training – It has been agreed that the SIPKUMHAM will not only be based on data crawling, but also integrate manual entry by the Ministry’s provincial offices, as well as other stakeholders, including CSOs. In its early years, SIPKUMHAM experienced difficulties with data entry as staff in the provincial offices were not able to correctly classify law and human rights issues. Therefore, the provision of training on human rights and law issues is very important. Consequently, MAJu conducted a procurement process to select a training provider for such purpose. In the 2 weeks following the start of the procurement process, MAJu only received 3 bids. Due to the straightforward requirements involved, MAJu did not conduct a bidder conference or invite the bidders to make presentations. MAJu established a selection committee panel consisting of three representatives of Balitbang KumHAM, and two from MAJu. The selection process was based on administrative and technical compliance with the terms of the RFP. The winner of the process was a coalition made up of ICJR and ELSAM. However, the panel emphasized their expectation that the winner would reconsider the use of online-learning methodology, which Balitbang KumHAM had doubts about. The contract with ICJR and ELSAM will be signed in the next quarter. Output/Activity 2.1.2: Foster Ownership and Engagement across Key Institutions SIPKUMHAM is currently managed solely by Balitbang KumHAM, with no other bodies being involved. However, SIPKUMHAM will use data crawling to collect data and information from

50

various online media sources including the websites of institutions external to the Ministry of Law and Human Rights that are relevant for collecting human rights data. It is expected that in the future, SIPKUMHAM will be able to assist institutions outside of the Ministry with rights-based decision making. Output/Activity 2.1.3: Improve Data Management Capacity of Other MAJu Partners Legal Assistance Database System (SIDBANKUM) support – SDIBANKUM is the principal application used to reimburse accredited LAOs. In December 2018, MAJu signed a contract with PT DOCOTEL Teknologi for the second-phase upgrades to SIDBANKUM. These upgrades are focused on five aspects:

1. Better data layout and display for reporting of legal aid information as part of the National State Budget Revision Process (APBN Perubahan/APBNP), including data validation updates, termination of LAO and Kanwil reimbursement process, APBNP reporting and document filtering;

2. VERASI: a tool for the refinement and validation of legal-aid and financial data from accredited LAOs: updating of registration and reregistration forms, and validation of administration documents;

3. Budget-Ceiling (PAGU) Management: adjustments to migration tool to assist BPHN officers with managing incoming and historical data ceilings, including management of budget history and log history, master budget, data migration tool for LAO budgets, and data migration tool for budget history;

4. Additional Pages and Menus: transition period from 2016, list of continued National State Budget (APBN) and APBNP allocations, list of updated BAST (Memorandum of Project Handover)

5. Additional financial year features and classification categories for acceptable goods and services supported by the BPHN.

PT DOCOTEL Teknologi completed its work in December 2018. The BPHN expressed its appreciation for MAJu’s support for the SIDBANKUM upgrade, particularly in connection with the LAO accreditation process in 2018. Documentation of human-rights and other cases by MAJu partners – MAJu, through the institutional support it provides, encourages every partner organization to document human-rights and other cases. These partner organizations include LBH Surabaya, LBH Yogyakarta, LBH Semarang, LBH Jakarta, LBH Apik Jakarta, GWL INA, and Perkumpulan Suara Kita (PSK), all of which conduct regular monitoring on human rights issues. PSK has also developed an IT-based application that can be used by the public to report cases related to marginalized individuals especially key population of HIV/AIDS. The Sahabat Kita App can be downloaded at http://m.appbuild.io/r5b75. Through this application and the Sahabat Kita network, 106 cases have been received. Meanwhile, as mentioned in Output 1.1.2, YAPPIKA provides training on public-service monitoring to MAJu partners that focus on access the health services for people with HIV/AIDS. The training is expected to ultimately result in more accurate data that can be used for advocating improved public services and access to healthcare. A total of 24 participants from the HIV/AIDS organizations network, such as GWL INA, Suara Kita, Sahabat Kita, Jaringan Indonesia Positif,

51

OPSI, Transvoice, YIM, PPH Atma Jaya, Gaya Ptriot, Yayasan Kaki, etc., have been provided with training. Currently, they are endeavoring to collate information on past incidences of discrimination in the provision of healthcare, as well as information on current cases. This information will be submitted to ORI for follow-up. Intermediate Outcome 2.2: Strengthen the Information Management and Analytical Capacity of the Government of Indonesia, State-Auxiliary Bodies, and Civil Society Organizations to Produce Reliable and Verifiable Human Rights Data SIDBANKUM training – As a follow up from the new, improved SIDBANKUM, MAJu, through PT Docotel, conducted training of trainers for BPHN staff on the new SIDBANKUM and how to use it. The training manual and assistance by BPHN was provided to the staff of the Provincial Offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights who are responsible for operating SIDBANKUM. Komnas HAM request – As reflected in Output 1.1.2. MAJu agreed to provide support for the three activities. For the designing of the blueprint, MAJu will use an external consultant or vendor to develop the document, which is expected to help Komnas HAM to identify activities that should be conducted so as to achieve its targets. The document can also be used by Komnas HAM to seek support from other donor agencies. MAJu is now waiting for detailed TOR from Komnas HAM to be used in the vendor procurement process. Working Group with Republic of Indonesia Ombudsman (Ombudsman Republik Indonesia/ORI) – Refer to Output 3.3.1. Through MAJu support to YAPPIKA, a working group has been established with ORI to discuss problems related to HIV/AIDS issues. This is not a formal working group but rather is intended to facilitate HIV/AIDS groups to obtain redress, or simply to exercise their rights to seek better public services in the healthcare sector. Through this working group, MAJu hopes to see a more sensitive response from ORI to the needs of people with HIV/AIDS and key affected populations. Output/Activity 2.2.1: Improve the Analytical Capacity of Komnas HAM, Legal Aid Organizations, and Civil Society Organizations

Launching of Annual Report Findings – As usual at the end of every year, MAJu partners publish annual report that describe their work over the course of the year, including the cases or incidents they have handled, common cases that occur in their areas, and situation analyses of such cases. This year, a number of MAJu partners have published their annual reports, as detailed below:

a. LBH Semarang annual report “The Dark Side of Democracy”: https://drive.google.com/file/d/10vP_3BSS5cCJigevV1rLkwbVHa2zRJ-4/view

b. LBH Bandung annual report, which focused on human-rights violations and the state of Indonesian democracy

c. LBH Surabaya annual report “Death Knell for Justice for Poor and Marginalized People in East Java”: http://bantuanhukumsby.or.id/2018/12/21/catahu-lbh-surabaya-2018-2/

d. LBH Jakarta annual report “Democracy at the Cross Road”: https://www.bantuanhukum.or.id/web/demokrasi-di-persimpangan/

52

e. LBH APIK Jakarta annual report “Half-hearted State Response to Fulfilling the Rights of Women Victims of Violence”: https://drive.google.com/file/d/15lxarZwrgxBWAm73hyExt4GLgBe79UL7/view

Publications – This year, MAJu has supported serveral publications in relation to program issues: a. Refer to Output 1.1.6. GWL INA has published a book on the issue of acceptance of children

with different gender identity by parents, namely, the autobiography of Kevin Halim. This book is expected to inspire and support families when facing similar situations, and in accepting the reality of having children with different gender identity. The book launch was by invitation only (closed to the public) due to the sensitivity of the issue and to prevent further violence by intolerant groups. It is hoped that the book will help to expand support for marginalized individuals so that they can grow and develop in a healthy way, both mentally and physically.

b. LBH Masyarakat published a pocket book setting out advocacy guidelines c. MAJu, in collaboration with PERADI (Indonesia Bar Association) and HukumOnline,

published Pro Bono Guidelines for Advocates, which can be accessed at http://mini.hukumonline.com/panduanprobono/

d. YLBHI published a factsheet titled “Factsheet: Right to Development”: https://ylbhi.or.id/bibliografi/hak-atas-pembangunan/

e. YLBHI, in collaboration with CRCS UGM, published a book titled “Membatasi Tanpa Melanggar Kebebasan Beragama atau Berkeyakinan” (Limiting without Abrogating the Freedom of Religion and Belief)

f. LBHM: Videographic on the criminalization of sex workers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTTgReOFsUE&feature=youtu.be To date, this videographic has been viewed more than 1700 times on the three LBHM social media channels.

g. LBH Apik Jakarta: campaigning against sexual violence and HIV/AIDS h. Rifka Annisa: Handbook of Services for Women and Child Victims of Violence; three modules

on i) violence against women related to gender and sexual diversity; (ii) violence against women with HIV/AIDS; and (iii) violence against women related to freedom of religion and belief

Output/Activity 2.2.2: Enable a Dialogue within the Government of Indonesia about Data Findings Advocacy Effort – Refer to Output 1.1.4, several efforts to provide policy recommendations based on data have been conducted through advocacy on Criminal Code, Criminal Procedural Code, Indigenous Peoples Bill, and local regulations. Women Crisis Center Network (Forum Pengada Layanan) – They have worked together with FPKK (Forum Perempuan Korban Kekerasan Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta/Forum for Women Victims of Violence in Yogyakarta) to improve their guidelines for providing services to women and child victims of violence by adding HIV/AIDS issues. This approach has proved successful and now the guidelines are being revised. FPKK is a multi-stakeholder forum consisting of 36 member organizations/institutions that include District Public Hospitals (RSUD); Police Units; Legal Aid Organizations, CSOs working for women and children in Yogyakarta; District Social Services Offices (Dinsos); District Health Offices (Dinkes); District Women’s Protection Offices

53

(TP2TP2A); Provincial Offices of the Attorney General's Office; District Courts and Appellate Courts; District Manpower Offices; Correctional Facilities; District Culture Offices and District Religious Affairs Offices. SKPD Forum (Regional Government Work-unit Forum) - This forum was initiated by DPC PERADI Tasikamalaya and MAJu to encourage improvements in the provision of public services to minority and marginalized communities in Tasikmalaya Regency, particularly Ahmadiyya communities that have been receiving assistance. The forum is made up of the Population and Civil Registration Office, Religious Affairs Office, Regional Office of the Ministry of Religious Affairs, National Unity and Politics Agency (Kesbangpol) and Village Governments. The forum has been established as a follow-up on the assistance and counseling on civil and political rights that has been provided to date. Intermediate Outcome 2.3: Increase Awareness of Citizen Rights within the Government of Indonesia, State-Auxiliary Bodies, and the Private Sector Discussion with Ministry of Home Affairs on the important role of CSOs in the development process and how the mechanisms currently available, especially the mechanism for grants and for the procurement of goods and services, can be accessed by CSOs. The discussion involved a dialectic process related to freedom of assembly and organization, and the overall democratization process, so as to identify common ground as a basis for developing guidelines that support the work of CSOs. Citizenship Rights Training – As indicated above, MAJU has agreed to provide training on human rights, law and citizenship rights to staff of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights’ regional offices. MAJu, through DPC PERADI Tasikmalaya, provided training on citizens' rights, especially civil and political rights, and also on mediation skills for paralegals and village officials in Tasikmalaya Regency. The skills and knowledge imparted were intended to increase the capacity of villagers to understand their rights as citizens and to negotiate and find common ground for conflict resolution. Introduction of Citizen Rights to Public Officials from village level to local-government administrations – Since last quarter, DPC PERADI Tasikmalaya have been active in introducing citizens’ rights to public officials. In the previous quarter, they conducted a one-day training course to raise the level of awareness of village administration officers as regards the constitutional rights of villagers and the provision of public services in a non-discriminatory manner. This quarter, they took representatives of a number of village administrations and the Legal Bureau of the Tasikmalaya District government to the National Legal Aid Conferences I and II in Jakarta and Bali, respectively, to introduce and connect them to the broader legal-aid network and to national government officials so as to encourage them to expand their support for legal aid by allocating funding for legal aid out of Village Funds and Local Government budgets. A similar intervention was also conducted by LBH Papua, which took a number of village government officials (who are also paralegals) to the National Legal Aid Conferences. Below is the testimony of one village administrator (See Box 2)

54

Box 2

Bringing Village Administrations and Religious Minorities Closer Together Through the Legal Awareness Movement and Social Inclusion

My name is Nanang (people often call me Ahong) and I am the Village Secretary (Sekdes) of Sinaputra Village, Cigalontang District, Tasikmalaya Regency. Apart from that, I also currently serve as Chair of the Indonesian Village Officials’ Association (PPDI)’s chapter in Tasikmalaya Regency. About a year ago, I learned about DPC Peradi Tasikmalaya from Dian Muhamad Darda, a member of a PPDI partner organization. Dian is a paralegal in Peradi Tasikmalaya DPC’s Legal Aid Center (PBH). During my first meeting with DPC Peradi Tasikmalaya, I told them about our fears and worries as village officials as we often find ourselves threatened by journalists and bogus NGOs who question the use of village development funds from both the Village Fund and Village Allocation Fund. We find ourselves under pressure when performing our work as, to be honest, we still have a lot to learn about how to use our budgets in accordance with the laws and regulations. Because of our lack of knowledge about the law, we are often subjected to extortion by journalists and NGOs, even though we only earn Rp. 900,000 per month. Around February 2018, we met with the Board of Directors of DPC Peradi Tasikmalaya and the managers of the Peradi PBH. We asked them to help us by providing legal monitoring and outreach. We even asked them how much we would have to pay as PPDI members to receive legal assistance services from DPC Peradi or the Peradi PBH. When we asked this, the Chair of DPC Peradi just responded with a smile. He then asked us about the various problems and obstacles we faced in carrying out our duties as village officials. That's when we got everything off our chests, spilling out all our problems, such as erratic working hours (can be 24 hours a day), having to deal with all the complaints of villagers, lack of certainty over our status as civil servants, and our miserable salaries. At the end of the meeting, we all agreed to sign an MoU to build “Legally Aware and Inclusive Villages.” For the Legally Aware Village aspect, we had a fair idea of what this was about. But we were completely confused at first about the Inclusive Village concept. But after we participated in a number of activities organized by DPC Peradi, we began to understand more about what is meant by an Inclusive Village, although it is difficult to describe in words. However, what is certain is that an Inclusive Village is a village that is free from corruption, a village that has a child-friendly environment, a village that is free of discrimination, and a village that respects the rights of all its residents. As a result of various events organized by DPC Peradi, I began to get to know and mix with people from the Ahmadi, Wahidiyah and Christian communities. Prior to this, we had viewed such people as being deviant, even infidels – people who clearly did not adhere to the teachings of my religion, Islam. But thanks to these events, my opinion about them changed. They are also human beings who have the same human dignity as us and who must be afforded equal rights as citizens. As executives of PPDI, our friendship with them came about thanks to the intervention of DPC Peradi Tasikmalaya, who continually worked to bring us closer together. For example, in our Inclusive Village Kemah Bhakti events, we sat together with them on the committee. By now, we have close ties of friendship with them. In the economic field, for example, we often work together with Ahmadiyah people, as well as for various social activities

55

In line with the above initiatives, LBH APIK Jakarta also made efforts to strengthen the capacity of village and sub-district officials to encourage the provision of non-discriminatory legal aid for women and children. This process involved the holding of discussions at Paralegal Posts on various topics, such as “Women’s Bodies and the Media’s Role in Violence Against Women.” Output/Activity 2.3.1: Use Data and Analysis to Help the Government of Indonesia to Address Specific Human Rights Capacities Redress Mechanism for Land Conflicts – MAJu has worked on a redress mechanism for land conflicts with a consultant and then discussed the results with the government of Jayapura Regency. The local government was supportive, with the Regent of Jayapura setting up a taskforce to accelerate the establishment of Adat Villages. This task force, which works together with national and local NGOs, is chaired by the First Assistant to the Regent of Jayapura. It also includes representatives from Bappeda, and the local Agriculture Agency, Housing Agency and Environmental Agency. The Regent has allocated Rp 50 million per year to produce an adat area map. The taskforce was established based on a decree of the Regent. This decree will now need to be amended so as to include the proposed redress mechanism unit. However, with already limited funding allocated for the Papua initiative, MAJu submitted the roadmap document and suggested that the Regent use the roadmap to form the redress mechanism unit. Legal Identity – Refer to Output 1.1.7, where it is reported how LBH Papua and Forum Paralegal Kampung Sereh have successfully collaborated with the Population and Civil Registration Office for ID-document recordation and the issuance of various other population documents in Kampung Sereh. SIPKUMHAM Development – Under the agreed work program, the success of the new SIPKUMHAM will be assessed based on the production of reports that are backed by solid data and analysis, and the subsequent formulation of the required policy recommendations. However, this will only become effective after the entire system has been completed. The current policy-making process will continue to be conducted internally by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, and it will not necessarily involve other government institutions. According to the plan, the new system will become effective in 2020.

56

Output/Activity 2.3.2: Encourage Private Sector Involvement Engagement of private law firms – Continuing from the previous report, MAJu is working with HukumOnline to engage private law firms to provide pro bono services. As explained in Output 1.1.8. the progress achieved in securing the support of private law firms has been very encouraging. Indeed, they declare their willingness to defend the rights of university students who took to the streets to protest against the enactment of the new Anti Corruption Commission Law. Engagement with Facebook – LBH APIK Jakarta has been verified as a trusted partner of Facebook for cases of sexual violence posted on IG, FB and WA. One of the benefits of this collaboration is that LBH APIK Jakarta now has a fast-track route for reporting online sexual cases through these 3 social-media outlets. Going forward, LBH APIK Jakarta will invite other MAJu partners to get involved and will also ask FB to expand the collaboration network. Output/Activity 2.3.3: Utilize Data for Advocacy and Public Campaigns Documentation of human rights and other cases by MAJu partners – MAJu, through the institutional support it provides, encourages every partner organization to document human rights and other cases. These partner organizations include LBH Surabaya, LBH Yogyakarta, LBH Semarang, LBH Jakarta, LBH Apik Jakarta, GWL INA, and Perkumpulan Suara Kita (PSK), all

of which conduct regular monitoring of human rights issues. PSK has also developed an IT-based application that can be used by the public to report cases related to marginalized individuals especially key population of HIV/AIDS. The Sahabat Kita App can be downloaded at http://m.appbuild.io/r5b75. Information sheets on the rights of MAJu target groups –YLBHI produced a Factsheet on the Right to Development; LBH Semarang also produced an infosheet based on their experience of advocating for the rights of women homeworkers; LBH Masyarakat produced an info sheet on the need to prevent the criminalization of sex workers as this could increase HIV/ AIDS transmission. It should be noted that the info sheets related to marginalized individuals and HIV/AIDS cannot be branded for safety reasons, and that MAJu has received a waiver to this effect. Should the info sheets be required, MAJu will provide them separately.

Image 4 - Screen capture of Facebook Security Center panel, featuring LBH APIK as a Trusted Partner

Image 5 - Suara Kita mobile application for Android and iOS, online since February 2019. The application is distributed through appbuild.io, a distribution portal outside App Store/Playstore.

57

Policy Recommendations for Regional Regulations - In line with Output 3.1.1, YAPPIKA, together with the KKB (Freedom of Association Coalition) network, provided input for a draft gubernatorial regulation on recording, facilitating and collaborating with community organizations in the Yogyakarta Special Region, which is expected to be issued in 2019. Meanwhile, LBH APIK Jakarta has entered into an MOU with the Pasar Minggu Community Health Center (Puskesmas) to encourage the referral process and the provision of integrated health and legal-aid services to women and child victims of violence. This MOU may be referred to in the ANNEX 2 – MOU BETWEEN LBH APIK JAKARTA AND PASAR MINGGU HEALTH CENTER Public campaigns - Using existing data and knowledge, MAJu, through its partners, is encouraging public campaigns using various methods, including games, and online and print media. MAJu contracted PT Indo-AD (Ogilvy) to help MAJu partners develop communication tools that will enable them to deliver their messages and to empower target-group communities using various types of media. Ogilvy has started their assessment of all partners to gain an understanding of their main messages, target groups, tools, and circles of influence of target groups. YAPPIKA also used their research findings for public campaigning when they were invited to participate in an episode of the “MataNajwa” TV show that was focused on Forum Pembela Islam and freedom of association. The episode may be viewed at the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=256i1ap-upQ LBH APIK Jakarta film on survivors of gender-based violence - Last quarter, with MAJu support, LBH APIK Jakarta produced a 20-minute film for use as a tool in paralegal training and in raising community awareness that gender-based violence can happen to women anywhere and anytime. The film is inspirational as it portrays how victims become survivors and ultimately human-rights defenders. It may be viewed at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIjHwW-QSYw&feature=youtu.be

58

Produce materials for public-awareness raising and capacity building - During the reporting period, a number of MAJu partners have produced publications aimed at raising the awareness of LAOs, CSOs, and the paralegals they organize, as well as the public in general, regarding the rights of vulnerable and marginalized groups to access justice. LBH Masyarakat produced two pocket books, namely: (1) a pocket book for the human-rights community and workers on the right to health and practical guidelines for assessing health standards in the provision of services to PLWHA; (2) a pocket book containing information on the complaints mechanism for cases where health rights are not fulfilled. In addition to the pocket books, they produced videos and infographics on how the criminalization of sex workers actually exacerbates the stigma against sex workers. MaPPI also produced a manual for paralegals on the provision of assistance to women in contact with the law. During the reporting period, Rifka Annisa completed a paralegal training module that integrates the issues of gender-based violence, gender and sexual diversity, HIV/AIDS, and conflicts related to freedom of religion and belief. The module has been used to train paralegals in West Java, Central Java and Yogyakarta. During the preparation and use of the module, Rifka Annisa has involved the Forum Pengada Layanan (National Network of Women’s Crisis Centers) and the National Commission on Women. Atmajaya Catholic University's Law School has developed four modules and syllabi for law students on the following issues: (i) basic rights and fundamental human rights principles; (2) the right to legal proportionality for marginalized groups; (3) the right to health services; and (4) social rights and welfare for people with HIV/AIDS. This achievement refers to Output 2.2.1. OUTCOME 3: An Improved Enabling Environment for Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) to Effectively Promote Protection of Citizen Rights Increasing conservatism and exclusionary practices based on religion, race, ethnicity, and discriminatory enforcement of government regulations are some of the main threats to freedom of expression, assembly and association for civil society. In the run-up to the 2019 presidential election, both candidates clearly engaged in identity politics. While they both officially stated their commitment to diversity in Indonesia, the reality at the grass-roots level was different. The national election in April 2019 left divisions, increasingly intolerant views and latent conflict among the candidates’ supporters and, indeed, among the public at large. The greatest causes of concern as regards identity politics are that they divide people, increase stigma and further entrench discrimination against those who are considered different from

Image 6 - Infosheet on risks of criminalizing MAJu target group produced by LBH Masyarakat

59

mainstream society. Intolerance in everyday life encourages restrictions on the freedom of those with different identities, and civil society groups that promote the rights of groups with different identities. The increasing concern about restrictions on civil society has triggered greater scrutiny by both the Government of Indonesia and CSOs at the local and international levels as regards restrictions on the freedom of association, freedom of expression, and freedom of religion/belief. It is critical that CSOs have the space they need to operate so as to protect the rights of marginalized and vulnerable citizens and raise awareness of human-rights violations directed at MAJu target groups. Intermediate Outcome 3.1: Develop the Knowledge and Capacity of Local Civil Society Organizations on the Evolving Regulatory Environment for Non-Governmental Organizations Civil Rights Advocacy - YAPPIKA/KKB conducted media monitoring on the impacts of the Mass Organizations Law on vulnerable and minority groups. The website kebebasansipil.id invites people and individuals who feel that their rights of association and organization have been violated to file reports online through this website.

From the results of the monitoring in 2019, the following data has been identified:

Image 7 – Lists of violation of freedom of assembly and association

60

- The three biggest problems identified by monitoring of the Mass Organizations Law in 2019 were the same as in 2018, namely, compulsory CSO registration, stigmatization of CSOs and restrictions on CSO access to resources, while the principal actors were provincial and local governments. The overall findings paint a gloomy picture as regards the civic space in Indonesia.

- The six-year Report on the Mass Organizations Law and Freedom of Association and Organization, which was recently issued by YAPPIKA, shows an increase in violations of these rights, as shown in the following table:2

Period Number of Incidents

Number of Types of Action

First Year (2 July 2013 – 1 July 2014) 70 101 Second Year (2 July 2014 – 1 July 2015) 35 39 Third Year (2 July 2015 – 1 July 2016) 117 156 Fourth Year (2 July 2016 – 1 July 2017) 175 260 Fifth Year (2 July 2017 – 1 July 2018) 200 284 Sixth Year (2 July 2018 – 1 July 2019) 88 118

Total 685 958 The report also revealed that 32% of the actions taken under the Mass Organizations Law required CSOs to register and obtain a Registration Certificate (SKT), including extensions of expired SKT, even though this was contrary to Constitutional Court Decision No. 82/PUU-XI/2013 which ruled that CSO registration is voluntary. The CSO Law also generalizes all forms of organization without looking at the needs and nature of the diverse organizations that exist in society, such as community forums that are set up spontaneously to respond to the policies of village heads or communities of hobbyists that are formed to channel the interests of their members or traditional groups that feel the need to organize so as to express their aspirations. The Mass Organizations

2 YAPPIKA-Action Aid, Kebebasan Sipil Terancam: Menyempitnya Ruang Sipil dan Politik bagi Organisasi Masyarakat Sipil di Indonesia, Laporan 6 Tahun UU Ormas, September 2019.

Image 8 – Monitoring Map

61

Law continues to prioritize the controversial paradigm whereby CSOs are deemed to be a threat to the country's stability so that control over CSOs needs to be tightened. The Coalition has responded by expanding collaboration and disseminating information as regards the increasingly limited space afforded to civil society. This was done through campaigning and hearings with policy makers. Advocacy on Criminal Code – Refer to Output 1.1.4. Although our support for ELSAM has concluded, the MAJu program continues to support advocacy on the Draft Criminal Code (RKUHP) by the National Alliance for RKUHP Reform through a grant to YLBHI. During this period, the National Alliance continued to actively organize discussions, hearings and public campaigns on the need to improve the substance of the various problematic articles that are contained in the final draft of the RKUHP. The National Alliance harnesses the respective strengths of each of its member organizations in coordinating action on the issues related to the RKUHP. In July-September 2019, YLBHI organized a number of discussions on the following topics: 1. The concept of “living law in the community,” as incorporated in Article 2 of the RKUHP.

This article is problematic as it has the potential to violate a key human-rights principle in the criminal law, namely, the principle of legality. The drafters of the RKUHP appear to have been influenced by the concept of customary law so that the RKUHP affords recognition of local knowledge or local wisdom. This has given rise to a separate debate, especially among activists campaigning on indigenous peoples’ issues. YLBHI held a focused discussion to discuss the concept of living law with AMAN, HUMA, academics in the field of customary law, and other groups. The discussion produced the following conclusions and recommendations: a. Indigenous peoples’ issues need to be urgently and comprehensively provided for

through the enactment of a specific Law, namely, an Indigenous Peoples Act; b. Living law in a community does not need to be in written form as it evolves in tandem

with local wisdom; c. Laws must be formulated by taking into consideration the experiences of and realities

facing women and vulnerable groups, such as indigenous peoples, the poor, and minority groups;

d. There has been a tendency to sideline customary law in indigenous communities; e. The provisions on living law in the RKUHP could be used to criminalize anyone who

does things that are not in line with the policies of the powerholders; f. Living Law is law that is alive and real in communities. So, the state should focus on

making state law while indigenous peoples should have the right to determine and regulate their own customary laws.

Based on the conclusions of the discussion, the National Alliance will prepare a policy paper to provide an analysis and recommendations on the reformulation of the living law provisions of the RKUHP.

2. Crimes related to religion and belief, such as the crimes of blasphemy (defamation of religion) and theft of sacred objects, particularly having regard to Article 2 RKUHP, which incorporates the concept of living law in the community. Following a media conference organized by CSOs that are members of the Freedom of Religion and Belief Network (KBB), YLBHI held a civil

62

society network meeting to draw up an Inventory of Issues and to develop an advocacy agenda, including holding meetings with religious organizations, and encouraging religious organizations to organize media conferences and hold meetings with House of Representatives (DPR) members.

Output/Activity 3.1.1: Broaden and Strengthen the Network of Civil Society Organizations Addressing the Regulatory Environment for Non-Governmental Organizations Following on from the findings of monitoring of the implementation of the Mass Organizations Law (UU Ormas) for 2018, the Coalition for Freedom of Association and Organization (KKB) provided a number of recommendations to policy makers: 1. The National Legislature and Government should be encouraged to promptly enact the

Associations Bill as the correct legal framework for CSOs. 2. The Ministry of Home Affairs must develop an instrument to evaluate the implementation of

the Mass Organizations Law, especially the application of the Registration Certificate (SKT) requirement.

3. The Ministry of Home Affairs must reconstruct the function of the SKT under the Mass Organizations Law by formulating separate policies for data collection on CSOs and policies for the accessing of public resources by CSOs.

4. The National Legislature should be encouraged to revise the Mass Organizations Law by highlighting that its provisions relating to SKT must be in line with judicial decisions and the principles of Pancasila, the provisions governing the prohibition of and sanctions against mass organizations, and the Law’s penal provisions.

5. The National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) should be encouraged to develop standard setting and norms for freedom of association so as to provide a human rights interpretation of issues and problems related to freedom of association in Indonesia.

Accordingly, the Coalition held a number of meetings/audiences with policy makers. 1. Meeting with National Legislature’s Legislation Committee to discuss the eight issues

related to the revision of the Mass Organizations Law, which revision has been listed in the Priority Legislation Program for 2019 (Prolegnas Prioritas 2019). These issues are as follows: 1) registration of mass organizations, 2) structure and scope of mass organizations, 3) empowerment of mass organizations, 4) control and supervision of mass organizations, 5) prohibition of mass organizations, 6) sanctions for legal violations by mass organizations, 7) procedures for the dissolution of mass organizations, and 8) penal sanctions for mass organizations.

2. Meeting with the Justice and Welfare Party faction (F-PKS) in the National Legislature – More detailed information on this meeting may be accessed at: https://pshk.or.id/aktivitas/koalisi-kebebasan-berserikat-kkb-melakukan-audiensi-ke-fraksi-partai-keadilan-sejahtera-f-pks-untuk-mendorong-revisi-uu-ormas/

3. Meeting with the Indonesian Churches Association (Persatuan Gereja-Gereja Indonesia/PGI) – During this meeting, the Coalition for Freedom of Association and Organization (KKB) explained that in a jurisdiction that adheres to the civil law system, there are only two forms of mass organization, namely, membership-based organizations and non-membership-based organizations. The PGI said that they would monitor the revision of the Mass Organizations Law this year. More detailed information on this

63

meeting may be accessed at: https://yappika-actionaid.or.id/koalisi-kebebasan-berserikat-kkb-melakukan-audiensi-ke-persekutuan-gereja-gereja-di-indonesia-pgi/

4. Meeting at the Ministry of Home Affairs’ Regional Autonomy, Politics and Public Administration Research Center – During this meeting, the KKB provided three recommendations on the Mass Organizations Law to the Ministry of Home Affairs’ Regional Autonomy, Politics and Public Administration Research Center: 1) The Ministry of Home Affairs must develop instruments for evaluating the implementation of the Mass Organizations Law, especially as regards the implementation of Registration Certificate (SKT) requirement, 2) The Ministry of Home Affairs must reconstruct the SKT requirement in the Mass Organizations Law by formulating separate policies for collecting data on CSOs and policies for the accessing of public resources by CSOs, and 3) The Ministry of Home Affairs must adhere to the principles of transparency, accountability, professionalism and proportionality in its policies related to the collecting of data on CSOs and providing access to resources. The Ministry agreed with the recommendations of the KKB on the need to reconstruct the SKT function in the Mass Organizations Law by formulating separate policies for data collection on CSOs and policies for the accessing of public resources by CSOs. More detailed information on this meeting may be accessed at: https://pshk.or.id/aktivitas/koalisi-kebebasan-berserikat-kkb-melakukan-audiensi-ke-badan-penelitian-dan-pengembangan-otonomi-daerah-politik-dan-pemerintahan-umum-kemendagri/

Photo 11 - KKB discussed the result of 5th year implementation of UU Ormas with Home Affairs Ministry

5. Meeting with Ms. Yuyun, Indonesian Commissioner for the ASEAN Intergovernmental Committee on Human Rights (AICHR) – More detailed information on this meeting may be accessed at: https://yappika-actionaid.or.id/koalisi-kebebasan-berserikat-kkb-melakukan-audiensi-ke-representation-indonesia-untuk-asean-intergovernmental-commission-on-human-rights-aichr /

Advocating for guidelines on provision of resources to CSOs - From the findings of YAPPIKA's research on the SKT requirement, a number of problems were identified that highlight the degree to which the registration and SKT requirement under the Mass Organizations Law are being confused with financial-management capacity, which has had a negative effect on the level of access of CSOs to available state resources, such as Type III Self-managed Grants (intended for the procurement of goods and services), notwithstanding that program- and financial-management capacities are not related to the issue of registration. Consequently, YAPPIKA is advocating for

64

the allocation of CSO resources in a way that restricts the scope of the SKT requirement so that it is not used as an instrument to unduly limit an important indicator of freedom of association, namely, CSO access to resources. The guidelines have been finalized as a result of collaboration between the Directorate General of Politics and Public Administration and the Research and Development Center for Regional Finance. The following issues may be identified as regards the guidelines: 1. Regarding grant funds, management authority is accorded to regional heads. Thus, the

availability of grants may depend on the specific political agenda of a particularly regional head. Nevertheless, there are opportunities for advocacy. While legal rules have been adopted by way of a Regulation of the Ministry of Home Affairs, technical implementation rules have yet to be formulated.

2. For type III self-managed grants, Presidential Regulation 16/2018 will start to be officially implemented in 2020. So, it is obviously difficult to push for these guidelines to be implemented this year.

3. In addition, these guidelines are very much oriented towards the interests of civil society rather than the interests of the government. The guidelines are available upon request.

Drafting of internal National Ombudsman (ORI) guidelines on “Public Participation in Preventing Maladministration in the Provision of Public Services” - As previously reported, MAJu, through a grant to YAPPIKA, has collaborated with the National Ombudsman (ORI) on the preparation of an internal regulation to promote greater public participation so as to assist ORI to more proactively monitor public services and help the government improve public services. However, quite a lot of obstacles were encountered in our collaboration with ORI, starting with internal staffing

changes in ORI, which had an impact on priorities and also resulted in a change in the form of the regulation, which was originally intended to be stand-alone Ombudsman’s regulation but was eventually issued as an internal SOP under an existing ORI regulation on prevention of abuses. The draft (in Bahasa Indonesia) is available upon request.

Photo 12 - YAPPIKA submits Draft Public Participation Guidelines toAlamsyah Saragih from Ombudsman RI, during audience held on xx xxx

65

Policy Recommendations for Regional Regulations - In line with Output 2.3.3., YAPPIKA and the KKB (Freedom of Association Coalition) network have provided input during the process of drafting a Governor's Regulation on the Recording and Facilitation of, and Collaboration with, Community Organizations in the Special Region of Yogyakarta. It is expected that this regulation will be issued later in 2019. Strategic plan for CSO Coalition for Freedom of Religion and Belief – YLBHI and Paritas Institute put together a network on freedom of religion and belief (KBB) to discuss advocacy on this issue against a background of increasingly high levels of intolerance, disunity among citizens and also disunity among CSOs. Intermediate Outcome 3.2: Build Networks among Local and Jakarta-Based Civil Society Organizations Public Services Coalition (MP3) - Recognizing multiple discrimination problems against people with HIV/AIDS and MAJu target groups, MAJu is collaborating with YAPPIKA to use the right to public services and the Public Service Law (No. 25/2009) to advocate for better public services for people with HIV/AIDS. YAPPIKA is leading the Public Services Coalition (MP3) and successfully pushed for the Public Service Law to be enacted by the National Legislature in 2009. YAPPIKA held a meeting with MAJu health partners GWL INA, LBH Masyarakat and Perkumpulan Suara Kita to identify public service problems in health-service provision and the discriminatory treatment they face. The results of the meeting provided YAPPIKA with a strong basis for developing training modules for paralegals at MAJu partners working for marginalized individuals especially those who are key populations of HIV/AIDS issues on access to and monitoring of public services. On 28-29 March 2019, YAPPIKA conducted a training event on monitoring access to public health services for key population of HIV/AIDS partners. More than 70% of the participants expressed satisfaction with the training as they found it highly relevant to their day-to-day work, and it also covered many topics that were new to them. Based on the training, the participants agreed to implement a follow-up plan covering policy advocacy as well as continuous monitoring tools. Output/Activity 3.2.1: Enhance Informed Exchanges and Advocacy on Freedom of Association The book “Mitigating Violations of the Rights to Freedom of Assembly and Association” - MAJU has supported YAPPIKA in preparing a book aimed at helping CSOs from vulnerable and marginalized groups when facing situations that narrow their space for action. Mitigating human rights risks in this context can mean identifying the most prominent human rights impacts and taking steps to reduce the adverse effects of these impacts. The book is intended to 1) minimize the risk of violations of freedom of assembly and association/organization as a result of legislation and other situations for civil society and vulnerable groups; and 2) provide an overview of opportunities for advocacy and recovery in the case of violations of freedom of assembly and association/organization experienced by civil society and vulnerable groups. Engaging media and journalists - Refer to Output 1.1.4, LBH Surabaya provided media briefings and engaged in journalistic consolidation efforts so as to increase the sensitivity of journalists to

66

the issues facing vulnerable groups. LBH Surabaya has also involved academics in this consolidation process as, besides victims, the main sources of information used by journalists are academics. Both journalists and academics need to have the same levels of sensitivity so as to encourage the elimination of stigma and discrimination aimed at vulnerable groups. A similar initiative was also carried out by YAPPIKA, which held meetings with the editorial boards of Republika and The Jakarta Post dailies, both of which meetings elicited a positive response and positioned YAPPIKA/KKB as key information sources on the Mass Organizations Law. Legal identity and freedom of association - As a follow-up from previous collaboration with MLKI (Majelis Luhur Kepercayaan Indonesia - a faith-based group), YAPPIKA has been requested to facilitate a larger meeting with MLKI members to discuss freedom of association and the Mass Organizations Law. YAPPIKA may expand the meeting’s agenda to include discussions on public services in relation to legal identity, as well as the Mass Organizations Law, which is highly relevant to faith-based groups as they are required to comply with the Population Administration Law (UU Administrasi Kependudukan/Adminduk) to obtain legal recognition after they have been legalized under the Mass Organizations Law and have obtained an SKT. Freedom of association and freedom of religion and belief – MAJu was involved in facilitating and discussing the national conference for indigenous religions that was held in collaboration with Komnas Perempuan, CRCS UGM, and Satunama. MAJu requested YAPPIKA to speak at the conference, during which they discussed issues related to freedom of association for indigenous religions. The conference was held on 1-3 July 2019. Intermediate Outcome 3.3: Build Alliances among Civil Society Organizations, Academics, and the Government of Indonesia to Advocate for an Improved Enabling Environment Working with Ombudsman for improvements in public services - YAPPIKA and MP3 have worked to strengthen their networking with MAJu partners and beneficiaries in advocating for equal access to health services for people with HIV/AIDS. To this end, YAPPIKA has engaged the National Ombudsman (ORI) to create space for public participation so as to better accommodate complaints related to the provision of health services to people with HIV/AIDS and to enhance the National Ombudsman’s awareness of the issues involved. Output/Activity 3.3.1: Encourage Practical Action to Improve the Enabling Environment Monitoring Provision of Services in HIV Clinics at Puskesmas and RSUD – Continuing on from the training on public services that has been provided, YAPPIKA and GWL INA have developed a monitoring tool for the provision of public services at HIV clinics in Puskesmas (community health centers) and RSUD (local government hospitals). The tool includes monitoring guidelines, standard questionnaires and interview guidelines. They have conducted regular visits to 30 health-care centers in Greater Jakarta for the purpose of observing the services provided. The findings of this monitoring was then conveyed to the National Ombudsman for follow-up. The monitoring is also supported by intensive campaigning by peer leaders (paralegals) from GWL INA on the importance of HIV/AIDS testing and treatment, and providing sufficient time for consultations. This has resulted in an increase in the increasing number of young people who have a high risk of contracting HIV/AIDS to conduct initial tests and seeking treatment.

67

Improving health services in Puskesmas - In addition to conducting monitoring, in line with Output 1.1.3 and 3.1.1., LBH APIK Jakarta and Rifka Annisa have secured the participation of a Puskesmas (community health center) in their efforts to improve the services provided to women. This initiative is now being expanded to include the HIV/AIDS community and key affected populations. LBH APIK Jakarta and Puskesmas Pasar Minggu have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to collaborate on the provision of legal-aid and health services for women victims of violence. The services now being provided by the Pasar Minggu Puskesmas include the following:

Early detection of cases of violence. Provision of clinical-medical treatment for victims of violence and the effects of violence Psychological stabilization services Counseling. Referral to health facilities at a higher level. Examination and treatment of women with HIV/AIDS

This collaboration serves as an example for the other five community health centers in South Jakarta. Meanwhile, Rifka Annisa has begun to introduce and expand its legal-aid services for women in collaboration with the FPKK (Victims of Violence Protection Forum), which consists of 53 individuals/agencies from various local-government organizations and NGOs, including local-government Women and Children’s Agencies, P2TP2A in four regencies and 1 municipality, District Courts, Prosecutor's Offices, the Police, local-government Education Agencies, local-government Manpower Agencies, DUKCAPIL, Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, Yogyakarta Office of the Ministry of Religious Affairs, local-government Cultural Agencies, the Sradjito State Hospital, local-government hospitals in 4 regencies, Pantirapih Hospital, PKU Muhammdiyah Hospital Yogyakarta, Gracia Hospital, Bapeljamkesos, NGOs focused on women and children’s issues, SAMIN (focused on trafficking issues), YASANTI, and Rifka Annisa. The participation of legal-aid organizations in this forum encourages improvements in the services provided by Puskesmas, such as the incorporation of a mechanism for referring cases to LAOs. Standard Setting and Norms on Freedom of Assembly and Association - Komnas HAM and the Coalition for Freedom of Association (KKB) has completed work on the Draft Standard Setting and Norms on Freedom of Assembly and Association. The drafting process involved various parties, including both government institutions and civil society organizations. The formulation of standard setting and norms is intended to: (1) provide guidelines for state officials to ensure that no policies or actions involve violations of freedom of assembly and association, whether at the planning, regulation or implementation stages, and to put in place legal processes and sanctions for those responsible for any violations of freedom of assembly and association that occur; (2) provide guidelines for individuals, including community organizations, such as political parties, civil society organizations, trade unions, religious organizations, youth organizations, and other societal groups, in order that they can fully comprehend all issues related to violations of freedom of assembly and association so that they can ensure that their human rights are protected and that all types of discriminatory actions that would restrict the civic space can be avoided; and (3)

68

provide guidelines for non-state actors so as to encourage respect for the civic rights by avoiding actions that restrict the freedom of assembly and association. In line with Output 1.1.2, YAPPIKA, in collaboration with Komnas HAM, has finalized the draft Standard Setting and Norms for Freedom of Assembly and Association, and it is now posted on the Komnas HAM website. Komnas HAM has also invited the public to provide feedback on the draft. With the consent of MAJu, YAPPIKA and Komnas HAM decided not to apply organizational branding, including USAID branding, as the draft is a state document. The draft is available upon request. The invitation to the public to provide feedback may be accessed at: https://www.komnasham.go.id/index.php/news/2019/9/15/1086/undangan-masukan-publik-untuk-penyusunan-draft-standar-norma-dan-setting-tentang-kebebasan-berkumpul-dan-berorganisasi.html E. Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning M&E Indicators – In Quarterly Report 14 and MAJu Implementation Plan FY2020, TAF submitted a list of M&E indicators for review and revision in collaboration with USAID, particularly necessary for indicators pertaining to the human-rights database and biodiversity funding activities in Papua. It has been confirmed by USAID that the updated set of indicators has officially approved by October 2, 2019 along with MAJu Annual Implementation Plan FY2020. Thus, the revised indicators will be used starting from FY 2020. Please refer to ANNEX 1 – APPROVED REVISED M&E INDICATORS for further reference on approved revised indicator. Theory of Change-based monitoring update – In previous quarter, MAJu with long-term partners such as LBH partners, sat together to revisit their respective theory of changes, resulting in adjusted program strategies and updated result mapping with more tangible changes. Within this quarter, MAJu resumes monitoring the updated workplan to ensure that all activities can be conducted within remaining grant duration and partners have all the consultative support from MAJu that they need. MAJu will resume this monitoring as one of sections in one-on-one session planned in Grants Compliance refresher planned in October 2019. Case Study: lessons learned from DPC PERADI assistance in Tasikmalaya for Islamic minority groups – MAJu is currently preparing collaboration with Center for Religious and Cross-cultural Studies Gajah Mada University (CRCS UGM) to perform case study in Tasikmalaya, where MAJu partner DPC Peradi Tasikmalaya provides assistance for the Islamic minorities' group. MAJu and CRCS UGM see that this is an opportunity to assemble important lessons learned from interventions in Tasikmalya, where two approaches; legal and cultural approach; were previously reported to be incompatible in CRCS UGM’s previous series of publications. The activity is planned for December 2019. Private sector contribution - USAID has advised MAJu to include and measure the level of engagement of the private sector by counting the pro bono hours contributed by individual lawyers. This will be difficult as the bar association does not have a mechanism for counting individual lawyers’ contributions. Further, it is difficult to justify the categorization of individual lawyers as

69

being part of the “private sector.” Consequently, MAJu will differentiate between the contributions of individual lawyers and those of law firms so as to ensure that individual lawyers’ contributions can be measured, as anticipated by USAID. Accordingly, once the Pro Bono Guidelines have been accepted by law firms and bar association, have technical guidance to implement the Guidelines, and be implemented in bar association or law firms as regulation, MAJu will see the possibility to include the contributions of individual lawyers as pro bono contributions to legal aid, while the contributions of law firms will be calculated as part of the private sector’s contribution. Therefore, MAJu will update the progress to USAID. F. Activity Location Data Per MAJu’s Activity Location Data and Geographic Data accompany this report as an attachment. See APPENDIX I – ACTIVITY Location Data G. Conclusion – Going Forward Human Rights Database – The Human Rights Database is currently the most challenging project activity. To date, the procurement of an IT vendor and human rights training vendor has been finalized, as well as the dataset and grant design. In the next quarter, it is expected that a vendor for the project will be contracted and that basic human rights training will be provided to staff in the provincial offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights. Village or Community-based legal aid services – MAJU will encourage the development of a legal-aid mechanism at the village level by conducting pilot projects in a number of regions. These efforts will be harmonized with the government’s “Legally Aware Village” and “Village Paralegal” programs, which are run by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and the Ministry of Village Affairs and Disadvantaged Areas. In addition, we will also encourage the further development of referral mechanisms between legal-aid providers in the regions. USAID Health Office Activities – MAJu will continue to provide support to several organizations in relation to health issues, and to address a number of Focused Outcome and Impact Table (FOIT) indicators, including engaging community and religious leaders. MAJu will also conduct activities at the national level to strengthen the capacity of legal aid providers as regards access to healthcare services. As of this quarter, MAJu has not yet been able to discuss the assumptions underlying the FOIT indicators and benchmarks with USAID. However, fact-checking against the FOIT suggests that a number of indicators may need to be reconsidered and revised. Papua – MAJu will finalize the work of two partners in Papua, but will support the paralegal strengthening activities in Papua based Project Management and Implementation – In the final year, MAJU will focus more on the escalation of program achievements so as to boost overall program impact, including achieving pay-in on the part of government and other stakeholders. MAJu will also work hard to achieve better target spending and also to improve the capacity of underutilized partners. There will also be changes in program management to reflect this priority.

70

Limited Financial Review – Following on from the outcome of the LFR, MAJu will conduct refresher training for all MAJu partners.

71

ANNEX 1 – APPROVED REVISED M&E INDICATORS (Approved by USAID on 2nd October 2019)

Index Indicator MAJU 1 Number of individuals or groups from marginalized target communities who received

legal aid or victim assistance with USG support under MAJU

MAJU 2 Number of incidents of human rights violations against target groups where MAJU partners provide assistance to the affected communities

MAJU/ENV 3 Number of instances where USAID-supported CSOs have provided assistance to forest dependent indigenous communities to retain their rights, including land rights

MAJU 5 Number of human rights defenders (including paralegals) trained and supported under MAJU

MAJU 6 Change in scores on human rights skills and knowledge of CSO trainees

MAJU 7 Number of representatives from CSO partners and networks trained to better understand and protect the rights of marginalized target groups under MAJU

MAJU/ENV 9 Number of indigenous people and CSO representatives trained and supported to understand indigenous people’s rights to protect high biodiversity forests in which they reside

MAJU 10 Number of LAOs accredited, or accreditation score increased, with MAJU assistance

MAJU 11 Number of LAOs from MAJU provinces claiming reimbursement for legal aid services

MAJU 12 % increase in the amount of reimbursement from the state budget of funds for partner LAOs' legal aid cases for litigation and non-litigation related costs

MAJU 13 Number of developed, or improved, IT solutions to improve legal aid services

MAJU 14 Number of training and research services/workshops developed by universities to support legal aid providers, human rights defenders, GOI officials, and the private sector, under MAJU

MAJU 15 Number of targeted GOI institutions using data from the human rights database

MAJU 16 Number of evidence-based reports or documents produced as a result of USG support under MAJU.

MAJU 18 Number of LAOs and CSOs contributing information to the human rights database

72

MAJU 19 Public access to the human rights database supported by MAJU

MAJU 20 Level of satisfaction with database access and quality MAJU 21 Improvement in the score of the quality of data on human rights violations by

Ministry of Human Rights (Kemenkumham)

MAJU 22 Number of human rights incidences digitally documented as result of MAJU

MAJU 23 Number of staff of GOI, state auxiliary bodies, and CSOs trained on data management under MAJU

MAJU 24 The number of programs developed on citizens’ rights for government partners and the private sector

MAJU 25 Number of participants with improved awareness about citizens’ rights

MAJU 26 Number of partner CSOs and networks facing difficulties in implementing their work due to the regulatory framework and restrictive enabling environment

MAJU 27 The number of programs held to improve CSO understanding of the enabling environment for NGOs as result of USG support under MAJu

MAJU 28 Number of action plans developed by MAJU CSO partners to strengthen networks

MAJU 29 Number of CSOs involved in coalitions/networks on the legal enabling environment

MAJU 30 Number of meetings between provincial and national CSOs, GOI, and academics to discuss enabling environment, as a result of USG support under MAJU

MAJU 31 Number of policy documents/papers on improving legal enabling environment for NGOs produced by local CSOs (including collaboration with Jakarta-based CSOs) submitted to the government, as result of USG support under MAJU

Note:

a. MAJu 4, MAJu 8, and MAJu 17 are approved to be removed.

73

ANNEX 2 – MOU BETWEEN LBH APIK JAKARTA AND PASAR MINGGU HEALTH CENTER

LBH APIK Jakarta and Pasar Minggu Health Center MOU

COOPERATION AGREEMENT

Between

PUSKESMAS KECAMATAN PASAR MINGGU

And

THE INDONESIAN WOMEN'S ASSOCIATION FOR JUSTICE LEGAL AID INSTITUTE (LBH APIK) JAKARTA

on

LEGAL AND HEALTH SERVICES FOR PEOPLE WHO EXPERIENCE VIOLENCE

NUMBER:

On this day ………. date ………… month ………… year …………… .., in Jakarta, We, the undersigned:

1. Drg. Susilowati: As the Head of the Puskesmas Kecamatan Pasar Minggu (Pasar Minggu District Health Center) based on the Decree of the Governor of DKI Jakarta Province Number 32 of 2017, dated January 3, 2017, in this case acting in her aforesaid capacity and thereby lawfully acting for and on behalf of, and representing, the Pasar Minggu District Health Center located on Jalan Kebagusan Raya Number 4, Kebagusan Sub-District, Pasar Minggu District, South Jakarta Administrative City 12520, hereinafter referred to as the FIRST PARTY.

2. Siti Mazumah: As Director of the APIK Jakarta Legal Aid Institute, domiciled and with office at Jl. Raya Tengah No. 31 RT.01/RW.09, Kel. Tengah, Kec. Kramatjati, East Jakarta, hereinafter referred to as the SECOND PARTY

THE FIRST PARTY and the SECOND PARTY are jointly hereinafter referred to as the PARTIES. The PARTIES, in good faith, agree to bind themselves under a Cooperation Agreement for the Provision of Legal and Health Assistance Services to Women and Child Victims of Violence, subject to the terms and conditions set out in the following articles:

ARTICLE 1

DEFINITIONS

74

The First Party and Second Party, hereinafter referred to as the PARTIES, hereby explain as follows:

1. This cooperation shall be carried out on a partnership basis so that each party enjoys the same position as a working partner.

2. LBH APIK Jakarta is the Legal Aid Institute of the Indonesian Women's Association for Justice, which is accredited by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights to provide free legal aid to the underprivileged in DKI Jakarta.

3. Litigation is the process of resolving legal cases in court.

4. Non-Litigation is the process of resolving legal cases outside of court, including the provision of health services, psychological recovery services, socialization services, community empowerment services, mediation services, investigation services, home-visit services and safe-house referral services.

5. Legal Outreach is the dissemination of information and comprehension of the law to the community for the purpose of empowerment.

6. Health Service is every effort that is carried out either alone/jointly by an organization to maintain and improve health, prevent and cure disease and to restore the health of individuals, families, groups, and communities (RI MOH, 2009).

ARTICLE 2

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES

THE PARTIES agree to cooperate in the provision of legal and health services to people who are victims of violence based on the terms and conditions set forth in this agreement as part of the effort to guarantee access to health and justice for the community.

ARTICLE 2

TYPE & DURATION OF COOPERATION

1. The type of cooperation referred to in this Agreement is cooperation between the First Party and the Second Party for the purpose of carrying out the activities referred to in Article 1 (one).

2. The said cooperation shall last for 1 (one) year starting from ____________ 2019 until ____________ 2020.

ARTICLE 3

SCOPE OF COOPERATION

1. The parties agree to cooperate on the provision of legal aid and health services.

2. As part of this cooperation, the First Party may refer a client to the Second Party if the client needs legal aid, whether Litigation or Non Litigation in nature.

75

3. The Second Party may refer a client to the First Party if the client requires a medical examination o treatment at the location of the First Party, which includes:

3.1 Early detection of cases of violence.

3.2 Medical treatment for a case of violence and the impact of violence.

3.3 Psychological stabilization treatment.

3.4 Counseling.

3.5 Referral to a higher level health facility.

3.6 Examination and treatment of women with HIV-AIDS.

4. Legal Outreach on Women and Child Victims of Violence. “Legal outreach” on victims of violence refers to activities in which the PARTIES can serve as experts in providing information to individuals, groups and communities in their working areas with the aim of improving knowledge, perceptions and skills in terms of preventing and responding to cases of violence.

ARTICLE 4

RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES

Notwithstanding the rights and obligations set out in other articles of this agreement, the PARTIES agree to detail their respective rights and obligations as follows:

1. Rights of FIRST PARTY

a. To refer victims of violence to the SECOND PARTY for the purpose of accessing Legal Aid.

b. To obtain information on the further handling of victims of violence referred to the SECOND PARTY if necessary.

c. To inform victims of violence who are treated by the FIRST PARTY of the referral service cooperation with the SECOND PARTY, and to communicate with the SECOND PARTY to ensure their readiness to accept victim referrals.

d. To involve the SECOND PARTY in the provision of health outreach services in the work environment of the SECOND PARTY.

2. Rights of the SECOND PARTY

a. To be provided with the clinical record of a referred victim, including information on the condition of the victim and/or actions taken by the FIRST PARTY, and a record of the victim's follow-up needs.

b. To refer Women and Child Victims of Violence to the FIRST PARTY for health services.

c. To refer people to the FIRST PARTY for HIV/AIDS testing and treatment services.

76

3. Obligations of the FIRST PARTY

a. To provide a clinical record for a referred victim, including information on the condition of the victim and/or actions taken by the FIRST PARTY, and a record of the victim's follow-up needs.

b. To accept referrals back from the SECOND PARTY.

4. Obligations of the SECOND PARTY

a. To provide Free Legal Aid to victims of violence referred by the FIRST PARTY

b. To provide information on the further handling of victims referred by the FIRST PARTY if needed.

c. To permit the dissemination of information on the referral service cooperation between the FIRST PARTY and the SECOND PARTY to victims who seek treatment at the FIRST PARTY’s Health Facility.

d. To communicate with the FIRST PARTY and ensure readiness to accept victim referrals.

ARTICLE 4

FUNDING

1. Funding for Counseling and Legal-Service Referrals

1.1. The Second Party will bear all costs related to the handling the legal and health aspects of clients’ cases referred by the First Party.

1.2. The First Party will ask the client and/or their family to provide a National Health Insurance Card or Jakarta Smart Card or Certificate of Indigence, and submit it to the Second Party.

2. Funding for Legal Outreach Activities.

2.1. The First Party and Second Party are responsible for providing resource persons.

2.2. Accommodation and all other costs incurred in Legal Outreach activities are the responsibility of the Second Party.

ARTICLE 5

COORDINATION

Coordination between the Parties will be carried out by email, SMS, WhatsApp, telephone or other suitable medium, where the First Party will appoint the Person in Charge for the Violence against Women and Children Program and the Second Party will appoint the Director who signs this Cooperation Agreement as the persons responsible for coordination.

ARTICLE 6

MONITORING & EVALUATION

77

1. The First Party is entitled to receive information from the Second Party on the progress of referred clients.

2. The First Party and Second Party shall jointly discuss the progress of counseling clients and group counseling clients, and the effectiveness of legal outreach and follow-up on the results of legal outreach.

ARTICLE 7

FORCE MAJEURE

If during the course of this cooperation agreement something occurs that lies outside the control of the PARTIES (Force Majeure) in the form of natural disaster (earthquake, landslide, flood), war, riot, strike, sabotage and other event that is designated as a natural disaster by the Government and which renders this cooperation agreement incapable of being implemented, either in part or in full, any loss arising as a result will be resolved by deliberation among the PARTIES with a view to achieving the best possible settlement, and no claim of any kind shall arise as between the PARTIES.

ARTICLE 8

TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT

This agreement may be terminated by either of the parties prior to its expiry by the serving of written notice on the other party at least (1) one month in advance.

ARTICLE 9

DISPUTE RESOLUTION

1. Any dispute or difference of opinion regarding this agreement shall be resolved by deliberation and consensus among the PARTIES within a maximum period of 1 (one) month.

2. If a consensus cannot be reached, the PARTIES agree to submit the dispute for resolution to the South Jakarta District Court.

ARTICLE 10

CONCLUDING PROVISIONS

1. This agreement is signed by the Parties on sufficiently stamped paper and is made in duplicate (two) copies with each being of the same legal force.

2. Should any matters arise from this agreement that are covered by the articles hereof, they will subsequently be governed by an addendum.

Jakarta, ____________ 2019

The first party

Drg. Dewi Isnawati QI

78

Head of PUSKESMAS Pasar Minggu District

The Second Party

Siti Mazumah

Director of LBH APIK JAKARTA

79

ANNEX 3 – REPORT ON NATIONAL LEGAL AID CONFERENCE I

Report on National Legal Aid Conference I (Jakarta) 21-22 August 2019 Executive Summary A National Legal Aid Conference (Indonesian abbreviation: Konfenas I), themed "Expanding Access to Justice by Optimizing the Provision of Quality Legal Aid Services," was successfully held on 20-21 August 2019 at Taman Wisata Wiladatika, Cibubur, Jakarta. The event was organized by YLBHI, LBH APIK Association, ILRC, PBHI, LBH Masyarakat, LBH Jakarta, LBH APIK Jakarta, and MaPPI FHUI, in collaboration with the National Legal Development Agency (BPHN). It is one of two National Legal Aid Conference events, with the second being held in Bali in September 2019. Konfenas I was attended by around 386 participants from 33 provinces and a variety of backgrounds, including legal aid organizations, paralegals, legal aid recipient communities, academia, legal aid support institutions, advocates’ organizations, law firms, and representatives of legal aid providers at the central and regional levels. Konfenas I was held for the purpose of assessing legal aid policies, especially since the enactment of Law Number 16 of 2011 on Legal Aid. This Law has resulted in the achievement of significant progress by the Government through the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and the National Legal Development Agency (BPHN) in relation to the provision of legal aid. At the legislation level, the Government has issued various regulations on the requirements and procedures for legal aid and the provision of legal aid funds, and the procedures for the verification and accreditation of legal aid institutions/community-based organizations, and paralegals for the provision of legal aid. In the funding arena, the Government has regularly increased the total national legal aid budget. In terms of funding regulations, the Government has issued Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation No. 10 of 2015 on the Implementation of Government Regulation No. 42 of 2013 on the Requirements and Procedures for the Provision of Legal Aid and the Allocation of Legal Aid Funds, which regulates the level of funding for legal aid, and Minister of Law and Human Rights Decree No. M.HH-01.HN.03.03 2015 on Litigation and Non Litigation Legal Aid Costs, which builds on the previous regulation issued in 2013. In addition, the Government has successfully encouraged many Regional Governments to issue regulations on the funding of legal aid in their respective jurisdictions. As regards the actual provision of legal aid, the Government recently completed the verification and accreditation of 524 legal aid organizations across 215 regencies/cities. As for facilities, the Government has developed an online information and data system on legal aid, as well as “smart legal channels” so as to facilitate members of the community in accessing legal aid services.

80

However, in terms of access to justice, there continue to be many challenges. For example, the various legal aid policies and regulations that have been established continue to lack the scope and coverage that is necessary so as to realize comprehensive access to justice in terms of the number and distribution of legal aid service providers, legal aid recipients, legal aid providers at the regional level, types of legal aid activities, and the amount of legal aid funding. In addition, the implementation of legal aid policies and regulations has not been accompanied by guarantees as to the quality of services, including as regards legal aid service standards, the educational levels of legal aid providers, the verification and accreditation process, utilization of technology, and supervision and oversight. Further, there continues to be insufficient synergy between legal aid administrators and legal aid resources, whether in the public or private sector, so as to be able to optimize the implementation of legal aid policies and regulations and thus further enhance access to justice. During the 2 (two) days of Konfenas I, the speakers, who consisted of participants from various backgrounds, such as representatives of Government, advocates, legal aid organizations, paralegals, victims receiving legal assistance, academics and civil society organizations (CSOs), provided valuable input and feedback on the implementation of legal aid to date. The discussions focused on ten topics, namely (I) Paralegal Policies & Regulations; (II) Legal Aid Database and Information System; (III) Legal Aid Funding; (IV) Synergy in Harnessing State Legal Aid Resources; (V) Legal Aid Education; (VI) Role of Regional Governments in Legal Aid; (VII) Expanding the Scope of Legal Aid and Legal Aid Recipients; (VIII) Legal Aid Service Standards and Quality; (IX) Verification and Accreditation of legal aid organizations; and (X) Legal Aid as a Social Movement. The discussions covered a range of crucial issues. The issue that was most frequently discussed was the need to broaden the current definition of legal aid as the current definition is confined to legal aid for the poor and focuses on litigation and assistance for defendants. So, there needs to be a policy change that would expand the definition of legal aid, such as by expanding the scope of legal aid recipients so as to not only encompass the poor but also vulnerable and marginalized groups. In addition, the definition of legal aid needs to be expanded so as to include other forms of legal aid, i.e., non-litigation legal aid, especially as regards funding. Further, the recipients of legal aid should also include victims, such as victims who need assistance to cover the cost of medical examinations and the fees of interpreters or psychologists. Another issue that was focused on was the need to improve the quality of legal aid. It was recommended that the Government, through the National Legal Development Agency (BPHN), should prepare and adopt legal aid service standards. The establishment of legal aid service standards would help Government in conducting legal aid organization accreditation and would also allow the public to assess the quality of existing legal aid organizations. The formulation of service standards would need to be carried out based on in-depth studies involving legal aid organizations so as to ensure that the standards take cognizance of the needs of legal aid organization, as well as the public’s needs as regards access to justice. Further, in order to improve the quality of legal aid services in the regions, the BPHN and legal aid organizations should encourage the issuance of Regional Government Regulations and Gubernatorial

81

Regulations on legal aid, and help ensure that the substance and implementation of such regulations accords with the principles governing the provision of quality legal aid, and the availability of funding in each region for the provision of legal aid. As part of the process of establishing regulations, Regional Governments need to conduct in-depth studies to identify needs in their respective regions in order to ensure that the regulations that are established accord with such needs. In addition to these issues, Konfenas I also generated recommendations on the need to include legal aid education in the university syllabus, to improve the legal aid database and information system, and on a number of other relevant issues discussed over the course of the 2 (two) days of the conference. I. Introduction Since the enactment of Law Number 16 of 2011 on Legal Aid, significant progress has been made by the Government (through the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and its National Law Development Agency (BPHN)) as regards the provision of legal aid. In the field of policy, the Government has issued various regulations governing the requirements and procedures for the provision of legal aid and the allocation of legal aid funds, and the processes and procedures for the verification and accreditation of legal aid institutions, community organizations, and paralegals for the provision of legal aid.

b. As regards funding, the Government has regularly increased the overall national legal aid budget. The Government has also succeeded in encouraging many Regional Governments to adopt legal-aid funding policies in their respective regions.

c. As regards legal-aid provision, the Government recently completed the verification and accreditation of 524 legal aid organizations spread across 215 regencies/cities.

d. As regards facilities, the Government has developed a legal-aid data and information system that is available online and which uses “smart legal channels” so as to make it easier for people to access legal aid services.

However, when we consider the situation from the perspective of access to justice, one of the principal objectives of legal-aid policies, there continue to be a variety of challenges that need to be overcome, including the following:

a. Legal-aid policies have yet to achieve or bring about comprehensive access to justice in terms of the number and distribution of legal-aid providers, the recipients of legal aid, the availability of legal-aid providers in the regions, the types of legal aid that are available, and the amount of legal-aid funding;

b. The application of legal-aid policies has not been accompanied by guarantees as to the quality of the services provided, including as regards legal-aid service standards, educational levels of legal-aid providers, verification and accreditation, utilization of support technology, and oversight;

82

Lack of synergy between legal-aid providers and legal-aid resources in both the public and private sectors, thus hampering the optimizing of legal-aid policies that are oriented towards access to justice. Konfenas I focused on “Expanding Access to Justice by Optimizing the Provision of Quality Legal Aid Services.” The anticipated outcomes were as follows:

1. Expanded access to legal aid, including legal aid services, legal aid funding, distribution of legal aid providers, and number of recipients of legal aid;

2. Improvement in the quality of legal aid services through the adoption of legal-aid service standards, utilization of information technology, and oversight of legal aid services;

3. Greater integration, consolidation and synergy as regards legal aid policies and programs as between legal aid administrators, legal aid providers, law enforcement agencies, and other legal aid program stakeholders;

Konfenas I was attended by around 386 participants from 33 provinces and a variety of backgrounds, including legal aid organizations, paralegals, legal aid recipient communities, academics, legal aid support institutions, advocates’ organizations, law firms, and representatives of legal aid providers at the central and regional levels. The event was organized by YLBHI, LBH APIK Association, ILRC, PBHI, LBH Masyarakat, LBH Jakarta, LBH APIK Jakarta, and MaPPI FHUI, in collaboration with the National Legal Development Agency (BPHN). It is one of two National Legal Aid Conferences event, with the second being held in Bali in September 2019. The conference consisted of a number of sessions, as described below: 1. Opening Session, consisting of:

Singing of national anthem, “Indonesia Raya”

Cultural and artistic performances: palang pintu and kolintang

Welcoming addresses by the committee and representatives of the sponsors (USAID and the Netherlands Embassy)

Keynote speech by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights’ Inspector General – Jhoni Ginting, SH, MH.

2. Plenary Sessions, consisting of: Day 1 Plenary – a number of panel discussion, moderated by LBH Masyarakat (Ajeng Larasati),

on the roles of and synergies between legal aid resources in the realization of access to justice, including:

- The role of Bappenas in optimizing synergies between legal aid resources in the context of realizing access to justice (Director of Law and Regulations at the National Development Planning Agency/Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional)

83

- The role of the BPHN in optimizing synergies between legal aid resources (Head of the National Law Development Agency)

- The role of the Supreme Court in optimizing synergies between legal aid resources (Director Secretary of the Supreme Court)

- The role of Regional Governments in optimizing synergies between legal aid resources (Director of Regional Budget Planning at Ministry of Home Affairs)

- The role of the Indonesian National Police in optimizing synergies between legal aid resources (Head of the Indonesian National Police’s Criminal Investigation Agency)

- The role of universities in optimizing synergies between legal aid resources (Ministry of Research and Technology)

- The role of the Attorney General's Office in optimizing synergies between legal aid resources (Deputy Attorney General for General Crimes at the Indonesian Attorney General's Office)

- The role of civil society in optimizing synergies between legal aid resources: opportunities and challenges (Chairperson of YLBHI)

Day II Plenary - talk show moderated by MaPPI UI (Dio Ashar Wicaksana) on the topic of quality legal aid services for the poor and marginalized, including:

- The role of university-based legal aid organizations in optimizing the provision of quality legal aid services (LKBH UNISBANG)

- The role and functions of paralegals, particularly as regards coordination with legal aid organizations , in the provision of quality legal aid (Paralegals from Kampung Sere, Papua)

- Quality legal aid that addresses the needs of the poor and marginalized (communities assisted by LBH APIK Jakarta)

- Legal aid organization performance evaluation indicators in the context of accountability in the use of Regional Government legal-aid funding (Government of Jember Regency)

- Use of technology to improve the quality of legal aid services (Head of the Legal Outreach and Assistance Center)

3. Working Group Sessions, consisting of thematic discussions on issues related to legal-aid policies and their implementation, and recommendations for improvements to be submitted by representatives of National Legal Aid Conference I to the National Legal Aid Conference II in Bali. The Working Group Sessions discussed the following topics: (1) Paralegal Policies

Working Group 1, which was facilitated by LBH Masyarakat, discussed the following issues:

84

- Definition of paralegal;

- Recognition of various paralegal models;

- Competency standards;

- The scope of paralegals’ work. (2) Legal Aid Database and Information System

Working Group 2, which was facilitated by LBH Jakarta, discussed the following issues:

- System capacity and human resources;

- Substance of data;

- Media/platform;

- Synergy with legal aid organization information and documentation systems. (3) Legal Aid Funding

Working Group 3, which was facilitated by representatives of Asosiasi LBH APIK, discussed the following issues:

- Funding system;

- Funding allocation and reimbursement system;

- Expansion of legal aid funding allocation;

- The need for funding allocations to take account of geographical conditions in specific regions. (4) Synergy between state legal aid resources

Working Group 4, which was facilitated by PBHI and MaPPI FHUI, discussed the following issues:

- The BPHN’s legal aid scheme;

- The Supreme Court’s legal aid scheme;

- Regional Government legal aid schemes;

- Other legal aid schemes. (5) Legal Aid Education

Working Group 5, which was facilitated by ILRC, discussed the following issues:

- Competency standards for legal aid providers;

- Legal aid education system. (6) Role of Regional Governments in Legal Aid

Working Group 6, which was facilitated by LBH APIK Jakarta, discussed the following issues:

- Regional legal aid regulations;

- Allocation of Regional Government funding for legal aid;

- Expanded provision and receipt of legal aid;

- Support coverage for legal aid needs. (7) Expansion of Legal Aid Activities and Recipients

Working Group 7, which was facilitated by YLBHI, discussed the following issues:

- Litigation legal aid;

- Non-litigation legal aid;

- Enhancement of legal education and awareness;

- Policy advocacy;

85

- Vulnerable groups. (8) Legal Aid Service Standards and Quality

Working Group 8, which was facilitated by YLBHI, discussed the following issues:

- Service coverage;

- Legal aid standards and quality: procedural or substantive;

- Oversight;

- Deviations in the provision of legal aid. (9) Verification and Accreditation of legal aid organizations

Working Group 9, which was facilitated by ILRC, discussed the following issues:

- Criteria for legal aid organizations;

- Verification and accreditation procedures;

- Verification and accreditation timeframes. (10) Legal Aid as a Movement

Working Group 10, which was facilitated by YLBHI, discussed the following issues:

- The role of legal aid as an accelerating or moderating movement;

- Formalization of legal aid - strengthens or weakens legal aid?

- Social movement: for whom? II. National Legal Aid Conference I: Recommendations Konfenas I produced a series of recommendations for improving the provision of legal aid going forward. These recommendations are as follows:

1. Ministry of National Development Planning/National Development Planning Agency (Bappenas)

a. Need to improve cross-sectoral coordination among stakeholders regarding the funding of legal aid, especially as regards victims (including support system: psychological services, support for shelters/safe houses, etc.), suitable accommodation for persons with disabilities, also waivers of court fees for the poor (including fees for obtaining copy of judgment and judgment execution fees).

b. Need for integration with legal aid organization applications and those of other service providers, such as the Supreme Court’s SIPP application.

2. Ministry of Law and Human Rights a. Need to amend Republic of Indonesia Law No. 10 of 2015 on the Implementation of

Government Regulation No. 42 of 2013 (on the Requirements and Procedures for the Provision of Legal Aid and the Allocation of Legal Aid Funds), as regards the components/types of activities that are funded and their quantity.

b. Need to amend Minister of Law and Human Rights Decree No. M.HH-01.HN.03.03 2015 on Litigation and Non Litigation Legal Aid Costs so that all costs are covered in the provision of legal aid, as described in the section above on challenges related to litigation and non-litigation matters.

86

c. Need to amend the Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation on Paralegals so as to accommodate the necessary roles of paralegals in providing legal aid, including legal aid for non-litigation matters

d. Need to encourage guaranteed access for paralegals and legal aid organizations to provide legal aid during the criminal justice process through the building of networks with the relevant law enforcement and judicial authorities

e. Need to broaden the scope of legal aid recipients so as to include vulnerable and marginalized individuals/groups, including, if necessary, redefining the term "poor" so as to include both the socially and economically disadvantaged.

f. Need to expand the scope of legal aid so as to cover the cost of:

enhanced legal education and awareness in the community provision of assistance through customary law mechanisms (hukum adat) obtaining of documents, and expert assistance settlement of cases before going to trial, such as through diversion and the

pretrial motion mechanism assistance in relation to claiming compensation and restitution assistance in filing complaints with relevant institutions such as the National

Human Rights Commission, the Ombudsman Commission and the Judicial Commission, and

Legal and policy advocacy as regards such things as legislative reviews, executive reviews and judicial reviews

g. Need to ensure effective synergy between the Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and Regional Governments as regards the operation of the legal aid organization monitoring and reporting system.

h. Need to encourage the Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights to play the leading role in the legal aid sector, rather than village administrations

3. National Legal Development Agency (BPHN) a. The planning of legal aid funding should be based on the potential of, and growth targets

for, legal aid organizations, characteristics and capacity of each legal aid organization, local characteristics and geographical conditions, and the needs of justice seekers/legal aid recipients, especially the poor, and vulnerable and marginalized groups. This may be achieved by, for example:

Utilizing the findings of the regular evaluations conducted by BPHN /Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights on the use of legal aid funding;

Establishing and involving a National Legal Aid Budget Advocacy Team whose membership includes relevant stakeholders;

Increasing funding for litigation legal aid, and assessing the proportion of funding that should be allocated for non-litigation legal aid, including the possibility of considering the allocation of funding not solely on a case basis but also for specific activities such as investigation, consultation, counseling and case presentation.

87

b. Funding should be provided for work related to legal aid, such as: Capacity building for legal aid organizations and paralegals

c. The role of paralegals in legal aid should be expanded to include advocacy for policy change. One step that can be taken in this regard is to adopt a paralegals’ code of ethics to help guide paralegals in their work.

d. There should be more effective synergy between the Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and Regional Governments as regards the operation of the legal aid organization monitoring and reporting system, including a complaints mechanism for reporting irregularities or deviations in the provision of legal aid. Legal aid quality indicators should focus on quality, rather than just quantity and budget spending.

e. Legal aid organizations and BPHN need to be active in encouraging the establishment of policy tools in the form of Regional Regulations or MOU with local Governments that can support the provision of quality legal aid in each region, and should also actively participate in ensuring the proper implementation of relevant Regional Regulations in those regions that have issued them.

f. Together with the Regional Governments, the Ministry of Home Affairs and legal aid organizations, reporting standards should be developed, including the making of the necessary adjustments of report templates so as to take account of existing legal documents and procedures.

g. The technical verification process should be simplified without sacrificing substance, such as by providing the option of manual or online registration and submission of documents, extending the duration of socialization/familiarization process for verification and accreditation, and proper time-based planning from the initial announcement of a verification and accreditation process up to the signing of the MoU or contract;

h. User-friendly technical guidelines for using Sidbankum should be developed and disseminated both online and offline to legal aid organizations, including the provision of video guides;

i. Regular discussions should be held as between the BPHN and communities and/or legal aid organizations;

j. A digitizing facility should be provided by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights in order to assist will the documenting and recording of files in the line units of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, including, if necessary, increasing data storage capacity and security;

k. Legal aid services standards need to be established so as to accommodate the needs of minority and vulnerable groups.

l. A system needs to be designed and put in place so as to ensure the safety and security of paralegals when providing legal aid services.

4. Regional Governments a. Greater synergy is needed between the Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law and

Human Rights and Regional Governments so that the legal aid organization monitoring and reporting system can operate effectively;

88

b. Studies need to be conducted with a view to drafting Regional Government Regulations in each region so that they are truly capable of accommodating local needs, including funding needs for the expansion of legal aid and enhancing the capacity of legal aid organizations and paralegals

5. Legal aid organizations (OBH) a. Legal Aid Organizations and BPHN need to be active in encouraging the establishment of

policy tools in the form of Regional Regulations or MOU with Regional Governments that can support the provision of quality legal aid in each region, and should also actively participate in ensuring the proper implementation of relevant Regional Regulations in those Regions that have issued them.

b. Relevant actors need to be mapped, including as regards the resources they have available. This process should focus on identifying those that are truly orientated towards the provision of legal aid, and developing the quality of those that have resources available, such as through the provision of training and developing their capacity to identify available resources that could be used in the provision of legal aid

c. Community legal empowerment should be undertaken, including the provision of high quality training to paralegals in line with legal aid needs at the local level, as well as the development of paralegal posts in remote areas.

6. Universities a. Legal aid work needs to be mainstreamed by involving students and the academic

community. This includes the provision of courses on corruption, collusion and nepotism, and the conducting of field work as a means disseminating legal education in the community, encouraging students to serve internships in legal aid organizations, and promoting a better balance between research, community service and teaching.

b. The values contained in the University Tri Dharma philosophy need to be internalized and put into practice, including improving the quality community service, enhancing the quality and sensitivity of lecturers, incorporating community service as a compulsory part of the curriculum, and incorporating critical legal education as a compulsory part of the curriculum (including adopting student-focused teaching methods, such as the clinical legal education approach).

7. Law Enforcement Agencies & Judicial Institutions (Police, Attorney General’s Office and Supreme Court)

- Need to provide access to legal aid organizations and paralegals so that they can provide quality legal aid and accompaniment services.

III. CONFERENCE OUTPUTS The conference outputs discussed in this section originate from the working group discussions that were conducted. These discussions were of a very high quality as they involved 40 – 60 experienced participants from various backgrounds. However, we will confine our report in this section to those outputs that relate to challenges and recommendations.

89

Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation No. 10 of 2015 on the Implementation of Government Regulation No. 42 of 2013 on the Requirements and Procedures for the Provision of Legal Aid and the Allocation of Legal Aid Funds, which regulates the level of funding for legal aid, and Minister of Law and Human Rights Decree No. M.HH-01.HN.03.03 2015 on Litigation and Non Litigation Legal Aid Costs, which builds on the previous regulation issued in 2013, continue to give rise to various challenges, as discussed below:

1. Issues related to amount of funding for litigation legal aid: a. The minimal funding allocated for litigation legal aid (Rp 5 million per case during the police,

prosecution and first-instance stages, and Rp 1 million for each of the appeal, cassation (final appeal in the Supreme Court) and Supreme Court judgment review stages. The funding provided for litigation does not include specific legal process that must be

paid for, with the result that the costs associated with these must ultimately be borne by the legal aid organization itself, such as in the case of:

pre-trial motion; judicial review; local examination; seizure application; issuance of legal warning letter; judgment execution; issuance of court warnings to comply with judgment (aanmaning); fees of expert witnesses and translators; simplified/small claims procedure; obtaining a copy of judgment. For example, in Bali it costs Rp 300,000 to obtain a copy of

a judgment if the party is certified as being indigent, and Rp 500,000 if not certified as indigent.

b. Minimal litigation funding for victims. The funding provided for victims is minimal. The bulk of funding provided under the

Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation and Minister of Law and Human Rights Decree No. M.HH-01.HN.03.03 of 2015 is focused on suspects, defendants and convicted felons. This is because of the assumption that the victim’s interests are represented by the prosecutor so that funding is only provided to cover the cost of testifying in court. No funding is provided to cover costs at the investigation stage or during other legal processes.

c. Litigation funding makes no distinction between operational costs and the cost of legal aid services. In reality, operational costs should be calculated separately based on specific needs and conditions on the ground, such as geographical conditions. Consequently, the amount of litigation expenses should not be set on a “one size fits all” basis. In West Sulawesi, for example, the cost of transportation to the local sector police station can be up to Rp 3 million.

2. Issues related to the funding of non-litigation legal aid

90

a. The amount of funding allocated for non-litigation matters is minimal, with the benchmarks for various activities being very restrictive. For example, out-of-court assistance is limited to a maximum of 4 times in two months per case for the same legal aid recipient. By contrast, a victim of violence will require assistance for around 3 months, which will cost Rp 5 - 10 million for transportation and examination from the police investigation up to the trial stage, as well as additional funding to cover the costs of victim recovery.

b. The low level of funding provided for out-of-court assistance is insufficient to cover the cost of medical examinations and medical/psychologist’s certificates, as well as costs incurred during the victim’s time in a shelter/safe house and during the recovery process.

c. The funding provided for mediation processes is also small, even though restorative justice is strongly promoted by the Government. Mediation funding fails to take into account specific local conditions, such as traditional or customary resolution processes in Papua, which can be very costly in monetary terms.

d. Funding for community empowerment is also minimal, and does not cover structural legal aid work, such as community empowerment through organizing and advocacy at the grassroots level.

e. Funding for non-litigation activities does not cover policy advocacy, handling of cases involving violations of basic rights in connection with access to public services, such as arranging for the issuance of cards or deeds related to legal identity, all of which can be expensive.

3. The reimbursement system does not take account of new judicial mechanisms and procedures, such as a cassation appeal in a claim using the simplified/small claims procedure. This is not covered as under the normal system, an individual must first appeal to the appellate court, while in the case of the simplified/small claims procedure, appeal lies in cassation directly to the Supreme Court.

4. The funding system does not take into account non-standard court costs (for example, the requirement to make a Rp 2.6-million down payment in Bali in a divorce case) and systemic corruption and the levying of unofficial charges, which, like it or not, have to be paid.

5. To date, funding is calculated on a per person/client basis (per legal aid recipient) rather than on a case basis. Thus, if a person has received legal aid in one case, they will not be eligible to receive legal aid in another case, even where a particular matter involves both litigation and non-litigation aspects, such as in the case of a victim in contact with the law.

6. Issues related to the access and reporting mechanisms for legal aid funding a. A new contract/MOU is signed in the middle of the year (even if the MOU is operative

from the start of the year), plus the fact that Sidbankum does not automatically operate immediately (usually it only starts operating a month after the MOU is signed) – these factors make it difficult for legal aid organizations to access funding in circumstances such as the following:

A legal aid organizations that has been working on a case since the beginning of the year cannot directly obtain reimbursement, with the result that a backlog in payments occurs. As the reporting process commences in the middle of the year, this results in significant delays.

91

A legal aid organization must cover costs using their own resources in advance, while not all of the costs that have been incurred can be reimbursed. Especially in the case of litigation, if judgment is handed down in the current year but after the expiry of the MOU (e.g., the MOU expires in November 2018, while judgment is handed down in December 2018), then the costs cannot be reimbursed either in 2018 (because judgment was entered outside of the contract period) or in the following year, because a case can only be reimbursed if judgment was entered during the current budget year).

b. The requirements for reimbursement continue to be problematic, including the fact that 2 receipts must be submitted for the same item during the reporting and reimbursement process. Sometimes no receipts are provided for payments made to the court.

7. Legal aid organizations are encouraged to obtain accreditation. However, an increase in the number of accredited legal aid organizations is not automatically accompanied by a proportional increase in the funding provided. Indeed, funding may actually be cut due to an increase in the number of accredited legal aid organizations, as happened in Yogyakarta.

8. Legal aid funding fails to accommodate specific needs, such as those of the poor in remote locations, as well as the majority of vulnerable and marginalized groups, such as the disabled who need suitable accommodation during the course of the legal process, as well as the assistance of signers and helpers.

9. Legal aid funding policy focuses solely on the financially poor, even though Legal Aid Law Article 5(1) provides that those entitled to receive legal aid include all persons who are unable to fulfill their basic rights in an appropriate and independent manner.

10. Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation No. 10 of 2015 on the Implementation of Government Regulation No. 42 of 2013 regulates the types and frequency of legal aid activities that are eligible for funding – these are no longer sufficient to satisfy needs on the ground.

B. Recommendations A. Legal aid is as important as education and health as it concerns the rights of citizens and often

determines the level of fulfillment of other rights. Consequently, adequate percentages of total state and regional budgets must be allocated to legal aid, in the same way as specific percentages are allocated to education and health.

B. The planning of legal aid funding should be based on the potential of, and growth targets, for legal aid organizations, the characteristics and capacity of each legal aid organization, local characteristics and geographical conditions, and the needs of justice seekers/legal aid recipients, especially the poor, and vulnerable and marginalized groups.

C. Contracts /MOUs should be signed at the beginning of the year and incorporate clauses that require Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights to respond to the needs of each legal aid organization so that funding can be used in accordance with needs and spending of available funds can be improved.

D. Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation No. 10 of 2015 (on the Implementation of Government Regulation No. 42 of 2013 on the Requirements and Procedures for the Provision of

92

Legal Aid and the Allocation of Legal Aid Funds), should be amended as regards the components/types and quantities of activities that are eligible for funding.

E. Minister of Law and Human Rights Decree No. M.HH-01.HN.03.03 2015 on Litigation and Non Litigation Legal Aid Costs should be amended to cover all costs that arise in the provision of legal aid as described in the section above on challenges related to both litigation and non-litigation legal aid.

F. Funding should be calculated on a per case basis so that the same individual/client may receive legal aid more than once in respect of different types of services that are provided in the same case (litigation and non-litigation), or for different cases, as required.

G. Sidbankum for reporting and reimbursement should be capable of being opened/operated immediately after the signing of the MOU/contract, and responses accelerated so that backlogs do not arise. In addition, the reimbursement process should be simplified rather than made more complicated, such as in the case of two receipts being required, while at the same time maintaining accountability.

H. Cross-sectoral coordination among stakeholders in legal aid funding needs to be improved, especially in respect of victims (including as regards support systems: psychological services, support for shelters/safe houses, etc.), the provision of suitable accommodation for people with disabilities, and the waiver of court fees for the poor (including fees for obtaining copies of judgments and judgment execution).

I. The findings of the regular evaluations conducted by BPHN/Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights on the use of legal aid funding should be used to formulate better/more responsive funding policies;

J. A National Legal Aid Budget Advocacy Team should be established whose membership includes relevant stakeholders;

K. Legal aid support should not be confined solely to cases, but should also be available for funding other aspects, such as building maintenance costs, etc.

L. A change from reimbursement to direct funding should be considered; M. The 2% tax on legal aid services should be eliminated; N. Funding for new legal aid organizations should become effective in the following year; O. A blueprint should be prepared for the planning of legal aid funding based on the potential of,

and growth targets for, legal aid organizations, the characteristics and capacity of each legal aid organization, local characteristics and geographical conditions, and the needs of justice seekers/legal aid recipients, especially the poor, and vulnerable and marginalized groups.

3. Paralegals A. Challenges

A. The annulment of articles 11 and 12 of Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation Number 1 of 2018 on Paralegals and the Provision of Legal Aid in 2019 following a judicial review of paralegal functions;

B. No definition of “paralegal” is given in either the Legal Aid Law or the Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation on Paralegals. In practice, there are a number of different types of

93

paralegal, including community paralegals, paralegals attached to legal aid organizations and individual paralegals;

C. Each legal aid organization generally has its own paralegal training program or process. Despite these differences, almost all paralegal training involves the provision of basic material on human rights and basic legal education.

B. Recommendations 1. The role of paralegals in legal aid should be expanded to include advocacy for policy change.

One step that can be taken in this regard is to adopt a paralegals’ code of ethics to help guide paralegals in their work.

2. The BPHN and other institutions should be encouraged to provide funding to legal aid organizations to enhance paralegal capacity, including through the conducting of study visits and cross-issue/network learning.

3. The paralegal network should be expanded, including through the involvement of university-based legal aid organizations, law firms and service provider institutions.

4. Access for paralegals to provide legal aid during the criminal justice process needs to be guaranteed through the building of networks with the relevant law enforcement and judicial authorities

4. Expansion of Legal Aid Coverage A. Challenges

a. The BPHN’s legal aid funding scheme tends to prioritize litigation, with more funding being provided for litigation legal aid than for non-litigation legal aid. This scheme tends to compel all legal aid to be channeled through the judicial mechanism.

b. If a legal aid organization has a low level of spending in the litigation sector, its funding will likely be reduced and reallocated to other legal aid organizations that handle more litigation work. This also shows that the quality of legal aid provision is assessed based solely on spending levels.

c. The current legal aid funding mechanism fails to meet the needs of disadvantaged individuals/groups that wish to pursue legal measures such as legislative review, executive review and judicial review, even though these forms of legal action require significant resources. So, there seems to be an assumption that the poor are not entitled to have their voices heard on policies that affect them.

d. The restriction of legal aid to those who are financially poor excludes those who are not generally regarded as financially poor but are nevertheless vulnerable for one reason or another. For example, a woman who was previously wealthy but recently became impoverished as a result of divorce. A woman who finds herself in these circumstances will have difficulty in obtaining legal aid as she will have problems getting an indigent certificate (SKTM).

B. Recommendations a. Eligibility for legal aid needs to be expanded so that it is not only available to those who are

financially poor but also to vulnerable individuals/groups. b. The scope of legal aid services also needs to be expanded to encompass legal aid for

advocating changes in law and policy, such as legislative review, executive review and judicial

94

review, as well as oversight of government institutions, law enforcement agencies and the courts, and advocacy for access to justice.

c. The role of legal aid needs to be expanded to include community empowerment so that in the future communities can bring legal action themselves without having to rely on legal aid organizations, such as when seeking judicial reviews or legislative reviews.

d. The scope of legal aid services should also accommodate the resolution of cases before they go to trial, such as through diversion and the pretrial motion procedure.

e. Legal aid should be expanded to also cover the needs of victims/justice seekers who require medical examinations or the services of translators or psychologists.

f. Access needs to be provided so that legal aid organizations can submit proposals related to their activities and funding.

g. The meaning of litigation needs to be reviewed. Litigation should not be confined to the judicial process but should also include other aspects such as (1) investigation, (2) consultation, (3) counseling, and (4) the judicial process. In addition, litigation should also cover legal education as victims also need legal aid.

h. Funding should no longer be provided on a per case basis but should also be based on activities such as investigation, consultation, counseling and case presentation.

i. Assistance is needed to cover the transportation costs of legal aid organizations/justice seekers so that legal-aid responses can be mobilized, especially in the case of regions that suffer from poor public transportation.

j. Legal assistance also needs to cover the monitoring of the judicial process and the selection/appointment of public officials. In addition, legal assistance should cover the cost of filing complaints with institutions such as the National Commission on Human Rights, the Ombudsman Commission and the Judicial Commission.

k. Legal aid also needs to be available for assistance provided in respect of claims for compensation and restitution.

l. Legal aid should also cover various needs that to date are not covered, such as obtaining documents like birth certificates and isbat documents, and to cover the fees of experts.

m. Legal aid should also be available to cover the cost of customary or traditional (adat) resolution mechanisms, such as in the case of Papua, where certain types of cases need to be resolved through adat mechanisms.

n. A name-based reporting system is needed to ensure that if an individual is registered as a recipient of legal aid, they cannot then simultaneously access legal aid from another provider.

o. Legal aid also needs to be expanded so that legal aid organizations can accompany victims through the process of recovering from a crime, especially in a case like sexual assault.

5. Role of Regional Governments in Legal Aid A. Challenges

a. Regional Governments’ legal aid funding for litigation tends to be greater than for non-litigation

b. The scope of the legal aid recipients for whom funding is provided by Regional Governments should not be confined to the financially poor but also encompass vulnerable groups

95

c. There are concerns about “double funding” being provided by the Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and Regional Governments.

d. Some legal aid organizations that have been accredited have demonstrated a tendency to only handle certain types of cases. An assessment of the types of cases that should be eligible for legal aid has never been conducted.

e. Although a number of regions have issued Regional Regulations and Gubernatorial Regulations on legal aid, they are often ineffective for reasons such as a failure to accommodate local conditions and needs

f. Some legal aid organizations lack sensitivity to the issues facing of vulnerable groups B. Recommendations

a. Synergy is required as between the BPHN, the Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and Regional Governments for the operation of the monitoring and reporting system

b. Legal aid organizations should conduct an inventory of the issues related to legal aid at the Regional Government level. For example, the Depok Regional Government has issued a legal aid regulation but it has not been implemented to date. So, legal aid organizations should inventory the issues involved and hold discussions with relevant Regional Governments;

c. Legal Aid Organizations need to play an active role in encouraging the issuance of Regional Regulations in each region, as well as actively ensuring, and participating in, the implementation of Regional Regulations in those regions that have issued them.

d. Studies need to be conducted with a view to drafting Regional Regulations in each region so that they are truly capable of accommodating local needs;

e. The definition of legal aid in Regional Regulations needs to be expanded so as to not only encompass the poor but also vulnerable groups, including religious minorities, those with disabilities, LGBT people, sex workers, indigenous people, refugees, journalists, human rights defenders and workers;

f. MoUs need to be entered into as between legal aid organizations and Regional Governments for the handling of cases involving vulnerable groups;

g. Efforts need to be made to impart an understanding of the need to protect vulnerable groups against arbitrary actions by law enforcement officials in the regions;

h. Legal aid is needed for the provision of legal outreach at the village level; i. Independent teams needs to be established to oversee legal aid in the regions.

6. Synergy in Harnessing Legal Aid Resources A. Situation/Challenges

a. Limited resources, both in terms of human resources and financial resources. The additional funding that has been provided and the increase in accredited legal aid organizations have not been sufficient to meet legal aid needs.

b. In practice, a legal aid organization requires more than Rp 5 million to handle one case. This is because there is a limited number of legal aid organizations and they have not been established in all regions – to date, they are generally concentrated in the cities. In some

96

cases, legal aid providers have to pay significant amounts for transportation to legal aid recipients’ places of residence.

c. Each region has different characteristics. The potential resources that are available in one region may not necessarily be available in another region. So, the potential funding in a particular region may not be sufficient to provide adequate service coverage;

d. Some actors or resource providers lack SOPs or mechanisms governing the use of their resources by third parties. As a result, the resources that these actors or resource providers have available are incapable of being accessed and utilized to the maximum.

B. Recommendations a. Efforts need to be focused on 4 types of resources in order to achieve an optimal legal aid

system, namely: i. Political Resources, that is, resources that involve the relations between legal aid

providers and policy makers. For example, relations with the Police, Attorney General’s Office, Ministry of Law and Human Rights, Regional Government and Ministry of Home Affairs.

ii. Social Resources, that is, resources that involve relations between legal aid providers and other participants that could drive change, including NGOs, religious leaders, community leaders, youth leaders, mass organizations, and Public Order and Security Agencies (Kamtibmas). In addition, the power of the mass media and social media can be harnessed so as to promote and advocate issues related to legal aid.

iii. Economic Resources, that is, resources that are related to funding, money, budgets and assets that could help in the provision of legal aid. Funding should not be confined to BPHN funding alone. There are also other alternative sources of operational funding, such as:

o Commercial law firms (profit-oriented) could cross-subsidize the establishment of legal aid centers;

o Funding from village administrations -> would be more appropriate if funding for community empowerment was sourced from Village Fund Allocations (ADD) as Village Funds are supposed to be used for economic development purposes (may not be used for legal aid) -> 30%

o Donors, both domestic and foreign; o Corporate sponsors/Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) (companies that are

concerned with legal-aid provision) o BPHN -> for accredited legal aid organizations o Supreme Court o Provincial, Regency and City Budgets (using Regional Regulation on Legal Aid as

basis) o Entrepreneurs o Universities with research budgets o Fundraising

97

iv. Cultural Resources – this relates to the availability of human resources that have the capacity to provide support services for legal aid activities. These resources also relate to people who have the potential to assist in the provision of legal aid, such as qualified advocates, paralegals, expert staff in state ministries and auxiliary agencies, PKK ladies who have received training, village workers, academics, lecturers and students, paramedics and psychologists, campaigners/influencers and so on. These cultural resources can also be molded or brought to the fore through the provision of various types of human-resources training in collaboration with universities, with psychologists for the purpose of providing multi-disciplinary training, paralegal schools, the development of sustainable relationships of emotional empowerment, and routine training by relevant institutions in the required fields.

b. The capacity of parties that have resources available should be developed, such as through the provision of training and developing the capacity of parties to identify the resources they have available that can be used for legal aid. Such training should not only be provided by civil society and legal aid organizations but also by government institutions, such as the BPHN.

c. Actors should be mapped by identifying the resources they have available and those that are orientated primarily towards the provision of legal aid (rather than seeking profit or advancing personal interests) through the signing of MoUs.

d. Legal-aid forums should be established so as to create synergies as regards both actors and resources. Such forums may take various forms.

e. Regular meetings (both offline and online), thematic discussions, and monitoring and evaluation should be conducted in order to maintain relations so that resources are not only used formally but also based on proximity, and so as to bring about a uniformity of vision and mission in order to ensure a similar level of commitment to policy change.

f. Routine consultative meetings should be held with policy makers in each region so that the policy standards for the provision of legal aid are uniform in each region.

7. Legal Aid Documentation System A. Situation/Challenges

a. There are issues related to the integration of the BPHN’s legal aid database with the systems operated by Regional Governments in connection with the legal aid funding provided by Regional Governments;

b. There are issues related to the integration of the BPHN’s database with those operated by other legal institutions (for example, the Supreme Court’s SIPP);

c. The Sidbankum database is currently only accessible by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and individual legal aid organizations for accreditation security reasons;

d. The documentation system is sometimes constrained by internet-related issues, such as servers being frequently down and problems with uploading data, especially at the end of the year;

e. In practice, the legal aid documentation system adheres to the Government’s fiscal year. As a result, disbursements are frequently not made in accordance with the needs of legal aid

98

organizations when handling cases. Consequently, the BPHN is often unable to reimburse legal aid organizations as it has already spent all of its available funds;

f. No detailed guidelines are available on the use of Sidbankum in relation to case reporting standards.

g. It is difficult to achieve integration as the budget management capabilities of each region are different;

h. There are difficulties in documenting cases for reporting purposes; i. The current filing system is often not in accordance with the legal documents that are used.

B. Recommendations a. The BPHN should hold regular discussions with communities and/or legal aid organizations so

as to bring about a common understanding as regards documentation as between Government and communities/legal aid organizations;

b. The BPHN should integrate its system with those of legal aid organizations and other service providers;

c. The BPHN should update its video on Sidbankum so as to make it easier for people to use the system;

d. Digitizing facilities should be provided by the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights’ line units in order to assist with the documenting of cases;

e. Technical guidelines are needed for the use of Sidbankum so as to make it easier to use by legal aid organizations, both online and offline;

f. Better facilities are required, such as safer and larger capacity data storage facilities; g. Uniform standards need to be established for legal aid reporting and documentation as

between Regional Governments and the BPHN. In addition, the Ministry of Home Affairs should be involved in the preparation of such standards.

8. Legal Aid Education A. Challenges

a. Currently, legal aid is not covered by the university law school curriculum; b. There are various institutional constraints, such as the fact that university legal education

continues to be very bureaucratic and policies are not pro-public, as well as a lack of interest on the part of students;

c. From the curriculum perspective, legal education continues to be lecturer-centric, there are no systemic indicators or criteria for assessing the quality of lecturers;

d. Community service-related courses are optional, while teaching methods lack sensitivity to social issues. Meanwhile, the curriculum continues to be primarily oriented towards business issues.

e. While there has been collaboration between law school clinics and legal aid organizations, this has never been made mandatory;

f. There are a number of obstacles related to paralegal education. In reality, many paralegals are not involved in litigation advocacy. There are as yet no training and evaluation standards for paralegals. In addition, no socialization/familiarization has been conducted in respect of law enforcement agencies and legal institutions as regards the role of paralegals. As a result,

99

some paralegals have to deal with a lack of recognition from law enforcement officials and legal institutions.

B. Recommendations a. University law schools should position legal aid education as an important part of the legal

education curriculum. Law schools should help develop and improve the national legal education system, curricula, teaching methods, institutions, human resources and leadership.

b. Synchronization is needed as between the Legal Aid Law and the National Education System Law, using a rewards and punishment approach;

c. University-based legal aid institutions (LKBH) need to coordinate with their law schools and university authorities to strengthen regulations and the mainstreaming of legal aid, and to address institutional and bureaucratic issues that constrain the provision of legal aid services;

d. As regards the curriculum, law schools should not only focus on business-related subjects but rather should apply a curriculum that includes a community-service component for students. In addition, the sensitivity of lecturers to social issues needs to be heightened;

e. The universities should make community-service programs mandatory; f. Universities and legal aid organizations should enter into MOUs that provide opportunities to

students who are interested in legal aid work to serve internships in legal aid organizations; g. Lecturers should pay equal attention to all elements of the Tri Dharma philosophy, namely,

research, community service and teaching. h. Mainstreaming of legal aid work and the involvement of students and the academic

community in such work should be encouraged. This can be achieved through, among other things, the provision of courses on corruption, collusion and nepotism, and the conducting of field work so as to disseminate legal knowledge in the community, by students serving internships in legal aid organizations, and by promoting a better balance between research, community service and teaching;

i. The values contained in the Tri Dharma philosophy should be put into practice by increasing the focus on community service, improving lecturer quality, heightening lecturer sensitivity, making community service programs compulsory, and the inclusion of critical legal education as a mandatory part of the curriculum, including the adoption of student-focused teaching methods that incorporate that clinical legal education approach.

j. The perspectives of lecturers and students as regards the issues facing vulnerable and marginalized groups should be improved.

9. Service Standards A. Challenges

a. The legal aid standards set out in Government Regulation No. 4 of 2013 (on the Requirements and Procedures for the Provision of Legal Aid and the Allocation of Legal Aid Funds) and Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation No. 10 of 2015 and Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation No. 63 of 2016, both of which are implementing regulations for Government Regulation No. 4 of 2013, are primarily procedural in character and are not oriented towards the needs of legal aid recipients;

100

b. To date, no regulations have been issued on the substantive aspects of legal aid service standards;

c. The regulations fail to accommodate the needs of special, minority and vulnerable groups; d. Legal aid providers have found that legal aid provision to date continues to be focused on

formalities, such as the need to satisfy the requirements for reimbursement. For example, defense pleadings are submitted orally rather than in writing, while legal aid recipients are not involved in the preparation of various legal documents related to their cases.

e. There is often inadequate information disclosure on the part of both legal aid providers and legal aid recipients;

f. The law enforcement agencies and the judicial institutions (Police, Prosecutors and Courts) often attempt to thwart the provision of legal aid using various means, such as the following:

Intimidating people by telling them that if they avail of legal aid, then the prosecution will seek, or the court will impose, a heavier sentence;

Not involving legal aid recipients in each process for which legal aid is available (case presentation, preparation of legal documents, preparation of evidence, witnesses, etc.);

g. Legal aid in the litigation arena has not been optimal to date; h. Legal aid in the non-litigation field is often constrained by various problems, including: i. Geographical distance j. Outreach and empowerment efforts are not in accordance with the needs of the public; k. The process of applying to the BPHN to conduct legal research is quite complicated; l. There have been instances where fake documents have been submitted as part of the

administrative process for accessing legal aid; m. Legal aid providers continue to face difficulties in identifying special cases; n. Lack of communication and knowledge transfer as between legal aid providers and recipients; o. Applicants for legal aid, especially those from minority and vulnerable groups, experience

difficulty in fulfilling the documentary administrative requirements, particularly as regards identity documents and indigent certificates (SKTM);

p. The competency levels of legal aid providers often leave a lot to be desired; q. There continue to be legal aid organizations that lack the capacity to provide legal aid.

B. Recommendations a. Legal aid service standards need to be established; b. Regular monitoring and evaluation of legal aid organizations should be conducted by both the

Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and the BPHN; c. A complaints mechanism should be established so that complaints may be filed in respect of

deviations or irregularities in the provision of legal aid; d. The legal aid service standards that are established need to accommodate the needs of

minority and vulnerable groups; e. Legal aid should be provided (in both litigation and non litigation cases) in an informative,

accountable, participatory and inclusive manner; f. Legal aid providers should involve other institutions in the provision of legal aid, especially in

cases that pertain to minority and vulnerable groups;

101

g. Legal aid providers must guarantee the right to confidentiality of legal aid recipients, in accordance with the individual needs of each recipient;

h. Legal aid providers must guarantee the security and safety of legal aid recipients in respect of threats, intimidation and discrimination;

i. The quality of legal aid should not only be assessed based on the level of spending of available funding;

j. Legal aid resources should be increased so as to improve litigation and legal aid standards and quality, including: o the competencies and capacities of legal aid providers; o funding

10. Verification and Accreditation A. Challenges

a. In general, the verification and accreditation process is considered too complicated due to a lack of information and the complexity of the Sidbankum application.

b. At the registration stage, a variety of challenges arise, including the lack of a tutorial on using Sidbankum, system errors, a lack of responsiveness on the part of Sidbankum operators, inadequate dissemination of information on the launching of a registration process, and inadequate time between the announcement of a registration process and the deadline for registration.

c. During the verification and accreditation stage, the factual verification process fails to accommodate specific local conditions that affect the ability of an legal aid organization to fulfill the requirements, for example, the requirement to have an office/secretariat. Another problem relates to the restrictions on the scope of legal aid that may be provided, which may impede a legal aid organization from verifying a case that they have handled but which does not come with the scope of the legal aid that may be provided.

d. There is only one mechanism through which an individual may demonstrate they are poor, namely, the indigent certificate (SKTM) mechanism;

e. The requirements for university accreditation are problematic given that lecturers are civil servants, while an advocate may not be a civil servant. In addition, university-based legal aid institutions (LKBH) face difficulties in recruiting advocates because of the low number of candidates who pass the advocates’ professional examination;

f. Interim funding should be provided to institutions that have yet to be accredited so as to allow them to provide legal aid.

B. Recommendations a. Law 16 of 2011 on legal aid and its implementing regulations should be revised, particularly

those provisions on the verification and accreditation of legal aid organizations (article 7(3) and (4) of the Law 16 of 2011).

b. Information on the verification and accreditation registration process needs to be disseminated more evenly. In addition, a variety of different means of information dissemination should be employed, such as video tutorials, a registration manual, and so forth.

102

c. More registration options should be provided, both online and offline, such as registration by post;

d. Better time planning is required for all stages of the process (from dissemination of information on registration up to the registration deadline);

e. The Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights should conduct an initial evaluation by identifying and recording legal aid organizations that fail to satisfy the requirements;

f. Verification and accreditation should be conducted annual rather than every 3 years; g. The university-based legal aid service system should be integrated with Sidbankum as a

reflection of the University Tri Dharma philosophy; h. The provision of legal aid should be monitored and evaluated on a regular basis so as to

facilitate the conducting of the verification and accreditation process during the next period; i. The quality of legal aid services should also be verified – to date, the only aspect that is verified

is quantity; j. The accreditation and verification standards should be adjusted for university-based legal aid

institutions; k. Different registration requirements should be applied as between those registering for the

first time and those that have registered previously so that the latter do not have to go through all stages of the registration process again

11. Legal Aid as a Movement A. Challenges

a. The regulation on village paralegals that has been issued by the Minister of Village Affairs, Development of Disadvantaged Regions and Transmigration has the potential to give rise to conflicts of interest. This is because in practice, the paralegals are often village officials or village heads. Thus, they would lack independence if the village administration was in conflict with the community;

b. Uneven access to training that is in line with the needs of marginalized communities in the case of paralegals who hail from different backgrounds;

c. There are still no regulations on the rights of paralegals in respect of such issues as security or the restoration of rights as a paralegal;

d. The lack of clarity over the definition of "poor" reduces the coverage of legal aid and makes it difficult for those who have recently become impoverished to obtain indigent certificates (SKTM);

e. Both legal aid organizations and paralegals are often compelled for financial reasons to focus on increasing the number of cases they handle and to concentrate on litigation legal aid, with the result that legal aid for social mobilization is not a priority;

f. There are many incidences where legal aid organization clients have the potential to become paralegals. So, the question arises as to whether legal aid organizations can actively provide assistance to such clients?

B. Recommendations

103

a. There should be more equal access to paralegal training for paralegals from different backgrounds in accordance with the needs/interests of local marginalized communities;

b. The BPHN needs to formulate policies and establish a system to guarantee the security of paralegals who provide legal aid services so that they can act as the driving force of social movements;

c. There needs to be greater synergy between central government and village administration actors in the provision of legal aid, particularly as regards coordination and supervision, and guarantees of paralegal access so that they can provide quality legal aid and drive social movements;

d. The definition of “poverty” in the Legal Aid Law needs to be redefined so as to cover the needs of marginalized individuals/groups who become impoverished;

e. The definition of “service” needs to be redefined so that it is not confined to litigation and non-litigation services but rather is expanded to accommodate legal aid services for social mobilization;

f. As regards developing paralegal posts in remote areas, better coordination with legal aid organizations is required so that the credibility of paralegals can be enhanced and community trust in the capacity of paralegals to assist with cases can be improved.

IV. PRESS RELEASE Press Release National Legal Aid Conference “Expanding Access to Justice by Optimizing the Provision of Quality Legal Aid Services" Jakarta, 20-21 August 2019 Legal aid is a constitutional right of citizens. Consequently, the State has an obligation to guarantee the provision of legal aid, particularly to the poor and marginalized. To help ensure the fulfillment of this obligation, Law No. 16 of 2011 on Legal Aid (“Legal Aid Law”) was enacted on 2 November 2011. Since the enactment of the Legal Aid Law, legal aid has been provided throughout Indonesia by legal aid organizations (LAOs) that are verified by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights. In 2018, the country had 574 legal aid organizations spread across 215 regencies/municipalities. While considerable progress has been made in the provision of legal aid, such as the development of a legal-aid information and data system and the securing of support from Regional Governments, there continue to be many obstacles and constraints, including some that have a fundamental impact on access to justice. The most pressing question continues to be: "To what extent does the provision of legal aid contribute to improved access to justice on the part of the poor and marginalized?" A number of civil society, including Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Indonesia (YLBHI), Indonesia Legal Resource Center (ILRC), Asosiasi LBH APIK, Perhimpunan Bantuan Hukum Indonesia (PBHI), LBH Masyarakat, LBH Jakarta, LBH APIK Jakarta and MaPPI FH UI, with the support of the Netherlands Government through the Rule of Law Fund (RoLF) program managed by the International Development Law Organization (IDLO), USAID and The Asia Foundation (through the Empowering Access to Justice/MAJU program), are holding a National Legal Aid Conference on 20-21 August 2019 at Taman

104

Wiladatika, Cibubur (abbreviated in Bahasa Indonesia as “Konfenas Bankum I”). This event involves a series of activities that are closely related to the planned holding of a second National Legal Aid Conference (“Konfenas Bankum II”) in Bali by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights. Febi Yonesta, the chair of the organizing committee, said that the purpose of holding this National Legal Aid Conference I was to "Expand Access to Justice by Optimizing the Provision of Quality Legal Aid Services." She said that the conference would be attended by representatives of some 350 legal aid organizations, paralegals and civil society organizations from all parts of Indonesia that play a role in the provision of legal aid. She added that the opening ceremony would be attended by representatives of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, and the U.S. and Netherlands Embassies, which have been supporting the efforts to improve the legal aid system in Indonesia, including through support for this event. Further, Febi said, the Conference will be attended by representatives of relevant state institutions and auxiliary bodies, who will also serve as speakers. Heather Variava, United States Chargé d'Affaires, expressed her support for the Government of Indonesia in its efforts to expand access to legal aid to more Indonesian people, and her appreciation for the commitment of the Government of Indonesia to partnering with civil society so as to achieve this objective. She said that this two-day Legal Aid Conference would provide an opportunity to reflect on the successes achieved in expanding access to justice for more Indonesians and in upholding human dignity and democratic values. According to Ratna Batara Munti, representing the Asosiasi LBH APIK Indonesia and also SC for the Conference, three key themes will be focused on during the event, namely, expanding access to legal aid services, improving the quality of legal aid services, and forging synergies between legal resources at both the Governmental and community levels. These three key themes will be discussed in depth over the course of two days through plenary discussions, talk shows, and working-group sessions for the purpose of formulating recommendations. A total of 10 topics will be discussed, consisting of: 1) Paralegal Policies; 2) Legal Aid Database Information System; 3) Legal Aid Funding; 4) Synergy between State Legal Aid Resources; 5) Legal Aid Education; 6) Role of Regional Governments in Legal Aid; 7) Expansion of Scope of Legal Aid Activities and Recipients; 8) Legal Aid Service & Quality Standards; 9) Legal Aid Verification and Accreditation; and 10) Legal Aid from the Social Movement Perspective Ratna also stressed the importance of mainstreaming gender and human rights perspectives, and the alignment of legal-aid programs with the interests of victims of structural injustice, particularly vulnerable and marginalized groups such as women, children, the disabled, the elderly, etc. She said that these issues needed to be focused on during the National Legal Aid Conferences in both Jakarta and Bali. National Legal Aid Conference I represents an effort by civil society organizations to provide input to the Government in the expectation that this will help improve legal-aid provision going ahead. The most

105

important thing is that legal aid be provided based on appropriate values, principles and service standards so as to contribute to improved access to justice, especially for the poor and marginalized. Jakarta, 16 August 2019. National Legal Aid Conference Organizing Committee Contact Persons: 1. Febi Yonesta (Chair of Organizing Committee) : 0878 7063 6308 2. Ratna Batara Munti (Steering Committee) : 0813 1850 1072 V. List of Institutions/Organizations Attending National Legal Aid Conference I in Jakarta Aliansi Demokrasi untuk Papua (ALDP), Aksi Keadilan Indonesia, Arus Pelangi, Asosiasi APIK, Assegaf Hamzah & Partners, National Development Planning Board (Bappenas), National Legal Development Agency (BPHN), Semarang University’s Legal Aid and Consultation Bureau (BKBH), Clinical Legal Education UNPAS, PERADI Tasikmalaya Executive Board, Depok Local Legislative Assembly (DPRD), ELSHAM Papua, FMPL, Federasi Buruh Lintas Pabrik, Forum Akar Rumput Indonesia, Forum Bantuan Hukum untuk Kesetaraan, Forum Masyarakat Antajaya Peduli Lingkungan, Atmajaya Law School, Gereja Al Masih Sayegan Sleman, GERADIN, GWL-INA, GAYa Nusantara, Hukum online, Internasional Development Law Organization (IDLO), Ikatan Advokat Indonesia (IKADIN), IKADIN Jember, The Indonesian Legal Resource Center (ILRC), Ikatan Perempuan Positif Indonesia (IPPI), IPPI Jakarta, Ikatan Waria Yogyakarta, Indonesian Legal Roundtable (ILR), Jaringan Nasional Advokasi Pekerja Rumah Tangga (Jala PRT), JAI Surabaya, Jaringan Paralegal, Kebaya Yogya, Kebon Tebu Muara Baru, Kemitraan, KSN, Koalisi Perempuan Indonesia (JATIM), Komisi untuk Orang Hilang dan Korban Tindak Kekerasan (Kontras), Komunitas Nelayan Puger, KPKC Sinode GKI Tanah Papua, KPR TUBAN, Minister of Law and Human Rights, Lembaga Advokasi Hak Anak (LAHA) Bandung, LBH Mawar Saron Batam, Lembaga Bantuan Hukum (LBH) Mawar Saron Jakarta, LBH Masyarakat, LBH Pers, LBH Project Base Palangkaraya, LBH Ansor, LBH GP. Ansor Tasikmalaya Regency, LBH Ansor Ciamis, LBH Pekanbaru, LBH Yogyakarta, LBH Jakarta, LBH Padang LBH Papua, LBH Bandung, LBH Manado, LBH Makassar, LBH Medan, LBH Depok, LBH Tohaga, LBH KAI, LBH Banda Aceh, LBH Palembang, LBH Kendari, LBH Bandar Lampung, LBH Semarang, LBH Surabaya, LBH Surabaya Pos Malang, LBH Sembada, LBH Anugerah Keadilan, Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Jayakarta, Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Serikat Buruh Sejahtera Indonesia, LBH SPP, LBH Demak Raya, LBH Bali, LBH Kamilia, LBH Pendidikan, LBH Citra Justitia Sulawesi Barat, LBH Respublica, LBH Sikap, LBH Catur Bhakti, LBH Keadilan Banten, LBH Keadilan Bogor Raya, LBH APIK Aceh, LBH APIK NTT, LBH APIK NTB, LBH APIK Kaltim, LBH APIK Sumsel, LBH APIK Jakarta, LBH APIK Banten, LBH APIK Bali, LBH APIK Sulteng, LBH APIK Jayapura, LBH APIK Semarang, LBH APIK Yogyakarta, LBH APIK Makassar, LBH APIK Medan, LKBH UMS, LKBH UPH, LKBH PDA MALANG, LKBH IAIC, LKBH FH UNPATI, Indonesian Islamic University Law School LKBH, LKBH Unisan Gorontalo, LKBH UNKRIS, LKBH UNLAM, UBHARA Law School LKBH, Lembaga Kajian dan Advokasi Independensi Peradilan (LeIP), LPA NTB, LPP Sekar Jepara, LPPA BINA ANNISA, LPKBH UNISNU, Supreme Court, MaPPI, Masyarakat Peduli Lingkungan Indonesia, Migrant Care, Desa/JAI paralegals, LBH APIK Jakarta paralegals, LBH APIK NTB paralegals, LBH Papua paralegals, Tenjowaringin Village paralegals, Kersamaju Village paralegals, Kampung Sereh paralegals, National University’s Legal Aid Center (PBH UNAS), Pusat Bantuan Hukum Indonesia (PBHI), PBHI Yogyakarta, PBHI Jawa Barat, PCWI, PKBI Sleman, PPNI Jepara, PPSW, PERWAKOS, Perkumpulan Suara Kita (PSK), Perkumpulan Advokat Indonesia, Persatuan Advokat Indonesia (PERADIN), Perwaris, PKBH UAD, UNTAR PKBH, Atmajaya PBKH, Pemuda Tapal Batas, Paguyuban Masyarakat Rumpin, Prakarsa Borneo Balikpapan, PBH Peradi, PBH Cenderawasih, Central Board of Pos Bantuan Hukum Advokat Indonesia (Posbakumadin), Pos Bantuan Hukum Advokat Indonesia Jakarta Timur,

106

Posbakumadin Jakarta Barat, Posbakumadin Jakarta Utara, Posbakumadin PN Jakarta Pusat, Posbakumadin Jakarta, Posbakumdin Cabang Kota Tangerang Selatan, Perkumpulan Pusat Dukungan Kebijakan Publik, Rifka Annisa, PBH Peradi Bantul, Pusat Bantuan Hukum Rumah Bersama Advokat Bandung, Komunitas Lensa Sukabumi, Komunitas Talitakum, Komunitas SpekHAM, Rumah Pelangi Indonesia, SAPA Institute, SEPASI/Serikat pekerja Sawit Indonesia, Sanggar Swara, Serikat Tani Merdeka, Solidaritas Perempuan, Suara Kita/Sahabat Kita, Surabaya Children Crisis Center (SCCC), Srikandi Lintas Iman, SKPKC, Situmorang & Partners, TAF/PEDULI, MAJu/TAF, Tifa Foundation, University of Melbourne, Walhi, Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Indonesia, Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Advokat Indonesia, Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Advokasi Syari'ah Cabang Tigaraksa, Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum dan Kemanusiaan Duta Keadilan Indonesia (Ylbhk-Dki), Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Papua Barat, Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Maluku Utara, Yayasan Bantuan Hukum Mutiara Indah, Yayasan Pesona Jakarta, YLBHK-CKI, YSS, YAPPIKA, YADUPA, Yayasan IGAMA, Yayasan Satu Keadilan, Himpunan Wanita Disabilitas Indonesia (HWDI) and KPI Jatim.

107

ANNEX 4 – REPORT ON NATIONAL LEGAL AID CONFERENCE II

REPORT ON NATIONAL LEGAL AID CONFERENCE II ON

EXPANDING ACCESS TO JUSTICE BY OPTIMIZING THE PROVISION OF QUALITY LEGAL AID SERVICES BALI, Tuesday-Friday, 10-13 SEPTEMBER 2019

A. OVERVIEW Article 1(3) of the 1945 Constitution expressly stipulates that "The State of Indonesia is a state of laws." A “state of laws” means that that the State is required to uphold the rule of law so as to ensure truth and justice, as part of which there is no power or authority that cannot be held to account. The establishment of Indonesia as a state of laws is inspired by the twin concepts of rechtstaat and the rule of law. Consequently, Indonesia draws on elements that are contained in both the concept of rechtstaat and the concept of rule of law. If we study these two concepts, it will be seen that there are both similarities and differences between them. The principal similarity is that both concepts are focused on the achievement of the same key goal, namely, the recognition and protection of human rights. Indonesia has adopted and combined the two concepts, thus giving rise to a new “state of laws” concept that features specific Indonesian characteristics based on the fact that Pancasila serves as the fundamental basis and source of all laws. Therefore, the Indonesian state of laws concept may also be termed the “Pancasila State of Laws.” Given this, it will be seen that although in Elucidation on the 1945 Constitution employs the term rechtstaat, the state of laws concept adopted by the Indonesian state is not coterminous with either the Continental European concept or the Anglo-Saxon concept, but is rather a unique concept that is founded on Pancasila. The distinctive features of the Pancasila state of laws is that it contains the following additional elements that are not found in the rechtstaat and Anglo-Saxon concepts: (1) Belief in almighty God; (2) Gotong Royong (mutual self-help; (3) Unity in Diversity; and (4) Democracy Legal development, as one of the catalysts for national development, needs to be supported by a solid legal system based on Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution. The application of the Pancasila state of laws concept is elaborated through (1) guarantees for the protection of human rights; (2) independence of the judicial authority; and (3) respect for legality in all its forms (every action of the state/government and society must be based on and taken through law). In addition, the role of legal culture is also important, that is, abstract conceptions as to what is good (and so must be adhered to) and what is bad (and so must be avoided). Legal culture needs to be developed in harmony with the values of Pancasila so as to provide a solid foundation for the application of the principles enshrined in a state of laws. The state of laws concept provides guarantees for the supremacy of law and restricts the room for arbitrariness. Moreover, the State is required to uphold the principle of equality before the law, including as regards the rights of the disadvantaged. The State must ensure that all people are equal before the law. Everyone, whether ordinary people, workers or state officials, should be treated the same when in contact with the law.

108

In the case of disadvantaged and marginalized groups, legal assistance needs to be made available so that they do not experience difficulties or complications when they come into contact with the law. It is through legal assistance that they will be able to obtain justice. Legal assistance must be provided by the State to disadvantaged and marginalized groups in compliance with the State's obligations under Article 28D(1) of the 1945 Constitution, which provides that “Every person has the right to just legal recognition, guarantees, protection and certainty, and to equal treatment before the law." This constitutional imperative represents a fundamental provision that guarantees the right of every citizen, including the disadvantaged and marginalized, to enjoy access to justice so that their rights are recognized, guaranteed and protected in a just and equitable manner, and that they are afforded equal treatment before the law. In order to give effect to this, Law Number 16 of 2011 on Legal Aid (“Legal Aid Law”) has been enacted. The legal aid scheme established by this legislation is confined to the poor and marginalized. While the Advocates Law also contains provisions imposing an obligation on advocates to provide pro bono services to the poor and disadvantaged, in reality not enough advocates are willing to do so. Without intervention on the part of the State in favor of the poor and marginalized, it will be very difficult for them to truly secure equality before the law. In this regard, the Legal Aid Law is intended to ensure that people who can prove they are financially poor will actually be able to benefit from legal assistance. Guarantees for the protection of people’s rights, especially the rights of the poor and disadvantaged, through the provision of legal aid and endeavors to improve legal awareness in society are also incorporated in the 2019 Government Priority Programs, and are in line with the vision and mission of the President of the Republic of Indonesia as set out in point 4 of the Government’s Nine Goals (Nawacita) statement, namely: "Rejecting a Weak State Through Reform of the System and Upholding the Law in a Corruption-Free, Dignified and Trustworthy Manner.” Taking the Legal Aid Law as our point of departure, the legal aid that can be provided by legal aid organizations (LAO) consists of both assistance for litigation and for non-litigation matters. Litigation assistance is provided to legal aid recipients so as to ensure balance in their treatment by law enforcers and judicial institutions in criminal cases at the investigation, prosecution and trial stages. Meanwhile, in civil cases, legal aid is intended to ensure balance between parties at the claim and trial states and, in administrative actions, at the preliminary examination and hearing stages. Non-litigation legal aid is also provided so as to inform people, particularly the poor, of their legal rights when they encounter legal problems, and to help identify non-judicial solutions to legal problems in society, such as through legal consultations or mediation. The overall aim is to create a society that is characterized by legal understanding and awareness so that not all problems end up being addressed through litigation. Guarantees for the protection people’s rights, especially the rights of the poor and disadvantaged groups, through the provision of legal aid and endeavors to improve legal awareness in society are also incorporated in the 2019 Government Priority Programs, and are in line with the vision and mission of the President of the Republic of Indonesia as set out in point 4 of the Government’s Nine Goals (Nawacita) statement, namely: "Rejecting a Weak State Through Reform of the System and Upholding the Law in a Corruption-Free, Dignified and Trustworthy Manner.” The provision of protection to the poor and disadvantaged groups, who are referred to in the Legal Aid Law as “Legal Aid Recipients,” is effected through the furnishing of assistance both in court and

109

outside the court in relation to litigation and non-litigation matters. Litigation assistance is provided to legal aid recipients so as to ensure balance in their treatment and the protection of their rights as suspects, defendants and convicted persons vis-à-vis the law enforcement and judicial authorities in criminal cases at the investigation, prosecution and trial stages. In civil cases, it is intended to ensure balance between parties at the claim and trial states and, in administrative cases, at the preliminary examination and hearing stages. In addition, non-litigation legal aid is provided so as to help create a legally aware society by informing people, particularly the poor, of their rights when they encounter legal problems, and to help identify non-judicial solutions to legal problems in society, such as through legal consultations or mediation, so as to promote a society that is characterized by familial responses to legal problems in order that not all such problems end up being addressed through litigation. Legal aid is provided by organizations that have been verified and accredited as legal aid providers (Indonesian abbreviation: PBH). In accordance with the Legal Aid Law and Government Regulation No. 42 of 2013 on the Requirements and Procedures for Providing Legal Aid and the Allocation of Legal Aid Funds, in order to officially provide free legal aid to the poor and disadvantaged groups, an organization must first be verified and accredited. At the end of 2018, the Ministry of Law and Human Rights (through the National Legal Development Agency as the echelon 1 unit charged with administering the legal aid program), conducted its third verification and accreditation process, covering the 2019-2021 period. This process resulted in the recognition of 192 new PBHs out of 864 organizations that had originally registered their interest in accreditation. In addition, a total of 332 out of 405 existing PBHs that were accredited in the 2016-2018 period were reaccredited. This means that a total of 524 PBHs are now accredited and eligible to access legal aid funds during the 2019-2021 period, marking a 30% increase over the 405 PBHs that were accredited in the previous period (2016 to 2018). Table: Distribution of 524 PBH

21

6

1710

22

41

714

47

5761

5 2 6

17

6 6

17

5 7

20

72 5

104

2012 14

6 8 10

32

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

ACEH

BALI

BAN

TEN

BEN

GKU

LUDI

. YO

GYA

KART

ADK

I JAK

ARTA

GO

RON

TALO

JAM

BIJA

WA

BARA

TJA

WA

TEN

GAH

JAW

A TI

MU

RKA

LIM

ANTA

N B

ARAT

KALI

MAN

TAN

SEL

ATAN

KALI

MAN

TAN

TEN

GAH

KALI

MAN

TAN

TIM

UR

KEP.

BAN

GKA

BEL

ITU

NG

KEPU

LAU

AN R

IAU

LAM

PUN

GM

ALU

KUM

ALU

KU U

TARA

NU

SA T

ENG

GAR

A BA

RAT

NU

SA T

ENG

GAR

A TI

MU

RPA

PUA

PAPU

A BA

RAT

RIAU

SULA

WES

I BAR

ATSU

LAW

ESI S

ELAT

ANSU

LAW

ESI T

ENG

AHSU

LAW

ESI T

ENG

GAR

ASU

LAW

ESI U

TARA

SUM

ATER

A BA

RAT

SUM

ATER

A SE

LATA

NSU

MAT

ERA

UTA

RA

Total

110

The above table on the distribution of legal aid organizations following the verification and accreditation process for the 2018-2021 period shows that there continue to be provinces that have minimal numbers of PBHs (only 2 PBHs in some cases). The bulk of PBHs are concentrated in provincial capitals, with the result that many regencies/cities do not have any PBHs. At present, only 215 regencies/cities have PBHs out of the total number of 514 regencies/cities throughout Indonesia. In addition to problems related to the uneven distribution of PBHs, there are also issues related to access to legal assistance at all levels of the justice system, including at the police and court levels. The police are expected to accommodate advocates and paralegals when providing assistance to legal aid recipients. The courts have a particularly important role to play in ensuring ease of access to legal aid, in addition to their existing activities through the legal service posts in each court, namely, the exempting of the poor from court fees, as envisaged by Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2014 on Guidelines for the Provision of Legal Services to the Needy in the Courts. Synergies need to be forged as between the legal aid program operated by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and the Supreme Court’s program for exempting the needy from court fees. This is because the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, through its legal aid program, pays for the services provided by PBHs to the poor and disadvantaged groups, while the Supreme Court waives the court fees for needy people and/or groups who are assisted by PBHs. It is also necessary to forge synergies as between official legal aid programs and pro bono services. Every advocate is under a moral and ethical obligation to provide pro bono services to needy individuals who find themselves in contact with the law. Bar associations, as the representatives of advocates, need to continuously encourage advocates to not be complacent about the legal aid programs provided through the State Budget (APBN) and Regional Government Budgets (APBD) as the funding available from the APBN and APBD is limited. Consequently, pro bono must also be prioritized by advocates so that access to legal aid may be expanded. Regional Governments can provide legal aid based on local regulations at both the provincial and regency/city levels. Such regulations afford Regional Governments the legal authority to make budgetary allocations to finance legal aid in their APBD. APBD-financed legal aid programs are very helpful for the disadvantaged and marginalized at the local level. However, it is important that such programs do not focus solely on legal aid for litigation and non-litigation matters, but also for capacity building for PBHs, as well as other activities, such as the provision of training to paralegals. So as to ensure greater access to legal aid for the poor and disadvantaged groups, and to help improve legal awareness in society, it was considered necessary to take a concrete step forward by holding a National Legal Aid Conference. This National Legal Aid Conference actually consists of 2 (two) components – National Legal Aid Conference I and National Legal Aid Conference II. National Legal Aid Conference I was held on 20-21 August 2019 in Jakarta for the purpose of eliciting recommendations from civil society and legal aid program stakeholders, while National Legal Aid Conference II was held on 11 - 13 September 2019 in Bali for the purpose of following up on National Legal Aid Conference I and formulating a Legal Aid Declaration based on the recommendations produced by both the Jakarta and Bali conferences. Those who have a role to play in optimizing legal aid services are not confined to legal aid organizations as PBHs, and the Ministry of Law and Human Rights as the institution responsible for

111

administering legal aid. Rather, many other institutions, ministries and state auxiliary organizations have an important role to play in the optimization of legal aid services. The role to be played by government institutions/agencies can be seen from, among other things, their authority to open up access to legal aid for those people who are in contact with the law, such as the authority vested in the law enforcement and judicial institutions (the Police, Prosecution Service and Courts). Further, authority in relation to national legal aid program planning is vested in the National Development Planning Agency, responsibility for increasing the number of people providing legal aid (particularly in the case of prospective law graduates) is vested in the Ministry of Research and Technology, while the Ministry of Home Affairs has the authority to encourage Regional Governments to develop and provide budgetary funding for legal aid programs at the local level. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Village Affairs, Development of Disadvantaged Regions and Transmigration has the social resources required to expand the role of paralegals at the village level. Synergies need to be created as regards the roles of each of these stakeholder institutions so as to optimize the provision of legal aid services to the poor. To ensure integration, consolidation and synergy as between legal-aid policies and their implementation by the various state institutions and agencies as key stakeholders, it was also considered necessary for the National Legal Aid Conference II to accommodate the holding of a special inter-ministry/agency forum in the form of a high-level meeting for the purpose of facilitating discussions on the proposed Legal Aid Declaration and to ensure the commitment of all of these institutions and agencies to the implementation of this Declaration.

B. OBJECTIVE The objective of the National Legal Aid Conference II was to “Expand Access to Justice by Optimizing the Provision of Quality of Legal Aid Services.”

C. OUTCOMES The anticipated outcomes of the National Legal Conference II were formulated as follows: 1. Expanded access to legal aid, including enhanced legal aid services and legal aid funding, and

better distribution of PBHs and legal-aid recipients; 2. Improved quality of legal aid services through the establishment of legal aid service standards,

the use of information technology, and oversight of legal aid services; 3. Greater integration, consolidation and synergy in legal aid policies and programs as between legal

aid administrators, PBHs, law enforcement agencies and judicial institutions, and other legal-aid stakeholders.

D. TIME AND VENUE

The time and venue of the National Legal Aid Conference II were as follows: Day/Date: 10-13 September 2019 Venue: Prime Plaza Hotel, Sanur, Bali Jl. Hang Tuah No.46, Sanur Kaja, Kec. South Denpasar, Denpasar City, Bali

E. SPEAKERS The National Legal Aid Conference II featured presentations by 13 speakers, namely: 1. Prof. Dr. H.R. Benny Rianto, S.H., M.Hum.

Head of the National Legal Development Agency (BPHN) 2. Achmad Setyo Pudjoharsoyo, SH., M.Hum.

(Secretary of the Supreme Court)

112

3. Dr. Diani Sadia Wati, SH, LLM. (Expert Advisor on Institutional Relations to the Minister of National Development Planning)

4. Police Brigadier General Drs. Daniel Tahi Monang Silitonga, S.H. (Head of National Police Criminal Investigation Dept.’s Development & Operations Bureau)

5. Idianto, S.H. M.H. (Head of the Bali Provincial Prosecutor’s Office )

6. Junaedi, Bc.IP., S.H.,M.H. (Director of Rehabilitation & Vocational Training, Directorate General of Rehabilitation)

7. Mohamad Yunus Affan, S.H., M.H. (Head of the Outreach and Legal Aid Center)

8. Prahesti Pandanwangi, SH, Sp.N, LL.M. (Director of Law and Regulations, National Development Planning Agency)

9. Ihsan Dirgahayu, SSTP, M.AP. (Head of the Sub-directorate of Regional Budget Planning, Directorate of Regional Planning,

Directorate General of Regional Government Finance, Ministry of Home Affairs) 10. Sutirah, SH, MH

(Head of the Legal Services Division, Bali Regional Office of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights); 11. Andi Seto Asapa

(Regent of Sinjai); 12. Dr. Gde Made Swardhana, S.H., M.H.

(Deputy Dean of Udayana University’s Law School); 13. Ajeng Larasti (LBH Masyarakat – representing civil society)

F. MODERATORS 1. Arfan Faiz Muhlizi, S.H., M.H (Head of BPHN’s Legal Aid Section) 2. Masan Nurpian, S.H. (Head of Legal Aid Program Subsection)

G. FACILITATORS 1. Totok Yuliyanto 2. M Ramdan 3. Gunawan 4. Ratna Batara 5. Jawardi 6. Siska MaPPI 7. Indah Rahayu 8. Masan Nurpian 9. Doni 10. Ajeng Tri Wahyuni

H. RAPPORTEURS 1. Sudaryadi 2. Bernita Sinurat 3. Edi 4. Fabinesta 5. Dicky M. Faisal 6. Putu Sumiasi 7. Asiyah Budiarti 8. I Dewa Gede Waisha Permana

113

I. PARTICIPANTS The conference was attended by some 250 participants from across 33 provinces, including: 1. Heads of Legal and Human Rights Services Divisions at Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law and

Human Rights from throughout Indonesia; 2. Representatives of Sidbankum administrators/operators from Regional Offices of the Ministry of

Law and Human Rights from throughout Indonesia; 3. Representatives of legal aid organizations; 4. Representatives of other relevant ministries/state auxiliary agencies and Regional Governments;

J. FUNDING Funding for the National Legal Aid Conference was provided by the National Legal Development Agency’s 2019 budget, supported by the TIFA Foundation, The Asia Foundation, and the YLBHI Consortium.

114

K. RECOMMENDATIONS Working Group Topic : Improving the quality of legal aid Facilitators : 1. Totok Yuliyanto

2. Ramdan Rapporteurs : 1. Sudaryadi

2. Bernita Sinurat

No. Sub Topic Discussion Challenges Recommendations

1 Legal aid service policies

Policies on the requirements and procedures for providing legal aid and allocating legal aid funds continue to be procedural in character and do not relate to the substance of legal aid services;

From the substantive perspective, the provision of legal aid should having regard to the following principles: informative, participatory, accountable and inclusive – however, these principles are not adhered to optimally;

There are no clear regulations establishing legal aid service standards.

Better arrangement and synchronization of legal regulations on legal aid;

Greater synergy between policies of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, the Ministry of Home Affairs and the implementation of other legal aid programs so as to improve the quality of legal aid services;

Establishment of regulations providing clear service standards (operational/technical guidelines) so that there is uniformity as regards implementation, administrative responsibilities, reimbursement, Sidbankum, and timeframes;

Policies are needed to promote a common perception and commitment that legal aid is a national priority program;

Revision of the Legal Aid Law specifically Article 19 (the word “may" should be replaced by "must";

Adoption of policies providing for funding for the functional position of outreach worker and the obligation to socialize the national program in the regions;

Greater synergy in cross-agency monitoring and evaluation policies.

2 Improving capacity and quality of administration

Lack of clear mechanisms regarding paralegal training curriculum and training methods;

Design curricula, modules and TOT for training so as to improve the quality and capacity of legal

115

and Legal Aid Providers

Lack of clarity regarding capacity and quality improvement programs for legal aid administrators (officers in BPHN, Regional Offices, advocates, paralegals etc.);

Role of academics is sub-optimal as regards in efforts to enhance the capacity and quality of legal aid administrators;

Lack of curriculum and modules to improve the quality of legal aid administrators and providers, advocates and paralegals.

aid administrators and providers as regards: - provision of services - use of IT - monitoring and evaluation - Budget management etc);

Conduct regular meetings at both the regional and national levels;

Development of blueprint on enhancing the capacity and quality of legal aid;

Need to prepare and socialize codes of ethics for LAOs and paralegals, and SOPs for reporting.

3 Improving facilities

Sidbankum is not capable of identifying the quality and measure the impact of legal aid services;

Lack of instruments to encourage more even distribution and spending of legal aid funds;

Problems related to database integration between BPHN, Regional Governments, providers of access to legal aid services (Supreme Court, Attorney General's Office, and Police).

Synchronizing SDP and Sidbankum;

Make online instruments accessible to villages and vulnerable groups (such as the disabled);

Establish a complaints mechanism for legal aid recipients;

Provide applications and systems for monitoring cases by legal aid recipients;

Encourage village governments to facilitate the provision of internet access to facilitate the process of legal aid reporting;

Provision of offline and online tools that have regard to the local context (geographical conditions);

Provide transportation and accommodation facilities for operational activities related to mobile assistance (mobile legal aid boats);

Assist advocates’ organizations to establish instruments for probono reporting;

Accord recognition to legal aid providers through a LAO Awards program;

4 Effective & Efficient

Monitoring & evaluation mechanism is focused on amount of funds that are spent.

Greater synergy in monitoring and evaluation mechanisms as

116

Oversight Mechanism

Lack of a clear complaints mechanism for legal aid recipients and a clarification mechanism for legal aid providers

between central and regional governments;

Establish an Integrated monitoring and evaluation team on a cross-agency basis (Regional Offices, Regional Governments, Law Enforcement Agencies and Judicial Institutions) with monitoring and evaluation conducted on both a regular or incidental basis;

Establishment of a complaints mechanism for legal aid recipients (both online and online) to be managed by the Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation Team;

Encouraging legal aid providers to prepare plans for provision of legal aid that can be used as the basis for monitoring and evaluation;

Coordination as between Ministry of Law and Human Rights Regional Offices, Regional Governments, law enforcement agencies/judicial institutions, etc.

Working Group Topic : Expanding Scope of legal aid Facilitators : 1. Gunawan

2. Ratna Batara Rapporteurs : 1. Edi

2. Mayong

No. Sub Topic Discussion Challenges Recommendations

1 Pre-case handling stage

Consultations are categorized as non-litigation work whereas they are essential in both litigation and non-litigation work

A new category is required so that consultations are included in the pre-case handling category

2 Case handling The legislation restricts the scope of legal aid to litigation and non-litigation work;

The quota for non-litigation work is out of proportion to the quota for litigation work;

Sidbankum does not support the expansion of legal aid work;

Need to amend the legislation to broaden the scope of legal aid work;

Greater balance needed as between quotas for litigation and non-litigation work;

117

The legal aid system is focused on perpetrators rather than victims;

A legal aid recipient may only receive one type of legal aid service, whereas a legal aid recipient may experience legal problems that simultaneously require litigation and non-litigation assistance, and work in the civil, criminal, and administrative law areas.

New arrangements are needed so that the scope of legal aid work is more oriented towards victims;

Legislation that restricts a legal aid recipient to receiving no more than one type of service needs to be amended.

3 Post case handling

Judicial warnings to comply with judgments (aamanning), asset preservation orders, judgment execution and auctions do not come within the scope of legal aid

Regulations needed so that warnings to comply with judgments (aamanning), asset preservation orders, judgment execution and auctions come within the scope of legal aid.

4 Non-case handling work

The scope of legal aid does not include helping victims to access support services, such as psychological rehabilitation, counseling, safe houses, etc., although there are various bodies that provide such services, such as the women's crisis centers, etc .;

Community legal empowerment is provided for on a very restricted basis in the non-litigation category;

The scope of legal aid does not include executive, legislative, and judicial reviews;

Monitoring of the trial process is not clearly provided for in the victim assistance category.

Assisting victims to access services should be included in the scope of legal aid, while synergy is needed with service institutions to integrate their systems with the legal aid system;

Need to increase support for the expansion of community legal empowerment work;

Need to expand scope of legal aid to include executive, legislative, and judicial reviews;

Need to add trial process monitoring work as part of victim assistance.

5 Legal aid recipients

The legislation limits those entitled to receive legal aid to the poor;

Vulnerable groups are not unambiguously included in the definition of “poor”;

People from vulnerable groups face obstacles in obtaining indigent certificates (SKTM) from the authorities.

The legislation needs to be amended so as to broaden the scope of “poor” to include people in vulnerable groups who face legal problems and who do not have the ability to access assets or other resources to pay for legal fees;

The procedures for obtaining SKTM should be simplified having regard to the needs of vulnerable groups.

Working Group Topic : Synergy in the provision of legal aid

118

Facilitators : 1. Jawardi 2. Siska MaPPI 3. Indah Rahayu

Rapporteurs : 1. Dicky M. Faisal 2. Putu Sumiasi – Bali Regional Office of Ministry of Law and Human Rights

No. Sub Topic Discussion

Challenges Recommendations 1 Synergy

between stakeholders, including between center and regions

Not all LAOs want to assist clients as they see accreditation solely as a means of accessing funding;

Justice seekers are not welcome to receive legal aid because if they access it, the process will be longer or the sentence will be heavier;

Legal aid supervision is sub-optimal.

Enhance the role of Ministry of Law and Human Rights Regional Offices in LAO verification as the Regional Offices understand LAO performance;

Socialization and efforts to increase community legal awareness should be enhanced by involving relevant colleagues;

Oversight by legal aid recipients, the public and other stakeholders needs to be increased;

Oversight and annual reports should reveal problems related to other state ministries/agencies and law enforcement agencies/judicial authorities;

Technical guidelines should be established to make verification and accreditation stricter, including as regards substance and standards;

Technical guidelines should be established to increase the role of Ministry of Law and Human Rights’ Regional Offices in the verification and accreditation process;

The role of paralegals in legal counseling and legal aid should be maximized;

The role of legal outreach workers and other cultural resources in legal education should be maximized;

119

Legal aid IT and information system solutions should be more inclusive and user friendly so that the public and legal aid recipients can access them and evaluate the provision of legal aid;

The process of evaluating LAOs by BPHN should be strengthened;

Annual reports on the provision of legal aid starting in 2019 should include challenges related to other stakeholders including state ministries/agencies and law enforcement agencies/judicial authorities. And annual reports must be accessible to the public.

2 Integration of systems/policies with those of law enforcement agencies/judicial authorities

Information on the legal aid program has yet to be provided to all law enforcement agencies/judicial authorities, even the officers at National Police Headquarters are not all aware of the existence of the Legal Aid Law – consequently, officers fail to cooperate with accredited legal aid providers;

Prevailing laws and regulations are not in line with the spirit of legal aid;

The MoUs entered into by the Minister of Justice and Human Rights with the Police, Attorney General's Office and the Supreme Court are not being applied

Providers of legal aid have difficulty gaining access to provide assistance at the Police, Attorney General's Office and the Court levels because they do not know about accredited legal aid providers;

Administrative systems are not fully integrated, especially as regards documents related to data

Greater coordination between institutions;

Each agency should play an active role. For example: Ministry of Law and Human Rights’ Regional Offices provide data on LAOs to the local police or vice versa, local police coordinate with the Regional Office;

Harmonization of all regulations governing legal aid;

Rules governing more technical aspects are required;

Integration of systems of each stakeholders, governed by more technical rules;

The Legal Aid Law should be the only legal umbrella for all legal aid activities;

All court fees should be waived in cases involving the poor and pro bono cases.

A communication forum is needed;

Greater synchronization in the laws governing each agency required as regards paralegals;

120

that is needed for reimbursement, which are often difficult to obtain;

The legal aid posts in the court do not provide assistance that accords with the Legal Aid Law;

Fees must still be paid in the court administration process, even in the case of the poor;

Lack of a common understanding on the provision of legal aid;

MoU between the Minister of Justice and Human Rights and the Ministry of Village Affairs has yet to be implemented, especially as regards Paralegals.

An MoU should also be entered into with the Ministry of Environment on paralegals;

More consistent operation of the legal system;

Supreme Court Regulations, Chief of Police Regulations, Attorney General's Office Regulations are needed to specifically govern the implementation of legal aid in line with the MoUs that have been entered into;

For the Police, the initial step could be the issuance of a letter by the Chief of Criminal Investigation to investigators in the regions, requiring them to adhere to the MoU. For example:

a. at the investigation level, advocates must be used who are registered with a legal aid provider that is verified and accredited by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights;

b. investigators should facilitate a SKTM made by the legal aid provider by confirming the SKTM at the investigation level.

The Sidbankum application should be integrated with the following applications:

a. SDP; b. SIPP; c. e-court; and d. e-investigation (in the case of

documents such as SP2HP, Surat Upaya Paksa, STPL Register

Court Legal Aid Posts should be evaluated and converted into joint secretariats for legal aid where representatives of legal aid providers representatives can also play a role in providing information and consultation services, and providing

121

assistance for the next stage, if needed;

The Supreme Court should focus on its existing backlog of cases;

Synergy between the legal aid funding provided by other agencies and the legal aid programs of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights;

Prodeo case list must be better managed:

Tax on judgments should be eliminated:

A legal aid communication forum should be established consisting of law enforcement agencies and legal institutions (advocates, Police, Prosecution Service, Supreme Court, civil service investigators);

Revision of existing regulations in each agency related to paralegals so that they are in line with the Legal Aid Law

3 Synergy with government in legal aid administration

Limited number of LAOs (due to the verification and accreditation process);

Administrative requirements prevent access to legal aid by prospective recipients (lack of ID cards and not resident in area stated on ID card);

Asynchronous central and regional regulations on legal aid;

Not all regions have legal aid regulations, such as local government regulations, etc;

Ineffective and inefficient oversight system for legal aid provision;

Legal vacuum in the case of non-litigation legal aid (restitution) and recipient coverage (vulnerable groups, marginalized groups, etc.).

3 year period should be shortened and assessment indicators for LAO quality be adjusted to take account of the facts on the ground;

Synergy between the systems operated by BPHN, Regional Governments and law enforcement agencies/legal institutions;

It should be possible for legal aid to be provided based on the appointment by the BPHN of the nearest LAO to a person who needs it;

Increased coordination by the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, and assistance by the Ministry of Home Affairs in the preparation of local regulations by Regional Governments;

122

Regional Governments should be encouraged to issue local regulations on legal aid;

Coordination between the Regional Offices and the center on the implementation of legal aid (technical and budget) at the regional level

Regional regulations need to be issued to fill the legal vacuum for non-litigation legal aid (restitution) and recipient coverage (vulnerable, marginal groups, etc.);

Support media need to be provided such as websites and call centers;

A system or application should be designed for legal aid recipient data that can be accessed by all stakeholders;

An inter-region MoU is needed to facilitate the provision of legal aid (SOPs or other technical procedures)

The Ministry of Home Affairs needs to synchronize and harmonize regulations on legal aid as between regions and between the central government and the regions (funding, reimbursement, types of litigation and non-litigation services covered, and recipients of legal aid);

Space should be provided for civil society and related organizations to oversee the deliberation of draft regulations at each level so as to ensure that they are in accordance with the legal aid principles;

There needs to be a joint discussion and coordination forum for the issuance of regional regulations as part of

123

the commitment of legal aid providers;

A supervisory team should be established or the capacity of existing supervisory teams should be enhanced as regards the provision of legal aid;

Specific provisions should be incorporated in local regulations related to non-litigation legal aid and coverage of legal aid recipients.

Working Group Topic : Legal aid funding and resources Facilitators : 1. Masan Nurpian

2. Doni 3. Ajeng Tri Wahyuni

Rapporteurs : 1. Asiyah Budiarti 2. I Dewa Gede Waisha Permana

No. Sub Topic Discussion

Challenges Recommendations 1 Increasing

legal aid funding

The existing cost standards for cases (Output Cost Standards) are not in line with what is happening on the ground;

At present, the ceilings for existing and new legal aid providers are the same, even though differences in the ceilings for existing and new legal aid providers should be provided;

The legal aid budget at the national level (APBN) is lacking;

Funding for civil cases is not adjusted so as to take account of distance from the court.

An evaluation should be conducted on the scope of legal aid in line with the needs of legal aid recipients for the purposes of legal aid planning and budgeting;

Intensive coordination is required between the institutions responsible for planning and budgeting (Bappenas, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Law and Human Rights, Ministry of Home Affairs);

A strategy should be developed as between legal aid providers and the Ministry of Law and Human Rights (BPHN and Regional Offices) to optimize legal aid budget spending;

Legal aid providers, including advocates and paralegals, should provide study-based input to increase legal aid funding, whether on a case by case basis, or by type of case and/or per activity.

124

2 Responsive use of legal aid funding

Is it possible to use resources other than those available from the state budget, local government budgets and CSR to develop the soft skills and hard skills of legal aid providers?

The spending of available funds by legal aid providers tends to be low up until the middle of the year as contracts for state budget funding are only signed in the middle of the year;

Funding for victims (children, people disabilities) is not clearly accommodated;

Non-litigation funding for legal education work needs to be increased;

Legal services should not be subject to tax

Contracts should be signed at start of fiscal year.

Legal aid providers should harness the potential of justice seekers (clients) to serve as legal aid partners

Legal aid provider forums should be established in each province or on an interprovincial basis for coordinating and communicating budget spending;

Intensive communication is required as between legal aid providers and the Ministry of Law and Human Rights’ Regional Offices as regards budget spending;

Legal aid provider forums should provide a means by which existing legal aid providers can assist new legal aid providers;

Funding should be provided by the state budget for the identification of prospective legal aid provider candidates so as to help in the accreditation process;

Regional Government funding should be used to expand their roles and the roles of law enforcement agencies/legal institutions, and other stakeholders during the socialization of legal aid provider verification and accreditation processes.

3 Maximizing legal aid funding in Regional Government budgets

Collaboration between Regional Governments and legal aid providers for LAOs that have yet to be accredited;

Not all local governments have issued a legal aid regulation;

Remote areas have difficulty accessing and budgeting for legal aid;

The application of Regional Regulations differs from one Regional Government to another

A standard set of the policies should be formulated for regional regulations at local government levels I and II;

The local regulation guidelines that have been prepared by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and the Ministry of Home Affairs need to be disseminated more widely and more consistently applied;

125

(both as between provincial governments and as between regency/city governments and provincial governments)

Lack of standardized policies in regional regulations on legal aid.

A coordination forum needs to be established by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights’ Regional Offices and Regional Government Legal Sections;

Regional Governments should assist the Ministry of Law and Human Rights in encouraging the establishment of legal aid providers in areas where they have yet to be established

4 Mechanisms for the Use of Legal Aid Resources and Funding

Legal aid resources do not cover human resource development in LAOs;

Some local governments have difficulty in providing reports on budget use and allocation;

There is no regulation or mechanism for the utilization of financial resources from third parties;

Resources do not only take the form of budgetary funding;

Priority should be given to accrediting LAOs in remote areas;

A mechanism is required to permit for the use of funding from third parties (CSR, advocates' offices, individual advocates) for legal aid;

Multiparty partnerships should be promoted so as to ensure synergy as regards legal aid funding policies (government and private sector);

BPHN needs to demonstrate appreciation for pro bono services and encourage the adoption of internal policies by advocates’ organizations to make pro bono work mandatory and to monitor it as a requirement for the renewal of membership

126

DECLARATION DECLARATION ON THE EXPANSION OF ACCESS TO

AND IMPROVEMENT IN THE QUALITY OF LEGAL AID In the context of expanding access to legal aid, including legal aid services, legal aid funding, the distribution of legal aid providers, and legal aid recipients, and improving the quality of legal aid services through the standardized regulation of legal aid services, the use of information technology, and supervision of legal aid services, we, the undersigned, hereby agree as follows: 1. To develop a common understanding as regards policies, planning, funding, synergy and

supervision for the legal aid program; 2. To promote integration, consolidation and synergy in legal aid policies and programs as between

legal aid administrators, legal aid providers, law enforcement agencies and legal institutions, and other stakeholders in the legal aid program;

3. To provide quality legal aid services based on legal aid service standards in accordance with the provisions of the laws and regulations in effect;

4. To develop a legal aid system that is predicated on integrity, simplicity and accessibility; 5. To conduct continuing supervision and evaluation of legal aid services; 6. To develop and strengthen the institutional capacity of those involved in legal aid, including

human resources capacity; 7. To act in an integrated manner on the recommendations formulated by this National Legal Aid

Conference. Bali, 11 September 2019

Signed, Head the National Legal Development Agency (Prof. Dr. H. R. Benny Riyanto, SH, M.Hum. C.N.) Secretary of the Supreme Court (Achmad Setyo Pudjoharsoyo, SH., M.Hum.) BAPPENAS Deputy for Politics, Defense and Security (Ir. Slamet Soedarsono, MPP, QIA, CRMP, CGAP) Commissioner General of Police Drs. Idham Azis, M.Si) Director General of Community Development and Empowerment, Ministry of Village Affairs, Development of Disadvantaged Regions and Transmigration (Taufik Madjid, S.Sos, M.Si) Acting Deputy Attorney General for General Crimes, Attorney General's Office (Ali Mukartono, SH., MH) Director of Regional Government Budget Planning, Ministry of Home Affairs (Drs. Arsan Latif, M.Si) M. CONCLUSION

Synergy in providing legal aid services to the poor has finally been realized. A number of ministries and state agencies that have duties and functions in the field of legal aid, whether directly or indirectly, have expressed their commitment by signing the "Legal Aid Declaration " to expand access to and improve the quality of legal aid services. The Legal Aid Declaration, which was initiated by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights through the National Legal Development Agency (BPHN) in collaboration with seven other ministries and state agencies, namely the Supreme Court, the Attorney General's Office, the National Police, the Ministry of Village Affairs, Development of Disadvantaged Regions and Transmigration, the

127

Ministry of National Development Planning/Bappenas, and the Ministry of Home Affairs, is expected to overcome the challenges currently faced in the provision of legal aid services. In accordance with the imperative set out in the Constitution, the State is responsible for providing legal aid to the poor as a manifestation of access to justice in society. As a concrete step on the road to doing so, the Government and the House of Representatives enacted Law Number 16 of 2011 on Legal Aid in the expectation that it would make the rules governing the provision of legal aid clearer, such as who is entitled to receive free legal aid, who is authorized to provide legal aid, and who is responsible for overseeing those involved in legal aid. However, there continued to be problems in the provision of legal aid. Consequently, it is hoped that the Legal Aid Declaration will serve as a strategic step towards the optimal provision of legal aid by all those involved, whether directly and indirectly. The Declaration, which was initiated by ministries and state agencies, is aimed at creating a common understanding as regards policies, planning, funding, implementation, synergy, and supervision of the legal aid program. In addition, the Legal Aid Declaration is also aimed at bringing about integration, consolidation and synergy in respect of legal aid policies as between legal aid administrators, legal aid providers, law enforcement agencies and legal institutions, and stakeholders in the legal aid program; organizing and providing quality legal aid in accordance with legal aid service standards; building a legal aid IT system that is integrated, simple and accessible; the conducting of monitoring and evaluation of legal aid services on an ongoing basis; developing and strengthening the institutional capacity of those involved in the provision of legal aid, including the development of human resources capacity; and following up in an integrated manner on the recommendations formulated by the National Legal Aid Conference. The effort to expand access to justice through the provision of legal aid is no longer the sole domain of one ministry or state agency, or a particular institution. The concrete measures taken by the State, through the Government, to guarantee the constitutional rights of citizens constitute a shared responsibility that is not limited to the Government but also extends to legal practitioners, especially advocates. Those who have a role to play in optimizing legal aid services are not confined to legal aid organizations as legal aid providers and the Ministry of Law and Human Rights as the administrator of the legal aid program. Various other institutions, ministries and state agencies also have important roles to play in optimizing the provision of legal aid services. The synergy created between the eight ministries and state agencies through the Legal Aid Declaration is expected to strengthen their commitment to providing legal aid services in line with their respective duties and functions. Earlier, the National Legal Aid Conference I that was held in Cibubur, Jakarta on 20 August 2019 focused on expanding the role of each ministry and state agency, including as regards the role of Bappenas in national legal aid program planning, the role of the Ministry of Education, Research and Development in enhancing the capacity of human resources in the provision of legal aid (particularly law students), the role of the Ministry of Home Affairs in encouraging Regional Governments to establish and fund legal aid programs at the local level, the role of the Ministry of Village Affairs, Development of Disadvantaged Regions and Transmigration’s in accelerating the paralegal program at the village level.

128

In addition, the courts have an important role to play in facilitating legal aid services through their Legal Aid Posts (Posbakum) in each court and the waiving of court fees, as required by Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2014 on Guidelines for the Provision of Legal Services to the Needy. The difference between the program operated by the courts and that operated by the BPHN is that the BPHN pays for the legal services provided by legal aid organizations and legal aid institutions to the poor and disadvantaged groups, while the Supreme Court waives the fees that would otherwise be chargeable (pro deo). Law No. 18/2003 on Advocates requires advocates to handle cases on a pro bono basis, that is, by providing free legal services in the public interest or to the poor. It is hoped that the country’s bar associations, which represent legal practitioners, will continue to encourage their members not to become complacent, given that legal aid programs are now funded by the State Budget and Regional Budgets. This is because there are limits to what government budgets can cover, while pro bono is an obligation. In addition to the role of advocates, the BPHN also expects to see paralegals play a greater role. This is essential given the uneven distribution of legal aid organizations and legal aid institutions around Indonesia. The BPHN is currently working intensively on improving the legal framework for paralegals by revising a number of the provisions contained in Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation No. 1 of 2018 on Paralegals. The distribution of the 524 legal aid organizations and institutions that were verified and accredited for the 2018-2021 continues to be uneven. Some provinces have very few legal aid organizations and institutions and those that they have are concentrated in the provincial capitals. Consequently, many regencies and cities do not have any legal aid organizations and institutions. At present, only 215 regencies and cities that have legal aid organizations and institutions out of a total of 514 regencies and cities throughout Indonesia. This means that 299 regencies and cities lack legal aid organizations and institutions. Therefore, full seriousness and a high level of commitment is required on the part of the State to strengthen access to justice through legal aid for the poor and marginalized groups so that they can truly experience equality before the law.

129

ANNEX 5 – Example of Reassign of Legal Aid State Fund

130

Translation of the above letter:

DECLARATION

The undersigned: Name : Abd. Wachid Habibullah, SH, MH Position : Director LAO/Accreditation : YLBHI-LBH Surabaya/C Hereby declares that we do not require litigation funding for Stage 3 (Appeal), stage 4 (Final Appeal/Cassation) and Stage 5 (Case Review). Accordingly, we hereby request that the available funding for these Stages be reassigned to Litigation legal aid for Stage 1 (Investigation/Claim) and Stage 2 (trial at first instance), with the details being as follows: (*)

Investigation/Claim (Stage 1)

Rp 2,000,000

Trial at First Instance (Stage 2)

Rp 3,000,000

Total

Number of Cases

Amount Number of Cases

Amount Number of Cases

Amount

9 Rp 18,000,000 3 Rp 9,000,000 12 Rp 27,000,000 Should you agree to disburse the 2019 Legal Aid funding, we commit to using it as specified above. Thank you for your kind attention.

Surabaya, 4 July 2019 Signed by:

Director/Head of YLBHI-LBH Surabaya Notes: Ceilings for Stages 3, 4, and 5 - Accreditation A = Rp 93,000,000 - Accreditation B = Rp 51,000,000 - Accreditation C = Rp 27,000,000

131

APPENDIX I – ACTIVITY Location Data