Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 5

Khlaresta T.

Noer 106805233 International Law

December 12, 2011 Page 1

Extradition Between Indonesia and Singapore Even though Indonesia and Singapore are both under the shade of ASEAN1, however in order to arrange an agreement regarding to a specific issue, they need a bilateral agreement that binding both states to certain decision that has been summed up in the agreement. Extradition could be an ideal example for this bilateral agreement. Extradition is the official process of transferring an accused, a suspect, or convicted from one state or country to another state or country2. Extradition it self is regulated by treaties that has been ratified3 by both states. On April 27, 2007 located at Tampak Siring, Indonesia and Singapore have been signed a Treaty between the Government of the Republic Indonesia and the Government of the Republic of Singapore for Extradition of Fugitive co in unison with the Agreement between Government of The Republic of Indonesia and the Government of the Republic of Singapore on Defense Cooperation4. These treaties were held up earlier with respect to the issues of the export of sand to Singapore from Indonesia and the extradition of tainted business executives to Indonesia. Sand, imported from Indonesia, is crucial to continue Singapore's reclamation of land from the ocean and to support its construction activities. Indonesia has been a major supplier of sand and granite to Singapore but banned all exports of these items owing to differences on the extradition treaty and the

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or was established on 8 August 1967 in Bangkok, Thailand, with the signing of the ASEAN Declaration (Bangkok Declaration)
1

Resource: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/extradition, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extradition, http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/extradition 3 Ratification is a principal's approval of an act of its agent where the agent lacked authority to legally bind the principal. 4 Resource: http://www.kemlu.go.id/Daftar%20Perjanjian%20Internasional/singapura.htm
2

Khlaresta T. Noer 106805233 International Law

December 12, 2011 Page 2

defense cooperation agreement. The extradition treaty, which has been under negotiations for more than 24 months, came to a conclusion along with the signing of the defense cooperation agreement for 25 years5. The defense cooperation agreement would give training facilities to Singapore and would thus save on its offshore training and logistics costs. The defense cooperation is meant to develop confidence between the two neighbors as well. A special emphasis for both these countries of late is their weapons acquisitions and modernization of armed forces. Singapore has one of the most advanced forces in the region while Indonesia is looking to modernize its armed forces. For extradition of fugitive treaty, Indonesian government concluded that the agreements that have been signed are profitable. This conclusion was based on the content of the agreement that covered 31 acts of crime in extradition treaty. Among other economic crimes, bribery, corruption. And other criminal acts; such as counterfeiting of money, banking crimes, violation of company law and bankruptcy law. The agreement applied by retroactive principle 15 years after the enactment. Persuaded by the agreement, Indonesian government hopes that could expropriate Indonesias assets that has been taken away by irresponsible conglomerates to Singapore with a total of more than 1,300 trillion rupiah. Also in addition, Indonesian government hopes by this treaty becomes able to drag those irresponsible conglomerates to the court to be judicially tried and those who has been tried in absentia6. Indonesia has an initiative to build extradition treaty because the fact that approximately since 2001, Singapore became a heaven for corruptors from

Resource: http://www.ipcs.org/article/southeast-asia/singapore-indonesiaextradition-treaty-and-defence-cooperation-2298.html 6 in absentia: In legal use, it usually means a trial at which the defendant is not physically present. < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_absentia>
5

Khlaresta T. Noer 106805233 International Law

December 12, 2011 Page 3

Indonesia7. Why is that? First reason could be, the number of flights to Singapore per day, this reason makes a big possibility for those irresponsible people to disappear immediately before being caught by the police. Also the distance between Indonesia and Singapore is not significantly too far away, so the family or their lawyer is still able to visit them frequently. Regarding to the distance, it is easier for the accused to observe about the development od their case in Indonesia from Singapore rather than any countries, due to the distance, it is not hard for them to have access to update the news. Intentionally or not, Singapore also offers an easy requirement in order to get a permanent residential in their state, we only have to invest approximately 1 million Singapore Dollar (it has the same valued with 7 billion Rupiah)8. A lot of names that suspected was still in Singapore to avoid the law9; Lesmana Basuki and Tony Suherman(allegedly involve in corruption case of Sejahtera Bank Umum, in this caseallegorist injurious the State for 209 Billion Rupiah, and 105 million US dollars), Muhamad Nazaruddin (Allegedly involved in the case of contruction of Wisma atlet Sea Games in Palembang. Allegedly, the state was baing harmed for 25 billion rupiah.), Hari Matalata (involved in the case of textiles export worth 1,6 billion rupiah), Atang Latief (involved in corruption of BLBI Bank Indonesia Rata with 155 billion rupiah loss to the country, the case is still under investigation, and his status is still a suspect), Nader Thaher (allegedly involved in Bank Mandiri credit corruption case by PT. Siak Zamrud Pusako, and allegedly harmed the state at 35

Resource: http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2011/07/22/06562758/Singapura.dan.Koru ptor.Indonesia 8 Resource: http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2011/07/22/06562758/Singapura.dan.Koru ptor.Indonesia 9 Resource: http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2011/07/04/09464965/Daftar.45.Pelarian.I ndonesia.ke.Luar.Negeri


7

billion US Dollar), Anggoro Widjojo (involved in the case of SKRT DepHutm and injurious the state to 180 Billion Rupiah), Gayus Tambunan (engaging in Khlaresta T. Noer 106805233 International Law December 12, 2011 Page 4

corruption, bribery, and tax evasion, and he injurious the sate for 24 billion Rupiah), Djoko S Tjandra (inovolved in corruption case of Cessie Bank Bali, this case injurious state to 546 billion rupiah. After awhile, the extradition treaty, the DCA and MTA are not applicable in both states yet because according to the current update regarding to those treaties, each country has not ratified both treaty and agreement. On June 2011, our foreign minister, Marty Natalegawa said that both Indonesia and Singapore agree that this extradition treaty needs to be continued, they let this issue to be developed scientifically regarding to the ratification of the treaty10. Since we are trying to do an exchange method, so we are mutually wait and waiting for other party to ratify first. So legally, the extradition treaty has not validated yet, simply because it has not been ratified by both countries, signatures is not enough in order to make a treaty valid in the states that concerned. But in my opinion, there is more to political issue rather than legal issue about why this treaty has not been ratified yet. The exchange between extradition treaty and the DCA&MTA agreements considered as unfair deal for Indonesian, because all Indonesia asks is to get the criminals back to the state and restore the loss that suffered by the state, which is should not caused any damages to Singapore, while Singapore blatantly asks Indonesia for a land. I personally cannot see a fair connection between this exchange. In Indonesians perspective, I see this exchange is profitable to Singapore but it could become a disadvantage to Indonesia, because we have trauma regarding to international law issue, we afraid that we might be careless about certain things that caused us the losses of our area. My prejudice would say that Singapore wont take a chance to loose Resource: http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2011/06/24/11110424/IndonesiaSingapura.Bahas.Ekstradisi
10

their major investors, because due to the fact that Singapore has almost no natural resources, the dependency of the Singaporean government to investors, Khlaresta T. Noer 106805233 International Law December 12, 2011 Page 5

domestic or foreign and specifically in its financial instruments, is high. So this exchange idea is only to buys time, cause Singaporean government might aware that with this prerequisite, Indonesia wont ratified the CDA and MTA agreements, and Singapore has enough reason not to ratified the extradition treaty. So basically, the current position of extradition treaty is still hanging nowhere because it has not been ratified yet by Singapore, the fact that we are trying to do an exchange with the CDA and MTA is only hinder the ratification progress. I would suggest that the government needs to revise the deal that has been made, and reaffirmed that extradition cannot be equated with both CDA and MTA. Also Indonesian government needs to be more careful at the time of composing treaties or agreements so it wont harm our state.

Вам также может понравиться