ASEAN COMMUNITY BUILDING; Collective Challenges, Opportunities and Strategies

ASEAN COMMUNITY BUILDING;
Collective Challenges, Opportunities and Strategies[1]

Yudha Akbar[2]



Introduction


The cooperation and benefits of ASEAN have been very tremendously considered as the rocketing development of this such regional organization. This August, ASEAN has come to the age of 38 which brings the opportunities and challenges how this association could possibly achieve its collective targets and future achievements. Under the framework of the Bali Concord II, the ASEAN leaders defined the specific measures for the ASEAN Security Community (ASC), ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) and ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC). These are considered as ASEAN three pillars to support the community-building of ASEAN in the year of 2020. The leaders then envisaged that the ASC would bring ASEAN’s political and security cooperation to a higher plane and would ensure that ASEAN Member Countries live with peace with the world in a just harmonious environment. The success of this association is attributed not only to increasing economic integration and political and security cooperation as other regional organizations but also to the “ASEAN Way” that makes ASEAN unique. The ASEAN Way is a harmonious combination of national priorities and the Association’s interests, and a dynamic, wise and flexible approach that enables ASEAN to optimize its geo-political regional strength. That is also the way ASEAN take the advantage of the cultural, social, political and economic diversity of member countries to turn challenges into opportunities[3]. ASEAN has been successful because its members have a very strong commitment to cooperation. Cooperation for the benefits for all and cooperation for stability and peace of the region. This is a very important hallmark of ASEAN.


ASEAN Community as the Maturity of Entity

The development of ASEAN’s three pillars is being the milestone of ASEAN evolution which surely has been interpreted as a forward-leaping move of this association to strengthen its solidity and cooperation. It is obviously seen that in the early times of ASEAN’s establishment, the founding nations faced a lot of obstacles related to global political constellation upon the influence of two-leading super powers in terms of cold war, suspicion happened among the neighboring countries, anxiety to domination one nation upon another, and territorial conflicts as inheritance of colonialism in this region have continued adding the existing problems of ASEAN. However, ASEAN has shown strong commitment to realize its cooperation in certain fields such as in economy namely ASEAN Free Trade Area (1992), in politics and security namely Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality Declaration (ZOPFAN/1971), Declaration of ASEAN Concord (1976), Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC/1976), ASEAN Declaration on the South China Sea (1992), the ASEAN Regional Forum (1995), Treaty on the Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapon – Free Zone (1995), ASEAN Vision 2020 (1997), the ASEAN Troika (2000), Declaration on the Conduct Parties in the South China Sea (2002), and Declaration of ASEAN Concord II (2003). These enriched commitments consequently empower ASEAN existence and essence.


The founding of ASEAN Community needs to be comprehended as an ongoing process that supported by all parties. The current domination of state actors in administering the direction of ASEAN’s cooperation should be equalized by larger roles of ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Organization (AIPO), interests groups, and more importantly by ASEAN’s people. In this way, an endeavor to make ASEAN downs to earth is conducting socialization and benefits sharing to comprehensively all walks of life and community levels. Education would be the most capable instrument to do this task. ASEAN should encourage its member countries to integrate information about ASEAN to their school curriculum. This knowledge empowerment should be educated to young generations who will be the future leaders and continue this ASEAN’s cooperation.


Myanmar and Non-Interference Principle of ASEAN


We surely cannot avoid discussing about human rights violation in Myanmar related to its recent political and security development. Myanmar finally did not take its turn in leading ASEAN in 2006 – 2007 for the sake of concentrating on national reconciliation and implementing Roadmap to Democracy while maintaining ASEAN’s relations to dialog partners. This Myanmar’s political step, of course, could be viewed in many different angles. Some argued that Myanmar’s decision had given such political signal which claimed ASEAN capable to solve its internal problems but some also captured it as the effect of economic and political pressures by European Union (EU) and United States (US). If so, it can strongly indicate that ASEAN’s independence has come to critical condition although ASEAN has good relations with both EU and US in terms of Asia – Europe Meeting (ASEM) and ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF). ASEAN’s independence is worth preserving if ASEAN is willing to bring its community into reality. Myanmar’s deferment has become negative precedent for ASEAN’s future. This can possibly happen to Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam if they experience domestic cases with international impact and they will be “rewarded” external pressures as well.


Myanmar’s case has given us opportunity to criticize one of ASEAN principles namely non-interference. This principle obliges ASEAN Member Countries to respect sovereignty of each of theirs and not to interfere other internal problems. It has been well proven that this principle able to keep the harmony and minimize conflict potentials. ASEAN non- interference has a historical basis in the foundations of the organization itself. The Bangkok Declaration of 1967, which established ASEAN, introduced the notion of “equality and partnership”. The TAC, the cornerstone of all ASEAN relations, enshrines in Article 10 the right of every state to make national policy free from external subversion or coercion[4]. However, we need to analyze whether this principle is still relevant to ASEAN after what it has done to Myanmar. We necessarily have to redefine this non-interference principle and also its operational framework especially the implementation of ASEAN’s constructive engagement to Myanmar. ASEAN’s challenges in coming years will be more complicated. In addition to redefining non-interference principle, we also need consensus how to prepare some adjustments in the event that redefinition erupts multi-interpretations. Redefining non – interference principle is not a final evaluation of ASEAN in welcoming its community 2020. ASEAN must intensify its code of conduct to be more applicable and solution-oriented. It should be noted that ASEAN succeeded developing ARF from focusing only on confidence building measures for the past twelve years to the level of preventive diplomacy which was recently agreed in ARF meeting in Vientiane. This has ensured ASEAN to necessarily develop its code of conduct internally to answer the challenges particularly those are the dispute settlements in the conflicts of territorial.


ASEAN External Relations and Their Prospects


ASEAN is known as an association which has solid external relations. ASEAN relations with its dialog partners have been conducted in a good way. Many dialogue partners have signed TAC including New Zealand and Mongolia in last 38th ASEAN Ministerial Meeting. Australia has also taken important role in keeping its relations with ASEAN by signing Declaration of Intention to Accede to the TAC. Signing TAC is also meant to be pre-qualification for entering East Asia Summit (EAS) that will be held in Kuala Lumpur in upcoming December. The concept of EAS is intended to be inclusive and not necessarily to be duplicating ASEAN+3. To differ ASEAN+3 and EAS, ASEAN must invite non-ASEAN+3 countries. It must be understood that EAS is not an ASEAN enlargement which can minimize ASEAN’s roles especially if EAS is transformed into East Asia Community (EAC) that globally echoed by Malaysia. Furthermore, ASEAN must be a leader in establishing EAS and ASEAN must be able to choose and give priority to its own interests. ASEAN should not let EAS take ASEAN’s recent concentration on building community and become a possible overlapping to ASEAN’s vision. ASEAN relations to countries in other region have been an important part of its development. ASEAN – European Union relations in the framework of ASEM could support this notion but ASEAN does not seem to take bigger advantages of it. ASEAN actually could take EU as a partner in developing economic and political cooperation and socio-cultural as well without giving less attention that these two regions have various differences. EU is internationally recognized as an entity that tremendously concerns on human rights enforcement. They have human rights mechanism and court to support their campaign on human rights. On the other hand, ASEAN shall understand that regional mechanism on human rights enforcement is completely needed to answer the challenges for building ASEAN community 2020. It has been obviously clear that human rights along with environmental degradation and terrorism are international issues which allow international community to intervene certain countries owning these cases. The establishment of ASEAN human rights mechanism and court will strengthen regional human rights enforcement in accordance with its regional culture so the clash of universality and cultural relativity in terms of human rights enforcement in ASEAN would be lessened.


Economic Obstacles and Strategies


Dynamics and flexibility have been maintained to respect the diversity of ASEAN Member Countries is worth preserving in coming future but in the same time, economic, social, cultural and political gaps do still exist. These gaps should not be deemed to be customary differences but should be resolved. The gaps, today, do not only happen among inter-ASEAN Member Countries but also in intra-member countries such as between Eastern and Western part Indonesia. Initiative for ASEAN Integration (IAI) has been a strategy to minimize those gaps and should remain applicable and consistently implemented. In economic angle, ASEAN must be able to integrate economic sources which depend on member countries’ willingness to open their market (market sharing). In the reality, market sharing is not well implemented because there is a tendency that every member country has different way in transforming their national economic interests. Moreover, there is influence of international environment e.g. individual member country’s economic cooperation with non-ASEAN Member Countries. ASEAN Member Countries have considered traditional markets namely US, Europe and Japan as more promising market than ASEAN itself. ASEAN should realize that AFTA has obstacles in implementation since, if we apply the theory of comparative advantage, ASEAN Member Countries mostly have same products which cause them unable to be competitive. Therefore, ASEAN must formulate alternatives to maximize the role of AFTA in generating ASEAN Member Countries’ economic growth. ASEAN then has endorsed eleven priority sectors for integration as follows: wood-based products, automotives, rubber-based products, textiles and apparels, agro-based products, fisheries, electronics, e-ASEAN, healthcare, air travel and tourism. The AEC shall ensure that the deepening and broadening of integration of ASEAN shall be accompanied by technical and development cooperation in order to address the development divide and accelerate the economic integration of Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Viet Nam so that the benefit of economic integration are shared. These goals are being pursued through IAI and the Roadmap for ASEAN Integration of ASEAN (RIA)[5]. ASEAN’s efforts in improving the quality and competitiveness of those eleven priority sectors should not only be in the level of decision makers but also should reach small and medium enterprises which have limited access to that policy socialization. There will be beneficial if ASEAN could possibly conduct the socialization through seminars, comparative studies and trainings in order to monitor the implementation of those eleven economic sectors development. After that, ASEAN must classify the received data which indicate how ASEAN Member Countries could commit their sectors development so that ASEAN’s solutions on economic obstacles experienced by member countries would be necessarily granted.


ASEAN Socio-Cultural Strategies to Strengthen the Community


ASEAN cooperation in social and culture matters related to Plan of Actions of the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community have four core elements. First, building a community of caring societies to address issues of poverty, equity, and human development. Second, managing the social impact of economic integration by building a competitive human resource base and adequate systems of social protection. Third, enhancing environmental sustainability and sound environmental governance. Fourth, strengthening the foundations of regional social cohesion towards an ASEAN Community in 2020[6]. These four core elements have to precisely meet the needs of ASEAN people in developing the capacity and growth of their daily social and cultural lives. For that purpose, ASEAN needs to protect the human security of ASEAN people which have wider implications in life and the development of environment quality. The preservation of environment in ASEAN, so far, has been only in the level of mapping of environmental problems, conducting activities and environment studies. Notwithstanding, ASEAN has implemented some endeavors in preserving environment but working groups e.g. ASEAN Senior Official on Environment (ASOEN) have not contributed effectively in solving environmental degradation. Forest fire and illegal logging have only been overcome bilaterally or by certain related countries. Next time, ASEAN is hopefully establishing dispute settlements of environmental degradation which have orientations of common interests of environment preservation and also
economic consideration since ASEAN Member Countries are developing countries. That dispute settlement should meet those two orientations.


Last but not least, ASEAN has been famous for its action plans but relatively poor in implementation. This notion is based on problems in ASEAN Secretariat. This secretariat has only 50 staffs to organize 700 ASEAN meetings annually. Furthermore, one of the most influential factors to ASEAN’s incompetence in running its action plans is organizational mechanism which unable to support inter- sector coordination in both national and committee levels[7]. ASEAN must realize that ASEAN Secretariat is no longer to be supportive element in ASEAN cooperation but it should be the center of plan development and implementation. Enlarging and intensifying the function of ASEAN Secretariat should not be considered as supranational organization so that ASEAN Secretariat must keep collectivity and ASEAN Way as its basis of organizational actions.



Conclusion


ASEAN has come to its more mature organizational level that directs its cooperation to the ASEAN Community building. ASEAN, of course, will not have its community easily since ASEAN faces various challenges. Economic cooperation is one of the pillars which is urgently evaluated and improved in order to minimize the gaps. In economic and political cooperation, ASEAN must take a lesson from Myanmar’s withdrawal in leading ASEAN. This controversy has become negative precedent for ASEAN's independence. Internally, ASEAN should redefine non-interference principle and the implementation of code of conduct as strategies in keeping ASEAN relevant to encounter challenges in future ASEAN cooperation especially in building ASEAN community 2020. To transform plans into actions, besides strengthening the ASEAN Secretariat, ASEAN is requested to comprehensively provide larger space for people-to-people contact and caring societies since the community is not only a state actor’s domination.





[1] This paper is presented in seminar on Challenges and Opportunities Toward ASEAN Community 2020,
conducted by Department of International Relations of Universitas Nasional – Jakarta, August 11, 2005.
[2] Student of International Relations Studies of Universitas Nasional
[3] H.E. Mr. Prime Minister Phan Van Khai, ASEAN Lecture, in http://aseansec.org (28/07/05)
[4] Yu-Ping Chan, Standing by ASEAN in Crisis, in http://hir.harvard.edu/articles (28/07/05)
[5] ASEAN Annual Report 2003-2004. Pg. 16
[6] The ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC) Plan of Action, Vientiane, Laos, 29 November 2004
[7] Ganewati Wuryandari and Zatni Arby, Masa Depan ASEAN, in Menuju ASEAN Vision 2020: Tantangan dan Inisiatif, Puslitbang Politik dan Kewilayahan Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia, Jakarta-2000. Pg. 173

ASEAN Socio-Culture Community toward Building Human Resources in Case of Education in Lao’s People Democratic Republic

ASEAN Socio-Culture Community toward Building Human Resources in Case of Education in Lao’s People Democratic Republic


Lia Karina

Abstract
“..….An all new education system is needed, a system which centering all ways in means to develop intellectual strength and produce thinkable framework to face skepticism burden….” (Karl Mannheim)


INTRODUCTION

In world marked by high technology, mass production as organizing human labor perhaps represent one of the most potential appliances to act mechanically.[1] Nowadays the quality of each human labor has to be measured by their capability in doing certain jobs which is required by the company their in, mostly these capabilities are thought in their education background, so it is easier to work in a major which fits the educational background. Education is an important aspect in every human life; it measures the development of human progress in building the future by using their intelligent. Education surrounds every age which human lives in, it can come through small and simple things or big and complicated problems. Human knows education since they can read and write although usually we learn things since we’re born. Education plays an important role for human resource development and provides knowledge, good moral behaviour and good culture for the people. Every country in the world is aware that education is most important in building human resources that can develop their country, the higher the quality of the human resource, the bigger expectations that could approach for the country’s development. It is often that to measure one country’s credibility is from their quality of education, that’s why every developed countries have high qualities in their human resources while developing countries are still slow in maintaining their education, most developing countries are formed after colonization from most developed countries such as the European and British which results countries that nowadays are known as India, Africa, Timor Leste including the Southeast Asian Countries which are gathered in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
ASEAN is an organization includes 10 countries which are known as developing countries, such as; Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Philippines, Brunei Darussalam, Singapore, Myanmar, Thailand and Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Formed in August 8th 1967 based on the Bangkok Declaration, ASEAN is known as an organization that seeks back to the traditional way of solving problems together which is consensus, having the same historical background made all of the ASEAN members have the same feeling of brotherhood between them. Despite the difference of culture and geographic site, all ASEAN members have an understanding of all the condition that each country have, we can see from how they help each other in economic and social problems. The five countries that joined after the five former are known as poorer countries, exclude Brunei Darussalam they are Vietnam, Myanmar, Cambodia and Lao, all programs which are established since ASEAN was formed consist of plans to develop each and every country to become a developed country which will make the ASEAN members equal to compete with the western countries. For example, when Indonesia suggested to built regional security based on the terror in September 11th 2001, all members agreed to make an agreement which is based on economic (ASEAN Economic Community), social culture (ASEAN Social Culture Community) and security (ASEAN Security Community) to reach the goal to perform ASEAN community. The agreement suggested that all the programs have to be accomplished by the year 2020; this was determined by considering the economic gap between the member countries.
In building the ASCC agreement, one of the important aspects is developing equal education among youth in ASEAN. The main focus of ASEAN cooperation in education continues to be on promoting ASEAN awareness among ASEAN’s young students – through the curricular of primary and secondary schools in the region, and through student exchange programs at the secondary level. The ASEAN Committee on Education (ASCOE) has agreed to develop a five-year plan of action and work program to guide education cooperation activities. Malaysia hosted the first ASEAN Student Exchange Program at Secondary Level in 2000, and Singapore hosted the second programme in June/July 2001. Thailand has offered to host the third exchange program.
In many ways the South East countries which are gathered in ASEAN have tried to develop their countries not only through economy but also by building human resource through education. Before ASEAN was formed, the Southeast Asian Minister of Education Organization (SEAMEO)[2] was first formed by the ministers of education from Laos, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and the Republic of (South) Viet Nam, the Chairperson of UNESCO National Commission of the Philippines, and the Special Adviser to the President of the United States of America as a result in a meeting in Bangkok. The signing of the SEAMEO Charter was done later by the Ministers of Education of Indonesia (Soemantri Hardjoprakoso), Laos (Leuam Insissienmay), Malaysia (Mohamed Khir Johari), the Philippines (Carlos P. Romulo), Singapore (Ong Pang Boon) and Thailand (Pin Malakul) on 7 February 1968, and later by Vietnam (Nguyen Van Tho), 28 June 1968. The SEAMEO Charter was signed during the Third SEAMEO Council Conference in Singapore. Prepared by a group of international lawyers, the Charter was submitted for clearance by the Member Countries before the signing. In 1973 at the Eighth SEAMEO Council Conference in Phnom Penh, the Charter was amended to include the terms and conditions of Associated Membership. It was revised again to cover Affiliate Membership at the Eighteenth SEAMEO Council Conference in Penang in 1983.[3] Unfortunately, SEAMEO is not well known to all the citizens in each Member Countries of ASEAN, the benefit of SEAMEO haven’t touched the whole level of society, it would be wise to spread the SEAMEO vision and mission to all level of society, so that small countries such as Vietnam, Myanmar, Cambodia and Lao can get a hand in building their human resources.
Toffler, in Future Shock (1970) and other writings, adequately documents the responses people generate to prospects of the future, nothing that the future as an unknown is extremely difficult for people to contemplate. The problem is not alone an educational one. As a nation we have a variety crisis – the energy crises, the monetary crises, the silent majority crises, the moral crises, the rise-of-crime crises, the pollution crises, and the population crises – all the results of lack of planning.[4] To achieve the goal towards ASEAN Community especially the ASEAN Social Culture Community, it must be a priority to encourage ASEAN members to increase their level of education by all means. As Cole said “Education is everywhere social. Because education is always a human process, one good way to understand it better is to study its social side.”[5] In this case I will look on the side of one of the poor country in ASEAN, which is Lao.

Education in Lao People’s Democratic Republic

Education in ASEAN is very much different remembering that each country in ASEAN has different methods in building their human resources based on their historical background. The early Buddhist monasteries were some of the oldest institution. Older yet was the Hindu ‘padepokan’ which was not only a meeting place for the village but also a centre of learning where religious instruction was given. Later, with the coming of Islam, boys in Muslim countries like Indonesia and Malaysia often acquired simple literacy in the ‘pesantren’ or the ‘surau’ or the Quran classes under a Haji, while in the other countries the temple priest became the main instructor in the village. Early European presence in the region brought little change as trade was the chief reason for their coming to the East. However, alongside the merchants came the Christian missionary who, in varying degrees, showed enthusiasm for the education of the native. After the colonization, each Member Country have differences in building their human resources through education, some examples are; Indonesia is the only country in the region where education at the first level is not free. In theory there is no charge but schools are permitted to and do, in fact collect fees. In Malaysia there is relatively small drop-out problem compared with either the Philippines or Thailand where less than half the first year intakes reaches the end of the sixth year.[6]
In ASEAN countries, the number of jobless continues to rise, wages continue to fall, governments have found themselves with less money to protect the environment and look after the health of the citizens. They are less able to invest in developing the skills of our people which makes them in danger of losing a whole generation of skilled workers who are so essential for the development of their economies and societies.[7]
The lack of employment which occurs in ASEAN is automatically connected with the lack of education in citizen’s poor area. Here I’ll explore the education in Laos which is officially known as Lao People's Democratic Republic, Laos is a former French colony that became an independent nation on July 19, 1949. The government of Laos-one of the few remaining official communist states-has been decentralizing control and encouraging private enterprise since 1986. Laos has made significant improvements in its economic growth, averaging 7 percent over the last decade. Due to its heavy dependence on trade with Thailand, Laos fell victim to the financial crisis in the East Asia region in 1997.
The Lao People's Democratic Republic or Laos is located in the centre of Indochina. It has an eastern border of 1,957 km with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, a northern border of 416 with the People's Republic of China, a north-western border of 230 km with the Union of Myanmar, a western border of about 1,840 km with the Kingdom of Thailand and a southern border of about 492 km with the Kingdom of Cambodia. The country provides a potentially strategic land link for closer sub-regional cooperation in the Greater Mekong area. Laos has a total population of 5.2 million (1999), with an average annual growth rate of 2.4 percent. People share a rich ethnic diversity, comprising such groups as Hmong, Khmu, Yao, A'kha, Ikoh, Lu etc. Most of them have kept their own customs, dialects and traditional dress. In total 47 different groups are accounted for in Laos.
Over 2.1 million people in Lao PDR, almost on-half of the total population, live in poverty. About 1.9 million of the poor are in the rural areas where poverty incidence of 53 percent is more than double that in urban areas, estimated at 24 percent. Among the three regions of the country, the South exhibits the highest poverty incidence at 60 percent. In the rural South, 66 percent of the population, or two out of three people live in poverty.
There are no national unemployment numbers for Laos, but a 1994 survey of five urban centres (Vientiane, Luang Prabang, Savannakhet, Pakse and Thakek) concluded that 5.6 percent of the labour force, the population who are usually economically active, was unemployed. Lack of skilled workers has led to an increase in private sector salaries, particularly for managers, technicians and professionals.[8]
Of the many ethnic groups in Laos, only the Lao Loum had a tradition of formal education, reflecting the fact that the languages of the other groups had no written script. Until the midtwentieth century, education was primarily based in the Buddhist wat, where the monks taught novices and other boys to read both Lao and Pali scripts, basic arithmetic, and other religious and social subjects. Many villages had wat schools for novices and other village boys. Only ordained boys and men in urban monasteries had access to advanced study. The Pathet Lao began to offer Lao language instruction in the schools under its control in the late 1950s, and a Laotian curriculum began to be developed in the late 1960s in the RLG schools.[9]
Laos is one of the poorest countries in the ASEAN region. It is a landlocked country with limited infrastructure and a largely unskilled workforce. Social indicators in Laos, such as health levels and death rates, are among the lowest in the region and fall closer to the average for Sub-Saharan Africa. Laos is also at risk of occasional floods, droughts and blight, and the environment is facing even more immediate dangers from unexploded ordinance, deforestation, and soil erosion. A majority of the population does not have access to potable water.
After the proclamation of the Lao PDR, the Lao government has been emphasizing on educational system issue. Lao educational system comprises of pre school education, general education, technical and vocational education and higher education. Apart from these, there is non-formal and private education. As we aware, Laos PDR is a developing country. For all levels of education, it is facing many challenges and has also a limited budget. And, it isn’t easy to resolve the problems of illiteracy, particularly people in rural areas. Or even in the city, schools are not enough for the increasing number of students.
Schools in Laos were facing following problems:
- First, the lack of sufficient fund to supply all the equipment needs such as textbooks, laboratory apparatus, computers, library…etc.
- Second, they don’t have enough qualified teachers.
- Third, there is a shortage of classrooms and schools.
In addition there is an inadequate curriculum in terms of innovating the education with new information technology such as the use of computer and the internet in the school. Those terms which are mentioned above are necessary for education. So, in the process of human resource development Lao need a new culture of teaching and learning which is introduced as an integral part of the transformation process. In order to cope with the challenge in the new century, teachers themselves need additional training and should have new education of methods and approaches to delivery of education and students should be developed the sense of creativity, community, solidarity and international understanding. Student’s lessons should be practically connected to real life situation.[10]
The government of Laos has identified education as their top priority. The illiteracy rate is 50 percent, and for the 70 percent of Laos's citizens who enrols in primary school, the dropout rate averages close to 60 percent. Most teachers have less than five years of education. Exacerbating the problem is the remoteness and inaccessibility of many areas in Laos, which makes it difficult to attract and retain trained teachers. In addition, most teachers are untrained in ethnic minority sensitivities or bilingual education, which is essential for working with the country's 48 separate groups. The lowest priority for education is given to girls as families keep them at home to help in raising younger children and doing fieldwork.[11]
Education is improving in Lao PDR, but still faces many limitations. Nearly 60 percent of teachers in primary and secondary schools are under-qualified. Very low public expenditure is a major constraint to ensuring balanced growth in the education system, especially primary education for the poor.[12]
Through the Women's Literacy and Basic Skills Project, many of Laos' ethnic minority women have been given access to some form of education and a chance to improve their lives and to help in the development of their communities. A total of 3,240 women participated in the program's various projects. It is further estimated that an additional 16,000 people will benefit indirectly from the women's participation. These beneficiaries include children and other family members, as well as villages.[13]
To resolve the problems mentioned above, Lao Government has given a great effort to improve educational system by many ways such as revising the curricular and training of teachers through scholarships provided by other countries or international organizations. Teachers got also a scholarship to participate in a training course abroad. Several education and awareness programs are currently in operation. These include conservation education and public awareness raising, primary and university curriculum enrichment, and a mobile conservation education unit.

Conclusion

The education in facing the globalisation must be developed in each Member Countries in ASEAN, while most of the countries in ASEAN are developing countries, the encouragement for maintaining human resources have to come from each country as a concern of their national integrity, as Mahdi Elmandjra[14] said, “….the key part of the learning process and of national educational policies is self-reliance. You cannot build up self-reliance through dependency….”
The problems which the government of Lao will face is the difficulties to reach the rural areas that is so far from the cities, also the tradition of women minorities in education should be erased by looking forward to build a better country. Besides all that the main point in developing human resource is to make South East Asian countries catch up with the western in order to continue the globalization of technology especially ASEAN members. The agreement in building ASCC have to taken seriously, not only in planning but also taking real actions to every social problems such as education as an important aspect.
What most countries lack are the political will and the courage to do so- in spite of or because of the great socio-political transformation which education brings about. Because of an acceleration of history, learning has become, more than ever before, a long-term process. Any reform of learning systems ought to be worked out in terms of generations, to be able to achieve a thorough change from pre-school education to postgraduate studies, including the training of teachers and the production of new teaching materials. A period of fifteen to twenty years is the minimum time required to transform an education system.[15]
We can see that it does take a long time to improve the human skill in building the human resource through education, especially forming a new system of education that is so much different from the traditional culture that each country has. Even though the system is ready, sometimes the society is not prepared to accept the new influence which entered their pattern of thinking; this might take a lot of time before they can adapt the system and automatically applied this system to their every day life. ASEAN should be patient in continuing development of the human resources with the new system that they can provide by applying the ASCC.
And with SEAMEO as an external organization of ASEAN it can encourage each Member Countries to develop their national education, despite their differences in putting the government budget for national education; each country should put education as a high priority in building human resources as a must for the global world.


BIBLIOGRAPHIES:

Books;
- Brembeck, Cole S., 1967, Social Foundations of Education, Jhon Wiley and Sons: USA.
- Deliar Noer, 1988, Culture, Philosophy and The Future, PT Dian Rakyat.
- Freire, Paulo, 2001, pendidikan yang membebaskan, MELIBAS.
- F.H.K Wong, 1976, Teachers education in ASEAN, Heinemann Educational Books LTD.
- Meeth, L. Richard, 1974, Quality Education for Less Money, Jossey-Bass Publishers: London.
- Rodolfo C. Severino, JR, 1999, ASEAN Rises to the Challenge, the ASEAN Secretariat.

Websites;
- www.asean.org access on April 2005
- www.seameo.org access on April 2005
- http://www.catholicrelief.org/our_work/where_we_work/overseas/Asia/laos/index.cfm access on 19th June 2005
- http://www.literacy.org/explorer/laos_out.html access on 19 June 2005
- http://www.adb.org/Documents/News/2001/nr2001117.asp access on 9 December 2005




[1] Freire, Paulo, 2001, pendidikan yang membebaskan, page 44.
[2] The Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO) was established on 30 November 1965 as a chartered international organization whose purpose is to promote cooperation in education, science and culture in the Southeast Asian region. Despite that, to enhance regional understanding and cooperation and unity of purpose among Member Countries and achieve a better quality of life through establishment of networks and partnerships, provision of an intellectual forum for policy makers and experts, and the promotion of sustainable human resource development are vision and mission of SEAMEO.
[3] SEAMEO official website : www.seameo.org
[4] L. Richard Meeth, 1974, Quality Education for Less Money, page 3.
[5] Cole S. Brembeck, 1967, Social Foundations of Education, page 4.
[6] F.H.K Wong, 1976, Teachers education in ASEAN, pages 6-7.
[7] Rodolfo C. Severino, JR, 1999, ASEAN Rises to the Challenge, pages 173-174.
[8] www.asean10thsummitinLaoPDR.gov
[9] http://www.mapzones.com/world/asia/laos/educationindex.php

[10] Mr Khamkheg Saysena and Miss Sipaphaphone Chounramany in Education for the Future in the Lao PDR (country report), 2000
[11] http://www.catholicrelief.org/our_work/where_we_work/overseas/Asia/laos/index.cfm
[12] http://www.adb.org/Documents/News/2001/nr2001117.asp
[13] http://www.literacy.org/explorer/laos_out.html
[14] Mahdi Elmandjra is professor at University Mohamed V, Rabat, Morocco.
[15] Deliar Noer, Culture, Philosophy and The Future, 1988, PT Dian Rakyat, page 143

Upaya Perjanjian Ekstradisi Indonesia-Singapura Sebagai Langkah Awal Pembentukan Konvensi Ekstradisi ASEAN

Upaya Perjanjian Ekstradisi Indonesia – Singapura
Sebagai Langkah Awal Pembentukan
Konvensi Ekstradisi ASEAN

Riza Ananda

Ekstradisi mengambil peranan penting dalam mewujudkan kepastian hukum yang melintasi batas negara, dimana seseorang yang melakukan pelanggaran hukum di sebuah negara dan melarikan diri ke negara lainnya, terhadap orang tersebut bisa dikenakan tuntutan atau dakwaan terhadapnya melalui mekanisme ekstradisi. Pranata hukum ekstradisi ini telah diterapkan sejumlah negara dalam upaya mengembalikan seseorang yang disangka atau dituduh melakukan tindakan melanggar hukum. Kasus Noriega, Shah Iran, John Demanjuk, dan upaya pengekstradisian terhadap Ratco Mladic salah satu penjahat perang Serbia, merupakan beberapa contoh bagaimana ekstradisi mengambil tempat penting bagi semua pihak agar hukum dapat ditegakkan terhadap para pelanggarnya.
Sebelum mengenal lebih jauh apakah yang dimaksud dengan ekstradisi itu dan bagaimana penerapannya, ada baiknya untuk mengetahui beberapa asas-asas penting di dalam hukum internasional yang didalamnya menyangkut substansi dari hukum pidana nasional sebuah negara dan sangat berkaitan erat dengan pelaksanaan ekstradisi, beberapa asas tersebut adalah:

Asas Teritorial
Kedaulatan teritorial suatu negara melahirkan yurisdiksi teritorial berupa hak atau kekuasaan atau kewenangan suatu negara untuk mengatur segala sesuatu yang terjadi di wilayah negaranya berdasarkan hukum internasional. Salah satu wujudnya adalah memberlakukan hukum nasional (termasuk hukum pidana nasionalnya) dalam batas-batas wilayah negara terhadap setiap orang, baik warga negara sendiri ataupun orang asing yang berada di wilayahnya, yang melakukan suatu peristiwa hukum, termasuk di wilayah negara yang bersangkutan.
Melalui asas ini negara mempunyai kedaulatan terhadap daerahnya, dan negara berhak menegakkan hukum terhadap semua warganegaranya termasuk warganegara asing yang melakukan tindakan pelanggaran hukum yang dilakukan didalam wilayah negaranya sendiri.
Asas Kewarganegaraan (Nasionalitas) Aktif
Menurut asas ini seseorang yang berada di wilayah negara lain, tunduk terhadap dua hukum yaitu hukum nasional negaranya dan hukum negara setempat. Sebab kewarganegaraan (nasionalitas) aktif ini didasarkan pada adanya hubungan antara negara dengan warganegaranya yang berada di luar wilayah negaranya.
Dengan asas ini seseorang yang melakukan pelanggaran hukum di luar wilayah negaranya sendiri atau di negara asing, tetap bisa dijatuhi tuntutan dari negara asalnya sebab hukum nasional negaranya mengikat terhadap setiap warganegaranya.
Asas Kewarganegaraan (Nasionalitas) Pasif
Suatu negara memiliki yurisdiksi terhadap seseorang yang bukan warganegaranya yang melakukan tindakan melanggar hukum di negaranya, atau warganegaranya sendiri yang melakukan pelanggaran hukum di wilayah negara lain. Disini berlaku asas kewarganegaraan (nasionalitas) pasif.

Asas Universal
Yang dimaksud dengan asas universal adalah dimana suatu negara memiliki yurisdiksi atas pelaku kejahatan dimanapun dan kapanpun kejahatan itu dilakukan, siapapun pelakunya dan siapapun korbannya. Kejahatan-kejahatan yang ditundukkan dalam yurisdiksi ini adalah kejahatan yang digolongkan sebagai musuh umat manusia seperti kejahatan terorisme, genocide, narkotika, kejahatan perang, dan sebagainya.
Asas ini diharapkan dapat menciptakan kestabilan, keamanan, ketentraman, dan perdamaian di muka bumi, setelah banyaknya kasus-kasus yang mengguncang dunia seperti pembantaian manusia, perbudakan, terorisme, dan lain-lain yang membuat hukum sulit ditegakkan karena pelaku-pelaku tindak kejahatan seperti itu selalu bersembunyi di balik kekuasaan yang dimiliki, karena umumnya otak kejahatan tindakan itu adalah para penguasa atau para Jenderal perang yang sulit untuk dihadapkan ke muka peradilan.

Prinsip Dasar Ekstradisi
Berdasarkan asas umum dalam hukum internasional, setiap negara memiliki kekuasaan tertinggi atau kedaulatan atas orang dan benda yang ada dalam wilayahnya sendiri. Oleh karena itu suatu negara tidak boleh melakukan tindakan yang bersifat kedaulatan di dalam wilayah negara lain, kecuali dengan persetujuan negara itu sendiri. Sebab tindakan itu dipandang sebagai intervensi atau campur tangan terhadap masalah dalam negeri negara lain, yang dilarang menurut hukum internasional. Dalam hubungannya dengan pelaku kejahatan yang melarikan diri atau berada di wilayah negara lain, maka negara yang memiliki yurisdiksi atas si pelaku kejahatan atau kejahatannya itu, misalnya negara tempat kejahatan dilakukan, tidak boleh melakukan penangkapan dan penahanan secara langsung di dalam wilayah negara tempat si pelaku kejahatan itu berada. Seolah-olah pelaku kejahatan yang demikian ini memperoleh kekebalan dari tuntutan hukum. Tetapi jika hal ini dibiarkan maka akan mendorong setiap pelaku kejahatan untuk melarikan diri ke negara lain untuk memperoleh perlindungan. Dan berkeliarannya pelaku kejahatan di negara lain tentu akan menimbulkan ketidakpuasan di kalangan masyarakat dan pelecehan terhadap hukum atau peraturan-peraturan yang ada.
Agar orang-orang semacam ini tidak lepas tanggung jawabnya atas kejahatan yang telah dilakukan, maka diperlukan kerjasama untuk mencegah dan memberantasnya. Kerjasama ini bisa diwujudkan dalam bentuk bilateral atau multilateral, sesuai dengan kebutuhannya. Oleh karena negara-negara yang memiliki yurisdiksi terhadap si pelaku kejahatan tidak bisa menangkap secara langsung di wilayah negara si pelaku kejahatan berada, negara-negara tersebut dapat menempuh cara yang legal untuk bisa mengadili dan menghukum si pelaku kejahatan tersebut. Negara-negara yang memiliki yurisdiksi ini bisa meminta kepada negara tempat si pelaku kejahatan berada untuk menangkap dan menyerahkan dia. Sedangkan negara tempat si pelaku kejahatan berada, setelah menerima permintaan dapat menyerahkan si pelaku kejahatan itu kepada negara yang mengajukan permintaan. Cara atau prosedur semacam ini telah diakui dan merupakan prosedur yang telah umum dianut baik dalam hukum nasional maupun hukum internasional yang lebih dikenal dengan nama ekstradisi.
Menurut Charles G. Fenwick, ekstradisi adalah suatu penyerahan yang dilakukan melalui izin dan disampaikan dengan permintaan formal, berdasarkan kondisi penahanan si tersangka sesuai dengan kewajiban umum yang terdapat dalam kesepakatan perjanjian.[1]
Sedangkan menurut D. W. Greig, ekstradisi adalah penyerahan yang dilakukan oleh sebuah negara kepada negara lainnya terhadap seseorang yang dianggap atau dituduh melakukan tindakan kriminal, dimana negara tempatnya melakukan kejahatan mempunyai kemampuan territorial untuk melakukan yurisdiksi.[2]
Menurut Mohd. Burhan Tsani, ekstradisi adalah penyerahan resmi yang dilakukan, atas dasar perjanjian internasional atau komitas, oleh suatu negara kepada negara lain, yang memintanya, seseorang yang dituduh atau dapat dihukum karena tindak kejahatan terhadap hukum negara peminta, proses ekstradisi dilaksanakan melalui saluran diplomatik.[3]
Penjelasan secara lebih rinci terdapat dalam pemaparan I Wayan Parthiana yang menyebutkan bahwa ekstradisi adalah penyerahan yang dilakukan secara formal baik berdasarkan perjanjian ekstradisi yang diadakan sebelumnya atau berdasarkan prinsip timbal balik, atas seorang yang dituduh melakukan tindak pidana kejahatan (tersangka, tertuduh, terdakwa) atau atas seorang yang telah dijatuhi hukuman atas kejahatan yang dilakukannya (terhukum, terpidana), oleh negara tempatnya melarikan diri atau berada atau bersembunyi, kepada negara yang memiliki yurisdiksi untuk mengadili atau menghukumnya, atas permintaan dari negara tersebut dengan tujuan untuk mengadili atau melaksanakan hukumannya.[4]
Penjelasan yang disebut I Wayan Parthiana diatas lebih tepat untuk mengetahui maksud dari ekstradisi secara keseluruhan. Dari pengertian itu bisa dilihat jika prosedur yang akan dilakukan sebuah negara untuk meminta penyerahan seseorang, harus berlandaskan prosedur yang ketat dan berbelit-belit, langkah ini diambil untuk menjamin bahwa hak asasi dari si pelaku kejahatan tersebut tetap dihormati. Hal ini tidak mengherankan sebab ekstradisi lahir dan berkembang selaras dengan pertumbuhan dan perkembangan hak-hak asasi manusia itu sendiri, sehingga bisa dipahami jika penghormatan atas hak asasi manusia sangat dominan didalamnya.

Unsur – Unsur Pembentuk Ekstradisi[5]
Ekstradisi mempunyai beberapa unsur utama, antara lain:
1. Unsur Subjek, yang terdiri atas:
Negara atau negara-negara yang memiliki yurisdiksi untuk mengadili atau menghukumnya. Negara-negara inilah yang sangat berkepentingan untuk mendapat kembali orang tersebut untuk atau dihukum atas kejahatan yang telah dilakukannya itu. Jumlah negara yang memiliki yurisdiksi ini bisa lebih dari satu negara. Untuk mendapatkan orang yang bersangkutan, negara ini harus mengajukan permintaan penyerahan kepada negara tempat orang itu berada atau bersembunyi. Negara atau negara-negara ini berkedudukan sebagai pihak yang meminta atau disebut ”negara-peminta” (the Requesting State).
Negara tempat si pelaku kejahatan (tersangka, tertuduh, terdakwa) atau si terhukum itu berada atau bersembunyi. Negara ini diminta oleh negara atau negara-negara yang memiliki yurisdiksi atau negara-peminta, supaya menyerahkan orang yang berada di wilayahnya itu, biasanya disebut ”negara-diminta” (the Requested State).
2. Unsur Objek, yaitu si pelaku kejahatan itu sendiri (tersangka, tertuduh, terdakwa, atau terhukum) yang diminta oleh negara-peminta kepada negara-diminta supaya diserahkan. Dia inilah yang dengan singkat disebut sebagai ”orang yang diminta”. Dia hanya sebagai objek saja yang menjadi pokok masalah antara kedua pihak. Tetapi sebagai manusia dia harus tetap diperlakukan sebagai subjek hukum dengan segala hak dan kewajibannya yang asasi, yang tidak boleh dilanggar oleh siapapun juga.
3. Unsur tata cara atau prosedur, yang meliputi tentang tata cara untuk mengajukan permintaan penyerahan maupun tata cara untuk menyerahkan atau menolak penyerahan itu sendiri serta segala hal yang ada hubungannya dengan itu. Penyerahan hanya dapat dilakukan, apabila diajukan permintaan untuk menyerahkan oleh negara-peminta kepada negara-diminta. Permintaan tersebut haruslah didasarkan pada perjanjian ekstradisi yang telah ada sebelumnya antara kedua belah pihak. Apabila perjanjian itu belum ada, juga bisa didasarkan pada asas timbal balik yang telah disepakati. Permintaan penyerahan itu sendiri harus diajukan secara formal kepada negara-diminta, sesuai dengan prosedur yang ditentukan dalam perjanjian ekstradisi atau hukum kebiasaan internasional.
4. Unsur tujuan, yaitu untuk tujuan apa yang bersangkutan dimintakan penyerahan atau diserahkan. Penyerahan itu dimintakan oleh negara-peminta kepada negara-diminta karena dia telah melakukan kejahatan yang menjadi yurisdiksi negara atau negara-negara peminta. Permintaan penyerahan atau penyerahan itu sendiri bertujuan untuk mengadili atau menghukum si pelaku kejahatan itu, sebagai realisasi dari kerjasama antar negara-negara tersebtu dalam menanggulangi dan memberantas kejahatan.

Asas - Asas Pokok Ekstradisi
Setelah dijelaskan unsur-unsur yang terdapat dalam ekstradisi, sebuah perjanjian ekstradisi juga mengandung beberapa asas pokok, yaitu:
1. Asas Kejahatan Ganda atau Double Criminality
Ekstradisi secara tegas mensyaratkan bahwa kejahatan yang dijadikan sebagai dasar untuk meminta penyerahan atas diri si pelaku oleh negara-peminta, haruslah juga merupakan kejahatan menurut hukum negara-diminta. Jadi baik negara-peminta maupun negara-diminta harus sama-sama memandang perbuatan orang yang diminta itu sebagai peristiwa pidana atau kejahatan.
Asas ini merupakan salah satu asas utama dalam prinsip dasar ekstradisi, sebab apabila negara-diminta melihat bahwa perbuatan yang dilakukan orang yang diminta itu bukan merupakan kejahatan menurut hukum nasionalnya, maka negara-diminta harus menolak permintaan ekstradisi dari negara-peminta.

2. Asas Kekhususan atau Asas Spesialitas
Negara-peminta dalam hal mengajukan permintaan kepada negara-diminta untuk menyerahkan orang yang disangka melakukan kejahatan, haruslah mengkhususkan pada kejahatan apa yang akan diadili oleh hukum negara-peminta nantinya. Sebagai contoh apabila dasar kejahatan yang diminta oleh negara-peminta terhadap seseorang itu adalah pembunuhan, maka negara-peminta tersebut haruslah mengadili atau menjatuhkan hukuman hanya terhadap kejahatan pembunuhan itu saja. Diluar dari kejahatan yang dijadikan alasan untuk meminta penyerahan tersebut, megara-peminta tidak boleh menjatuhkan hukuman terhadap orang tersebut.

3. Asas Tidak Menyerahkan Pelaku Kejahatan Politik
Permintaan penyerahan terhadap diri seseorang tidak diperbolehkan apabila kejahatan yang dijadikan dasar untuk meminta penyerahan adalah kejahatan politik. Pada awalnya kejahatan politik dan kejahatan biasa dapat dibedakan dengan mudah, namun yang terjadi adalah banyaknya kasus yang memperlihatkan bahwa kejahatan yang diluar tampak sebagai kejahatan biasa tetapi didalamnya terdapat motif-motif dan tujuan politik sehingga dianggap sebagai kejahatan politik.
Belakangan ini terdapat kecenderungan dari negara-negara untuk menghapuskan sifat politik dari suatu jenis kejahatan, agar kejahatan tersebut dipandang bukan sebagai kejahatan politik. Penghapusan tersebut ditegaskan dalam perjanjian-perjanjian ekstradisi bilateral maupun multilateral. Misalnya Perjanjian Ekstradisi Austria-Israel pasal 4 (1) secara tegas menyatakan bahwa Genocide seperti dinyatakan pada konvensi Genocide 1948 bukan merupakan kejahatan politik.[6]
Sebab banyak pelaku kejahatan seakan berlindung dibalik kejahatan politik untuk menghindari penyerahan, dan dengan dihapusnya sifat politik suatu kejahatan tersebut membuat negara-diminta mempunyai keterbatasan dalam menentukan apakah sebuah kejahatan tergolong sebagai kejahatan politik atau tidak.

4. Asas Tidak Menyerahkan Warga Negara
Asas ini memberikan kewenangan kepada negara untuk tidak menyerahkan warga negaranya sendiri yang dituduh melakukan kejahatan di dalam wilayah negara lain. Jika orang yang diminta adalah warga negara dari negara-diminta, maka negara tersebut berhak untuk menolak permintaan ekstradisi yang diajukan.
Kewarganegaraan mempunyai peranan penting karena menyangkut status seseorang. Negara memberikan hak-hak dan membebani kewajiban-kewajiban terhadap warga negaranya tetapi tidak bagi orang asing. Orang asing diperlakukan berbeda dengan warga negara sendiri. Tidak diserahkannya warga negara dari negara-diminta kepada negara-peminta berdasarkan pertimbangan bahwa negara mempunyai kewajiban untuk memberikan perlindungan hukum terhadap warga negaranya

5. Asas Non Bis In Idem
Yang dimaksud dengan asas ini adalah bahwa seseorang tidak boleh diadili dan dihukum lebih dari satu kali untuk satu kejahatan yang sama. Asas ini mempunyai arti penting bagi kepastian hukum terhadap si terhukum, sebab apabila dia telah dijatuhi hukuman oleh keputusan hakim dari pengadilan yang berwenang berlaku seterusnya. Asas ini menjamin penegakkan hak asasi manusia terhadap si pelaku.
Sebagai contoh seorang warga negara Malaysia melakukan pembunuhan terhadap seorang warga negara Cina di Indonesia. Berdasarkan asas teritorial Indonesia mempunyai yurisdiksi untuk mengadili tersangka tersebut demikian juga Malaysia berdasarkan asas nasionalitas aktif. Dalam hal ini Indonesia telah menjatuhkan hukuman terhadap warga negara Malaysia tersebut, kemudian Malaysia meminta penyerahannya kepada Indonesia. Karena pengadilan Indonesia telah menjatuhkan hukuman yang mengikat terhadap si pelaku, maka Indonesia harus menolak permintaan Malaysia dengan alasan kejahatan yang dijadikan dasar untuk meminta penyerahan sudah non bis in idem.


6. Asas Kadaluwarsa
Maksud dari asas ini adalah jika suatu peristiwa hukum terjadi sudah sekian lama dan selama ini tetap dibiarkan saja oleh semua pihak sehingga sudah dilupakan orang, maka setelah melewati jangka waktu tertentu sudah tidak bisa ditindaklanjuti kembali. Mengenai berapa lama jangka waktunya tergantung dari sistem hukum masing-masing negara.

Permulaan Ekstradisi
Pada permulaan tahun 1625 Grotius menyadari bahwa kebutuhan sosial dan kewajiban dari hukum alam, bahwa sebuah negara mampu mengadili penjahat kriminal di negaranya sendiri atau menyerahkannya kepada negara lain yang mempunyai kekuatan hukum untuk mengadili si pelaku kejahatan tersebut. Tetapi kewajiban ekstradisi ini tidak berdasar hukum resmi sampai kedua negara membuat sebuah perjanjian yang didalamnya terdapat kewajiban untuk menyerahkan seorang pelarian kejahatan. Walaupun tanpa adanya perjanjian ekstradisi, kedua negara tetap bisa menyerahkan pelaku berdasarkan prinsip sukarela. Pada perjanjian awal hanya kejahatan politik saja yang bisa dijadikan alasan untuk meminta ekstradisi, tetapi setelah Vattel pada tahun 1758 menerbitkan buku Droit des gens, kejahatan biasa juga dimasukkan kedalam sebuah perjanjian.[7]
Bentuk perjanjian awal tersebut yang menyebutkan hanya kejahatan politik saja yang bisa dijadikan alasan untuk meminta ekstradisi, sangat berbeda sekali dengan bentuk perjanjian modern saat ini, yang justru tidak menghendaki kejahatan politik sebagai alasan penyerahan. Ini bisa dilihat bahwa pada awal terciptanya ekstradisi, kejahatan politik saat itu lebih mendominasi dibanding jenis kejahatan lainnya.
Pada pertengahan abad ke 18, Prancis mempunyai perjanjian ekstradisi bilateral dengan seluruh negara tetangganya, kecuali Inggris Raya. Perjanjian pada tahun 1759 antara Prancis dan Wurttemberg merupakan bentuk perjanjian ekstradisi pertama di era modern.[8] Aturan dan prosedur yang dibuat pada perjanjian awal ini sama seperti hukum ekstradisi yang dipakai saat ini. Aturan yang dikehendaki adalah perjanjian ekstradisi bisa dilakukan melalui saluran diplomatik, atau paling tidak melalui otoritas perbatasan. Negara penuntut diharuskan membuat daftar tuduhan dan hukuman didalam tuntutannya.
Biasanya sebuah negara harus mempunyai Undang-Undang Ekstradisi Nasional terlebih dahulu sebelum membuat perjanjian ekstradisi dengan negara lain, tetapi Indonesia berbeda. Indonesia telah memiliki perjanjian ekstradisi dengan negara-negara tetangga seperti dengan Malaysia pada tahun 1974, dengan Philipina tahun 1976, dan dengan Thailand tahun 1978, sebelum membuat Undang-Undang Nomor 1 tahun 1979 tentang Ekstradisi.

Perjanjian Ekstradisi Indonesia – Singapura
Langkah Baru Membina Hubungan Kedua Negara

Hubungan Indonesia – Singapura
Indonesia dan Singapura mempunyai hubungan bilateral yang relatif pasang surut, kedua negara berusaha mewujudkan kepentingan nasionalnya masing-masing. Hubungan kedua negara sering diwarnai dengan pernyataan kontroversial mantan perdana menteri Singapura Lee Kuan Yew yang menyudutkan Indonesia, seperti ketika menganggap Indonesia sebagai sarang teroris, dan membuat merah hampir seluruh telinga pejabat-pejabat tinggi Indonesia. Ada keinginan untuk memutuskan hubungan diplomatik dengan Singapura yang diusulkan anggota DRR-RI.
Singapura mempunyai keinginan untuk memperluas wilayahnya dengan cara reklamasi pantai. Hal ini jelas akan menimbulkan masalah perbatasan dengan Indonesia dan Malaysia, di lain pihak pembangunan reklamasi pantai tersebut membutuhkan pasir yang tidak sedikit jumlahnya, dan pasir tersebut berasal dari Kepulauan Riau. Ekosistem Kepulauan Riau menjadi terancam akibat hal ini.
Selain itu, Singapura menolak pemberantasan kayu dan ikan dari Indonesia ke Singapura. Alasannya, pada saat masuk ke Singapura barang-barang tersebut membayar bea masuk, bukankah itu bisa dinamakan pemutihan? Pemerintah Indonesia lalu ingin meminta pembagian keuntungan dari hasil penjualannya, tetapi lagi-lagi ditolak oleh Singapura karena menganggap itu adalah urusan swasta.
Kemudian, belum transparannya laporan data perdagangan Singapura. Seperti negara-negara lainnya, Singapura setiap tahun selalu mengeluarkan data transaksi perdagangan dengan negara-negara lain, tetapi sering tidak muncul data perdagangan dengan Indonesia. Tidak transparannya pengungkapan data ini tentu bisa menimbulkan kesalahpahaman. Apakah memang sulit dilacak atau memang ada perdagangan gelap. Dengan ini, kecurigaan muncul terhadap pemerintahan Singapura.
Perubahan sikap Singapura baru terjadi ketika Lee Hsien Loong menjadi Perdana Menteri menggantikan Goh Chok Tong. BG Lee terlihat sekali ingin membina hubungan baik dengan Indonesia melalui pembicaraan perjanjian ekstradisi. Singapura sebagai negara yang mengandalkan sektor jasa dalam pertumbuhan ekonominya, sangat jelas membutuhkan hubungan baik dengan negara-negara tetangganya.

Perjanjian Ekstradisi Indonesia – Singapura
Indonesia dan Singapura bersepakat untuk memiliki perjanjian ekstradisi yang sudah dijajaki sejak tahun 1974.[9] Jarak Indonesia – Singapura yang hanya “sejengkal” menjadi sangat ironis ketika seorang koruptor yang diburu oleh Indonesia dan diduga bersembunyi di Singapura, sangat sulit ditangkap dan diadili di Indonesia karena tersangkut masalah perjanjian ekstradisi.
Tetapi satu hal yang pasti adalah bahwa perjanjian ekstradisi Indonesia – Singapura bukanlah penyelesaian mutlak untuk pemberantasan korupsi di Indonesia. Tindakan tegas dan cepat dari aparat untuk memburu para tersangka korupsi sangat dibutuhkan guna terciptanya penegakan hukum di negara kita.
Banyaknya koruptor kelas kakap yang berlindung di Singapura membuat perjanjian ekstradisi menjadi sangat penting, dan diharapkan pemerintah Singapura bisa berperan aktif dalam membawa mereka kembali ke Indonesia untuk diadili. Di antara para koruptor yang dikejar oleh Kejaksaan Agung untuk dieksekusi ke penjara menyangkut kasus penyelewengan dan penyimpangan dana Bantuan Likuiditas Bank Indonesia yang dikenal dengan kasus BLBI, antara lain Samadikun Hartono (Bank Modern), David Nusa Wijaya (Bank Umum Servitia), dan Bambang Sutrisno (Bank Surya), dan terakhir Maria Pauline Leumowa tersangka pembobol BNI dengan kerugian negara sebesar 1,7 triliun.[10]
Walaupun nama-nama tersebut telah diketahui keberadaannya, permintaan untuk menyerahkan orang-orang tersebut selalu terhambat karena ketiadaan perjanjian ekstradisi antara Indonesia dan Singapura. Perjanjian ekstradisi Indonesia dan Singapura juga akan menjadi tonggak yang tepat untuk mencegah terjadinya kasus-kasus serupa mengenai pemindahan dana-dana haram ke Singapura, sebab jika terjadi hal-hal yang demikian pemerintah Indonesia bisa mengambil langkah represif untuk menindak pelaku kejahatan tersebut agar diadili dan dihukum di Indonesia.

Keuntungan Singapura
Singapura memperoleh keuntungan besar dari keberadaan dana-dana dari oknum-oknum di Indonesia, bahkan keberadaan konglomerat yang melarikan diri dalam status terdakwa di Indonesia. Undang-undang investasi disana sangat “welcome” penanaman modal orang-orang asing, justru itu menjadi bagian penting untuk meningkatkan kesejahteraan disana. Negeri itu merupakan “safe haven” (tempat suaka aman). Padahal, banyak di antara mereka terlibat dalam kegiatan “safe-cracking” (pembongkaran peti besi alias manipulasi). Selamat, karena tidak adanya perjanjian ekstradisi antara kedua negara. Pihak berwajib Indonesia tidak bisa berbuat apa-apa. Pada masa lalu, di kalangan Pengamat Indonesia ada kesan, Singapura menunjukkan sikap “buying time” (mengulur-ulur waktu). Di pihak lain, ada juga kesan, pihak terkait Indonesia juga belum secara serius dan integrated (terpadu) berusaha mewujudkan perjanjian ekstradisi antara kedua negara.[11]
Sudah sejak lama Indonesia menginginkan perjanjian ekstradisi dengan Singapura, tetapi selalu ditolak oleh negara pulau tersebut. Karena ketiadaan perjanjian ekstradisi tersebut, seringkali menjadi penghalang terciptanya hubungan baik antara kedua negara.

Bentuk Perjanjian Ekstradisi
Perjanjian ekstradisi pada intinya mengatur penyerahan seseorang oleh suatu negara ke negara yang meminta orang itu diserahkan. Permintaan muncul karena yang bersangkutan disangka telah melakukan tindak pidana. Meskipun Indonesia telah memiliki Undang – Undang (UU) tentang Ekstradisi, yaitu UU Nomor 1 Tahun 1979, UU tersebut hanya efektif jika ada perjanjian ekstradisi dengan negara mitra.
Indonesia bersama negara-negara ASEAN lainnya pada bulan November 2004 telah menyepakati perjanjian mengenai Mutual Legal Assistance (atau bantuan hukum timbal balik), tetapi Mutual Legal Assistance ini hanya dianggap sebagai bentuk semangat kerja sama di antara negara-negara ASEAN untuk memerangi korupsi di negara masing-masing, sedangkan permasalahan ekstradisi menyangkut hubungan antar negara atau government to government.
Dalam menyusun list of crime dengan Singapura, Indonesia akan lebih berhati-hati memasukkan tindak kejahatan mana saja yang masuk dalam daftar. Jika merujuk pada UU No.1 tahun 1979 tentang ekstradisi, daftar tindak kejahatan yang terdapat dalam UU tersebut mempunyai banyak kekurangan untuk diterapkan dalam kondisi sekarang, karena munculnya berbagai bentuk kejahatan baru. Dalam UU Ekstradisi tahun 1979 disebutkan ada 32 jenis kejahatan yang bisa menjadi obyek ekstradisi. Tetapi di daftar itu tidak disebutkan soal jenis-jenis kejahatan mutakhir seperti pencucian uang, imigran gelap, dan lain sebagainya. Bukan berarti UU No.1 tahun 1979 harus diubah, karena Indonesia bisa menggunakan perjanjian internasional yang lain yang sudah ditandatangani.
Untuk kasus-kasus korupsi, pemerintah Indonesia harus lebih proaktif menyidik kekayaan pelaku korupsi yang berhasil melarikan diri ke luar negeri. Di antaranya, mengoptimalkan peran Pusat Pelaporan dan Analisa Transaksi Keuangan atau PPATK, serta aparat kepolisian. Kepolisian Indonesia sebenarnya telah mengantongi baik nama maupun alamat para pelaku tindak pidana korupsi yang lari ke luar negeri. Langkah polisi selalu kandas, karena tidak didukung perjanjian ekstradisi.[12] Selain itu perlu ditekankan keseriusan pemerintah terutama pihak kepolisian untuk bertindak cepat dalam menindaklanjuti kasus-kasus kejahatan yang dilakukan warga negara Indonesia seperti korupsi yang sangat merugikan keuangan negara. Langkah polisi harus pula didukung sepenuhnya oleh elemen-elemen lain yang berkaitan seperti Kejaksaan Agung ataupun Departemen Luar Negeri, agar penegakkan hukum yang dilakukan bisa menemui hasil yang maksimal.
Perjanjian ekstradisi merupakan langkah awal penegakan hukum, khususnya berkaitan dengan korupsi. Perjanjian ekstradisi antara Indonesia dengan negara lain dapat memberikan akses kepada penegak hukum Indonesia untuk menjangkau koruptor yang kabur ke negara terkait. Selama ini baik tersangka, terdakwa, maupun terpidana kasus korupsi sulit disentuh oleh tindakan hukum karena bersembunyi di luar negeri, jauh dari jangkauan penegak hukum Indonesia. Dengan adanya perjanjian ekstradisi, penegak hukum dapat menyentuh koruptor yang berada di negara yang bersangkutan berlandaskan perjanjian ekstradisi sebagai kepastian hukum bagi semua pihak.
Berdasarkan enam kali perundingan, Indonesia dan Singapura telah menyepakati 10 pasal perjanjian ekstradisi dari 18 pasal yang ada. Tetapi masih banyak hal yang perlu dibahas lebih lanjut karena berhubungan dengan sinkronisasi terhadap Undang-Undang di dalam negeri. Sehingga hal tersebut sudah menyangkut ke persoalan yang lebih teknis.[13] Diharapkan dalam waktu dekat perjanjian ini bisa dirampungkan, sebab kedua belah pihak telah menunjukkan itikad baik dalam merumuskan berbagai kesepakatan yang diinginkan.


Pembentukan Konvensi Ekstradisi ASEAN
Negara-negara anggota Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) telah banyak melakukan kerjasama di berbagai bidang yang saling menguntungkan di antara mereka. Kerjasama yang telah dilakukan juga meliputi bidang hukum yaitu dengan dibentuknya ASEAN LAW ASSOCIATION (ALA) yang merupakan organisasi internasional non-pemerintah (non-governmental organization), dimana disini sering dilakukan pertemuan-pertemuan para ahli hukum dari negara-negara anggota ASEAN.[14]
Dalam kerjasama hukum tersebut harus pula dipikirkan untuk membuat suatu hukum internasional regional dimana ia akan mencakup kaidah-kaidah hukum internasional yang tumbuh dan berkembang di dalam satu kawasan yang berlaku dan ditaati oleh negara-negara di kawasan tersebut. Dalam kaitannya dengan negara-negara di kawasan Asia Tenggara adalah perlu untuk membentuk hukum internasional regional Asia Tenggara yang harus dirumuskan dalam bentuk konvensi-konvensi regional Asia Tenggara.
Konvensi regional yang nantinya akan sangat berguna adalah dengan membentuk suatu konvensi ekstradisi ASEAN. Mengapa ekstradisi yang harus ditonjolkan di dalam kerjasama ini, diantaranya karena ekstradisi telah mengambil peranan penting dalam hukum nasional masing-masing negara anggota ASEAN, dimana ekstradisi erat kaitannya dengan membina hubungan baik dengan negara-negara lain. Kemudian beberapa negara anggota ASEAN telah terikat dalam perjanjian ekstradisi yang bersifat bilateral, akan lebih baik jika perjanjian-perjanjian diantara negara-negara itu dipadukan dengan sebuah konvensi ekstradisi yang akan saling melengkapi dan menunjang. Selain itu dengan semakin berkembang pesatnya kejahatan-kejahatan yang bersifat transnasional yang terjadi di kawasan Asia Tenggara, membuat konvensi ekstradisi ASEAN menjadi hal yang sangat dibutuhkan guna menanggulangi dan mencegah kejahatan tersebut terulang lagi.

Konvensi Multilateral
Pada konvensi multilateral menyangkut pelanggaran dalam kejahatan internasional, ekstradisi belum bisa dilihat sebagai alasan bagi sebuah negara untuk meminta penyerahan sebelum negara-negara peserta konvensi harus memasukkan kejahatan-kejahatan menurut karakter internasional tersebut kedalam sifat ekstradisi. Walaupun beberapa negara tidak terikat kedalam perjanjian bilateral diantaranya, konvensi multilateral ini bisa dilihat sebagai dasar hukum yang kuat untuk mengekstradisikan seorang pelanggar kejahatan.[15]
Penjelasan diatas menekankan bahwa isi dari konvensi multilateral harus mampu merangkum kejahatan-kejahatan internasional yang berkembang saat ini kedalam jenis-jenis kejahatan apa saja yang bisa dijadikan dasar untuk melakukan permintaan. Negara-negara peserta konvensi harus bisa menyepakati jenis-jenis kejahatan tersebut sehingga konvensi ini lebih komprehensif untuk mewujudkan sebuah dasar hukum yang tegas.
Beberapa kawasan lain di dunia telah memiliki konvensi ekstradisi regional seperti Perjanjian Ekstradisi Liga Arab tahun 1952, Konvensi Ekstradisi Eropa tahun 1957, Konvensi Ekstradisi Benelux antara Belgia, Nederland, Luxemburg tahun 1962, Konvensi Ekstradisi antar Amerika tahun 1981. Dengan beberapa contoh konvensi regional tersebut bisa menjadi referensi bagi negara-negara ASEAN untuk membentuk sebuah konvensi ekstradisi regional ASEAN.

Hambatan - Hambatan
Pembentukan konvensi ekstradisi ini nantinya tidak terlepas dari beberapa hambatan-hambatan diantaranya yaitu masih besarnya perbedaan sistem hukum dari masing-masing negara anggota ASEAN. Perbedaan sistem hukum ini berpengaruh terhadap perbedaan hukum nasional masing-masing negara termasuk hukum pidananya. Akibatnya akan sulit mencari kesepakatan tentang jenis-jenis kejahatan yang dapat dijadikan dasar untuk mengekstradisikan si pelaku tindak pidana tersebut, karena suatu perbuatan bisa digolongkan sebagai tindak pidana menurut hukum pidana negara yang satu tetapi bukan merupakan tindak pidana menurut hukum negara yang lain. Demikian sanksi atau ancaman hukuman terhadap suatu jenis tindak pidana berbeda antara hukum pidana negara yang satu dengan negara lainnya. Tetapi kendala ini bisa diatasi dengan merangkum terlebih dahulu perbuatan-perbuatan apa saja yang dapat digolongkan sebagai tindak pidana menurut hukum pidana seluruh negara anggota ASEAN. Kemudian menentukan tindak pidana yang mana saja yang disepakati sebagai dasar untuk meminta penyerahannya.
Kendala lainnya adalah situasi dan kondisi politik masing-masing negara anggota ASEAN yang relatif berbeda. Salah satunya adalah belum stabilnya situasi politik di Myanmar yang terkenal sebagai negara yang melakukan pelanggaran hak asasi manusia, dengan masih ditahannya pejuang HAM Myanmar Aung San Suu Kyi oleh pemerintahan junta militer disana. Selain itu juga isu penggulingan presiden Philipina Gloria Macapagal Arroyo yang dianggap melakukan manipulasi hasil pemilihan umum tahun 2004 yang kembali mengangkat dirinya sebagai presiden. Arroyo diindikasikan melakukan penyuapan terhadap pejabat komisi pemilihan umum dan kasusnya masih diselidiki hingga sekarang. Perbedaan situasi dan kondisi politik nasional ini tentu akan berpengaruh terhadap usaha untuk mencapai kesepakatan tentang substansi dan ruang lingkup dari konvensi ekstradisi itu nantinya.
Yang perlu ditekankan dari pembentukan konvensi ekstradisi ASEAN ini adalah kemauan dan keseriusan dari negara-negara anggota ASEAN untuk mencegah dan memberantas segala macam tindak pidana atau kejahatan-kejahatan dalam ruang lingkup regional Asia Tenggara, dengan bersungguh-sungguh untuk menindak setiap pelaku kejahatan dengan aturan hukum yang telah terdapat dalam hukum nasional masing-masing negara maupun berdasarkan konvensi-konvensi internasional lain yang telah disepakati bersama. Tanpa adanya kesungguhan dari negara-negara ASEAN, kejahatan yang bersifat internasional maupun transnasional tetap akan berkembang secara pesat dan merupakan momok utama dalam menciptakan kestabilan hukum di lingkungan ASEAN.
Walaupun ekstradisi bukan penyelesaian mutlak terhadap pemberantasan tindak pidana tersebut, ekstradisi bisa dilihat sebagai salah satu sarana untuk mencegah terjadinya kejahatan-kejahatan yang bersifat transnasional. Sebab disitu terdapat kepastian hukum yang melibatkan kerjasama negara-negara agar pelaku-pelaku tindak kejahatan itu bisa dihukum sesuai dengan aturan yang berlaku.

Bentuk Konvensi Ektradisi
Majelis Umum PBB pada tanggal 14 Desember 1990 dengan suara bulat telah menyetujui Resolusi Nomor 45/116 tentang Model Treaty on Extradition (Model Perjanjian tentang Ekstradisi) yang bisa dijadikan acuan atau referensi dalam membentuk perjanjian-perjanjian bilateral tentang ekstradisi maupun konvensi ekstradisi ASEAN. Jika ditinjau secara luas isinya Model Treaty ini pada prinsipnya tidak jauh berbeda dari perjanjian-perjanjian ekstradisi pada umumnya, didalamnya terdapat ketentuan-ketentuan yang sudah berlaku umum. Misalnya ketentuan tentng kewajiban untuk mengekstradisikan, penahanan sementara, penyerahan orang yang diminta, penyerahan yang ditunda atau yang bersyarat, penyerahan barang, aturan kekhususan, singgah (transit), dan ketentuan akhir.[16]
Model Treaty ini merupakan acuan terbaik untuk membentuk konvensi ekstradisi ASEAN, karena didalamnya terdapat pedoman-pedoman untuk membantu negara-negara anggota ASEAN dalam merundingkan apa saja yang harus disepakati dalam konvensi tersebut. Selain itu negara-negara yang telah memiliki perundangan-undangan ekstradisi dalam hukum nasionalnya juga bisa memperbaharui Undang-Undang Ekstradisinya sesuai dengan isi dan jiwa Model Treaty ini.

Modalitas Pembentukan Konvensi Ekstradisi
Dalam Declaration Of ASEAN Concord di Bali 24 Februari 1976 (Bali Concord I), 5 negara pendiri ASEAN telah menyepakati rencana-rencana kerja dalam lingkup kerjasama ASEAN dan salah satu pointnya dalam bidang politik berupa ”Study on how to develop judicial cooperation including the possibility of an ASEAN Extradition Treaty”. [17] Kemudian dalam forum ASEAN Ministerial Meeting (AMM) di Vientiane, Laos, 29 November 2004, telah disepakati ASEAN Security Community Plan Of Action, yang didalamnya terdapat penegasan kembali mengenai keinginan negara-negara anggota ASEAN untuk membentuk sebuah Perjanjian Ekstradisi ASEAN dengan rencana kerja ”Identification of ASEAN political decisions to establish Extradition Treaty and bilateral Extradition Treaties between ASEAN Member Countries; and Establishment of a working group on ASEAN Extradition Treaty under the purview of ASEAN Senior Law Officials Meeting (ASLOM).”[18] Dari dua rencana kerja tersebut perlu digaris bawahi bahwa tugas kelompok kerja yang dibentuk untuk menyusun perjanjian ekstradisi ASEAN cukup berat mengingat perbedaan sistem hukum di masing-masing negara ASEAN, tetapi ini merupakan tantangan yang harus ditempuh demi terciptanya sebuah sistem hukum di ASEAN.
Setelah disetujuinya ASEAN Security Community (ASC) sebagai salah satu pilar ASEAN Community 2020, kita harus menunggu peran ASEAN Senior Law Officials Meeting (ASLOM), ASEAN Law Association (ALA), atau forum ASEAN Law Ministerial Meeting (ALAWMM) yang telah dibentuk sejak tahun 1986 untuk mempelajari dan mengidentifikasikan sistem hukum di masing-masing negara ASEAN agar bisa diselaraskan menjadi sebuah kaidah hukum internasional yang bersifat regional dan menjadi dasar untuk pembentukan perjanjian ekstradisi ASEAN, selama jangka waktu sampai sebelum tahun 2020.
Perjanjian ini merupakan sarana efektif bagi negara-negara anggota ASEAN untuk mewujudkan kestabilan hukum dan keamanan kelak. Jika perjanjian ekstradisi ini terbentuk, merupakan sebuah kredit point yang sangat berharga bagi kemajuan kerjasama antara negara-negara anggota ASEAN dalam mendukung terciptanya komunitas ASEAN di tahun 2020.








Daftar Pustaka

- Charles G. Fenwick, International Law, Fourth Edition, 1971
- Christopher L. Blakesley, Terrorism, Drugs, International Law, and the Protection of Human Liberty, Transnational Publisher, New York
- D. W. Greig, International Law, Second Edition, Butterworths, London, 1976
- G. I. Tunkin, International Law, A Textbook, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1986
- I Wayan Parthiana, Ekstradisi dalam Hukum Internasional dan Hukum Nasional Indonesia, Penerbit Mandar Maju, Bandung, 1990
- I Wayan Parthiana, Hukum Pidana Internasional dan Ekstradisi, Yrama Widya, Bandung, 2004
- Mohd. Burhan Tsani, Hukum dan Hubungan Internasional, Penerbit Liberty, Yogyakarta, 1990

- ASEAN Political Documents, ASEAN Secretariat, 2003
- ASEAN Documents Series 2004, ASEAN Secretariat, 2005

- Sinar Harapan, Sabtu 19 November 2005

- http://http://www.mediaindonesia.co.id//
- http://http://www.antara.co.id//
- http://http://www.dephan.go.id//
- http://http://www.rnw.nl//




[1] Charles G. Fenwick, International Law, Fourth Edition, 1971, hal 388
[2] D. W. Greig, International Law, Second Edition, Butterworths, London, 1976, hal 408
[3] Mohd. Burhan Tsani, Hukum dan Hubungan Internasional, Penerbit Liberty, Yogyakarta, 1990,
hal 57
[4] I Wayan Parthiana, Ekstradisi dalam Hukum Internasional dan Hukum Nasional Indonesia, Penerbit Mandar Maju, Bandung, 1990, hal 12-13
[5] Ibid hal 13-16
[6] I Wayan Parthiana, Hukum Pidana Internasional dan Ekstradisi, Yrama Widya, Bandung, 2004,
hal 50
[7] Charles G. Fenwick, op.cit, hal 389
[8] Christopher L. Blakesley, Terrorism, Drugs, International Law, and the Protection of Human Liberty, Transnational Publisher, New York , hal 182
[9] http://www.mediaindonesia.co.id/, akses data 12 April 2005
[10] http://www.antara.co.id/, akses data 12 April 2005
[11] http://www.dephan.go.id/, akses data 13 April 2005
[12] http://www.rnw.nl/, akses data 13 April 2005
[13] Sinar Harapan, Sabtu 19 November 2005, hal 9
[14] I Wayan Parthiana, Hukum Pidana Internasional dan Ekstradisi, op.cit, hal 187
[15] G. I. Tunkin, International Law, A Textbook, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1986, hal 370
[16] Ibid hal 212
[17] Declaration Of ASEAN Concord, 24 Februari 1976, ASEAN Political Documents, ASEAN Secretariat, 2003, hal 14
[18] ASEAN Security Community Plan Of Action, Annex, ASEAN Documents Series 2004, hal 53

ASEAN Security Community As The Mechanism of Conflict Resolution

ASEAN Security Community as The Mechanism of Conflict Resolution

Angga Radian Pally

“A Security Community exist when a group of countries have forged a sense of collective identity, meaning they will settle differences without resorting to force. The mantra here is renunciation of the use of force. In this regard, it is important for ASEAN to develop a higher degree of confidence and trust, by which members no longer perceive threats as coming from within the community.”

(Makarim Wibisono)



Introduction
Since ASEAN was formed in August 8 1967, Indonesian government always put ASEAN in the higher precedence. Not only because Indonesia as one of the founder of ASEAN, but also knew that ASEAN will bring a new level of diplomacy, especially in South East Asia region. Nowadays, ASEAN still exist as a solid regional organization, which bring all of the aspect of political development in ASEAN member countries including Indonesia. ASEAN survived as the non – block organization in cold war era with keeping the values of ASEAN itself and the principle of non - intervention. ASEAN always be a portrait of South East Asia Community when they were faced with the cold war pressured.
Now ASEAN become ten members with giving us explanations that each of South East Asian states seek ASEAN as a strategic organization with open regionalism, which can carry the national interest, to be implemented in international relations. Foreign Minister for the Republic of Indonesia, Nur Hassan Wirayudha said in his speech, that ASEAN still got the highest priority in Indonesian diplomacy, especially when Indonesia become ASEAN Standing Committee in 2003.[1] According the agreement in Bali Concord II on October 7-8th 2003, for the purpose of ensuring durable peace, stability and share prosperity in the region, ASEAN established ASEAN Community 2020 with “three pillars” – the ASEAN Security Community (Indonesia), the ASEAN Economic Community (Singapore), and the ASEAN Socio-Culture Community (Philippines).
Indonesia giving their role in ASEAN and its region, to serve and implementing the needs of the region. This role gives some credits to Indonesia to have some bargaining in the international relation. Since Indonesia has declared themselves as independence country in August 17th, 1945, Indonesia always active in international relations including bilateral and multilateral meeting. When cold war influenced the pacific countries including Asia, political constellations in Asia has changed also in South East Asia. Indonesia, as the region most powerful nation at that time, feels that the region of South East Asia needs to be stronger in relationship and cooperation. That is why Indonesia and four other countries (Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand) needed to establish one regional organization to prevent the influence of cold war itself. According Bangkok Declaration on August 8th 1967, Indonesia represented by Mr. Adam Malik, Malaysia (Tun Abdul Razak), Philippines (Narcisco Ramos), Singapore (Rajaratnam) and Thailand (Thanat Khoman) declared ASEAN.[2] This organization was established to impetus the economic corporations between ASEAN member countries. Since it was esthablished ASEAN always focus on economic corporation, because ASEAN needs to make the economic in region stronger and keep in stability. In running the organizations, ASEAN always facing the pressure from cold war and seem ASEAN needs to make other corporation besides the economy that is to create stability in region between ASEAN member and non ASEAN member country such as Treaty of Amity and Corporations (TAC) in 1976.
Treaty of Amity and Corporations as political corporations besides economy, in order to strengthen the stability in region. TAC includes the ASEAN partner country to make the political will to contribute to their strength, solidarity and closer relationship. According the Article 2 of TAC, every member should put the high respect for the independence, sovereignty, equality, territorial integrity and national identity.[3] They also need to keep the non – interference in the internal affairs of one another and renunciation of the threat or use of force. Furthermore, TAC was created as a concept for making an effective corporation among the member to imperative submissive agreement reached. With TAC, ASEAN member can keep the region from the threat of interference and use of force. Actually ASEAN has the mechanism to dispute the internal conflict among the member, that is High Council. But unfortunately, High Council was not effective to implemented, because the issue was too sensitive if they wanted to bring it on High Council. With the spirit within TAC and Bali Concord in February 24, 1976. ASEAN also forming the ARF (ASEAN Regional Forum) in 1995 to maintain the political security in the Asia - Pacific region[4]. Now ARF has 23 members, which has the interest in the region. ASEAN Regional Forum was formulated as the dialogue mechanism to make a better relationship between ASEAN members and ASEAN partnership country. ARF seek more further about the world political constellations such as economy corporation, political corporation, and keeping the stability of security in the region.

ASEAN Security Community
After Cold war was ended in 1991, a political constellation in the world has changed and it also happened in Asia. It gives more challenge to ASEAN for keeping the regionalism and ASEAN existence in international relations. Therefore, according to Bali Concord II, ASEAN makes three pillars to strive the ASEAN Community in 2020. Indonesian has role to bring the concept for ASC (ASEAN Security Community) with keeping the Principe of national sovereignty, sovereign equality, non-interference, territorial integrity, national identity, shared responsibility and peaceful cooperation for mutual benefits among nations in Southeast Asia and renunciation of nuclear weapons and other response of mass destruction and avoidance of arms race in Southeast Asia. The problem among ASEAN member countries such as trafficking and the issue about terrorism, gives the reason to Indonesia for taking actions by making the concept of ASC. ASEAN should to make the formula to prevent the terrorism and transnational crime, which is happening now in ASEAN member’s countries. That is why, when Indonesia become the ASEAN Standing Community, Indonesia made the formula to prevent and solving the problem among ASEAN member, which known as ASEAN Security Community.

Security Concept Before ASC in Southeast Asia
Security Community in ASEAN is different with alignment pact such NATO. NATO was established for encouraged the anticommunist democratic country in North Atlantic to face the communism influenced brought by Warszawa Pact. ASC is not a pact but giving more concentrate into regional security among the members. Regional stability must be higher priority in implementation of ASC. Before ASEAN established in 1967, there was some treaty organization in South East Asia like Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) in 1955. Initially composed of the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Australia, Philippines, New Zealand, Pakistan and Thailand. But SEATO was failed to establish security Community in the region because its membership was composed of only two states in the South East Asia: Philippines and Thailand[5]. Prior to SEATO’s formation, Australia, New Zealand and the United States had formed the ANZUS Alliance in Treaty signed in 1951. The ANZUS Treaty was never invoked; it even created tension between Australia and New Zealand[6].
In 1961, the Philippines, Thailand and Malaysia formed the Association for Southeast Asia (ASA) to pursue regional cooperation. But unfortunately, ASA suffered its demise in 1962 when the Philippines pursued its claim to Sabah. To revive the spirit of community building in Southeast Asia, Malaysia, Philippines and Indonesia formed MAPHILINDO.[7] It was also disbanded when Malaysia and Indonesia engaged in Confrontation. Nonetheless, ASA and MAPHILINDO became the forerunners of the Association of Southeast Asian nations (ASEAN).
ASEAN Security Community as a brilliant idea that contained ASEAN needs to solve the problem between ASEAN members. According to the Indonesian Foreign Affair Spokesperson, Marty Natalegawa, ASEAN always sweep the sensitive political and security issues under the carpet.[8] With those arguments, without any doubt ASEAN should make the formula to solve the issue between the members of ASEAN because the ASEAN mechanism like High Council could not run effectively. ASEAN eventually has made some cooperation between the member and also other countries in the region. In 1971, ASEAN declared Zone of Peace, Freedom, And Neutrality (ZOPFAN), Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) in 1976. ASEAN Declaration on the South China Sea in 1992, ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in 1995 and Treaty of the Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapon Free Zone (SEANWFZ) in 1995.
ASC is not a military pact and alignment concept even though ASC military relation can happen somehow. ASC only concentrate in regional security under the police corporation. Security means not only for the military and prevent the war, but also include the regional issue such transnational crime, terrorism and extradition. For that reason, Indonesia makes the ASC Plan of Action (PoA) as the mechanism of ASC. For making this paper scientific, the author also include the theory which relevant with the theme. Security Community Theory from Karl Deutsch explained the security community from the states and power sides.


Security Community Theory

“A Security regime, as Stein points out, normally describes a situation in which the interests of the actors ‘are neither wholly compatible nor wholly competitive. Indeed, a security regime may develop within an otherwise adversarial relationship in which the use of force is inhibited by the existence of a balance of power or mutual deterrence situation…. A security community, on the other hand, must be based on a fundamental, unambiguous and long-term convergence of interests among the actors in the avoidance of war”.[9] akan ditambahkan dengan teori yang dikasih Echo
According the security theory from Karl Deutsch, security community must be the long – term of convergence of interest in avoiding the war. It means ASC must carry the stability of region and preventing the war with renunciation of the use of force. That is why in ASC Plan of Action, it contained the solutions to prevent the war and keeping the peace in the region. ASC Plan of Action was made to implement the concept of ASC with also keep the ASEAN principle of “non – interference and consensus” and with ASEAN way. In order to explain more further about ASC Plan of Action, the author try to describes ASC Plan of Action with contained the political development, shaping and sharing norms, conflict prevention, conflict resolution, post conflict peace building and implementing mechanism.

ASEAN Security Community Plan of Action

I. Political Development
One of the main objectives of the ASEAN Security Community as envisaged in Bali Concord II is to bring ASEAN political and security cooperation to a higher plane. ASEAN member countries shall promote political development in support of ASEAN leader shared the vision and common values to keep the peace, stability, democracy and prosperity in the region. This is the highest political commitment that serve as basic for ASEAN political cooperation. A conducive political environment will ensure the process of keeping the peace and stability in the region. All of member countries must realise that peaceful processes will only survive with cooperation, democratic and harmonic relations between the members of ASEAN and refraining from the use of military actions to solving the problem.

II. Shaping and Sharing Norms
Shaping and sharing norms aim to achieving a standard of common values and good conducted among members of ASEAN Community, consolidating and strengthening ASEAN solidarity, cohesiveness and the use of “we feeling”. Shaping and sharing norms have fundamental principles, that is:
Non – alignment;
Fostering and peace oriented attitudes of ASEAN member countries;
Conflict resolution through non – violent means;
Renunciations of nuclear weapons and other mass destruction and avoidance of arms race in South East Asia.
Renunciations of the threat or use of force.[10]

III. Conflict Prevention
Conflict prevention was proposed to increase the security cooperation among the member of ASEAN with confidence building measure / CBM, preventive diplomacy, and increasing cooperation about non- traditional issues. The objectives of conflict prevention shall be:
To strengthen confidence and trust within the community;
To mitigate tensions and prevent disputes from arising between or among member country as well as between member countries and non – ASEAN countries;
To prevent they escalation of existing disputes.[11]

IV. Conflict Resolution
It is essential that any disputes and conflict involving ASEAN member countries be resolved in a peaceful way to promoting peace, security and stability in the region. This element was order to force the ASEAN member countries to choose the regional mechanism in solving the internal conflict. While continuing the use of national, bilateral, and international mechanism, ASEAN member countries shall endeavour to use the existing regional dispute settlement mechanism and processes in the political and security areas.

V. Post Conflict Peace Building
Post – conflict peace building seeks to create the condition for a sustainable peace and to prevent the resurgence of conflict. This element was form to see the progress after the conflict has been solved. This element including the establishment human aid, monitoring and evaluation every peace activity after the conflict. ASEAN activity related to post – conflict peace building shall includes the establishment of appropriate mechanism and mobilization resources.

VI. Implementing Mechanism
As we know that ASEAN has lots of concept but in running the concept sometimes the implementations was not too effective. Learning by the lesson, ASC Plan of Action was included the implementing mechanism to ensure the implementation of ASC Plan of Action is effective, the following measures will be undertaken :
1. The AMM (ASEAN Ministerial Meeting) shall take the necessary follow-up measures to implement this plan of action including consultation and coordination with other relevant ASEAN ministerial bodies, to set up ad-hoc groups as appropriate, and to report annually the progress of implementation to the ASEAN Summit as well as to introduce new measures and activities to strengthen the ASEAN Security Community.
2. The AMM shall undertake overall review of progress of Plan of Action. The AMM shall inscribe permanently an agenda item.
3. The Secretary – General of ASEAN shall assist the ASEAN Chair in monitoring and reviewing the progress of implementation of this Plan of Action.[12]

From all of the mechanism, ASC seem have no obstacles to implement but as we know every member of ASEAN has their own perspective and interest in the region. ASC Plan of Action can run effectively with cooperation, harmonic relation between the ASEAN member (We feeling), and keep the ASEAN way in order to prevent the use of force. Hopefully, ASEAN members realize that every problem has the way to solve, and keeping the good relations is the key to keep the solidarity among ASEAN member. The existence of ASEAN is very importance nowadays, because ASEAN as one of the success regional organization in the world besides European Union, and also ASEAN as the regional organization in South East Asia which can provide the needs of its member and keeping the stability of peace and security.
The unique of ASEAN is that ASEAN is open regionalism with difference culture and perspectives among the member but still exist until now. In the future ASEAN will face different challenge from all of the side of the world with difference issues and pressures. In this kind of situation, ASEAN is expected to be a solid regionalism with effective implementation of the mechanism including ASEAN Security Community. ASEAN Security Community as the one of three pillars in ASEAN Community, still in the process now. Because the implementation of ASC needs time and understanding among the members country of ASEAN specially when they facing their national interest in the region. For example Myanmar military junta still arrested Aung Sang Syu Kyi, the Myanmar’s democratic activist. It is related with the human right and the democratic issue within the ASC mechanism.
In solving the Myanmar case, ASEAN tried to make a better solution with keeping the Principe of ASEAN way like non-interference and cooperation. ASEAN had sent their delegates to persuade the leader to release Aung Sang Suu Kyi. ASEAN also put the case in every higher meeting like ASEAN Ministerial Meeting, ARF, ASEAN SOM (Senior Officer Meeting), etc. It was a concrete step from ASEAN for building democracy in Myanmar. In reducing the pressures from other states, ASEAN keep pursuing Myanmar with soft term. Myanmar had responded the ASEAN consideration for the case, but still the decision maker is depend on Military Junta. Military Junta had a strength relationship with Western Countries such as United States and European Union.
Those countries had giving their economic embargo related with Myanmar case. They were afraid if Myanmar had their role to leading ASEAN (ASEAN Standing Committee) in 2006 after Malaysia, the democratic system in ASEAN especially in building the Human Right enforcement, will having so many resistance. But finally Myanmar giving the chance to lead ASEAN to the next member, or passing the rolling system. It’s a big surprise for US, EU and ASEAN also. Myanmar realized that they were in the hard position in region and the domestic. Myanmar has put the concentration on democratizations and internal needed.But the we have to give a big support to Myanmar decision and keeping Myanmar Role as the ASEAN member.
Actually, according to ASC mechanism in conflict prevention, we have to mitigate tensions and prevent disputes from arising between or among member country as well as between member country and non-ASEAN countries, and more important is to strengthen confidence and trust within the community. So, ASEAN has their own way in solving the case, and the mechanism seek the case with cooperation without any intervention straight to force the Myanmar government. Even though ASC mechanism was not run effectively in implementation, but here we can see how ASEAN have the better way in solving the problem especially between the ASEAN member.
In the other case like Ambalat block in East Kalimantan, we can see the high tensions between Indonesia and Malaysia. Indonesia was upset and angry with Malaysia claimed the Ambalat block. Malaysia Claim the Block based on the map, which Malaysia made in 1979. Indonesia also claims the block since with UNCLOS 1982, the national constitutions and effective occupation with the explorations since 1962. Both countries were sending the troops to keep the territory and they had some actions in the sea but not until making a war. Both countries finally had made the decision to overcome the conflict with bilateral mechanism. Malaysia inviting Indonesia to seat together in dialogue in order to solve the conflict. It is a diplomatic ways to find better solutions for both countries. But unfortunately, both countries were not using the ASC mechanism effectively (such High Council), because they might thing that bilateral diplomacy was the better solution for the conflict, although until know still on process.
ASC can run effectively if all of the members not only understand and ratified the agreement but also implementations. Regional or multilateral consensus brings us the democratic ways in solving the conflict around the region. But as we know in running the mechanism, its need time to implemented, especially when we are facing the conflict between the member. But that was supposed to do when we living in one area with it purposed. In my opinion, ASC with Plan of Actions can be effective to implemented in several years ahead. Because now all of the members still preparing themselves to fulfilling the needs of criteria and also the mechanism, such as law enforcement, transforming the data, cooperation and adopting the ASC Plan of Action.
ASC as one of the pillars for ASEAN Communities 2020 is the main subject to reach the ASEAN Vision. ASC is the mechanism for keeping the stability in the region especially in political and security. Global issues such as terrorism, transnational crimes, extradition and human right were included in ASC mechanism Plan of Action. Its mean all of the threat was being anticipated with the solution refers to ASEAN values. ASC was formulated to overcome the issues in Southeast Asia including counter terrorism which now becoming the common issues in the world beside human right. ASEAN leaders knew that if the issues were not being solved, it would be endangering the solidity of ASEAN member and also the stability in Southeast Asia.
ASEAN even though has lots of concept which with less implementation, but we can see with clearly the successes of ASEAN. ASEAN can keep the stability in the region including the security cooperation. The internal conflict between the members could not make the ASEAN solidarity become weak. Instead, ASEAN always has the stronger regionalism with the comprehensive mechanism and cooperation. ASEAN Vision 2020 with three pillars including ASEAN Security Community will bring ASEAN to a new level of regionalism into ASEAN Community. Every member of ASEAN realizes that collective interest must be in the highest priority. ASEAN member always keeping the solidity with ASEAN way, even though many problem were swept under the carpet. But it also aims to reduce the tensions and keeping the region from the threat of use of force.
ASEAN Security Community can run effectively if all of the member of ASEAN still in commitment to implement all of the aspect of ASC. Each of ASC Plan of Action has the target of time where it can be accomplished. If the concept was effective, ASEAN will have a stronger regionalism in 2020 and the community of ASEAN will be formed. In Indonesian perspective, ASEAN still in the highest priority because Indonesia as one of the founder of ASEAN feel that ASEAN must be exist and become a major regionalism specially in Asia. Indonesia has giving the entire component to ASEAN since it was established until now. The name of ASEAN itself was coming from Adam Malik, Indonesian Foreign Minister at that time. ASC as the security concept was pure from Indonesian idea for the regional of ASEAN. The values of ASC are very appropriate to the entire member of ASEAN because it’s contained the solution for the problem among the region. ASC has the mechanism for the transnational crime, including money laundering and human trafficking, extradition and counter terrorism. If ASC can be effective, so that ASEAN will be a stronger regionalism with the stability of security and solid cooperation. ASC will affirm the AEC (ASEAN Economic Community) and ASCC (ASEAN Social Culture Community). The economy of ASEAN will growth faster and the problem between the member can be diminished, because ASEAN has the mechanism from ASC for keeping the stability and solving the threat in the region.





Bibliography




- ASEAN Documents Series, ASEAN Publications 2004.

- ASEAN Political Documents, ASEAN Secretariat, 2003.

- ASEAN Reader, Institute of South East Asian Studies, Singapore. 1992.

- Banloi, Rommel C, The ASEAN Regional Forum and Security Community Building in The Asia Pacific : Lesson From Europe. Quezon City: Center for Asia Pacific Studies, 1999.

- Deutsch , Karl, et al.. Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International
Organization in the Light of Historical Experience. New York: Greenwood Press
Publishers, 1969.

- Indonesian Foreign Minister Speech in the end of 2003, Foreign Affair Publishing, 2004.

- Leifer, Michael, “The ASEAN Regional Forum: Extending ASEAN’s Model of Regional Security”, Adelphi Paper 320. London: Oxford University Press, 1996.

- Natalegawa, Marty, “Realisasi Visi ASEAN 2020” papper, Jakarta July 14th 2004. secretariat 2003.

- Sjamsumar Dam, “Kerjasama ASEAN, Latar Belakang, Perkembangan dan Masa Depan”, Ghalia Indonesia, Jakarta. 1996.
- Yalem J. Ronald, “Regional Security Communities and World Order”, in George W.Keeton, The Yearbook of International Affair 1979. London. 1979.

[1] Indonesian Foreign Minister Speech in the end of 2003, Foreign Affair Publishing, 2004.
[2] ASEAN Political Documents, ASEAN Secretariat, 2003.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Michael Leifer, “The ASEAN Regional Forum: Extending ASEAN’s Model of Regional Security”, Adelphi Paper 320. London: Oxford University Press, 1996.
[5] Rommel C Banloi, The ASEAN Regional Forum and Security Community Building in The Asia Pacific : Lesson From Europe. Quezon City: Center for Asia Pacific Studies, 1999.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ronald Yalem, “Regional Security Communities and World Order”, in George W.Keeton, The Yearbook of International Affair 1979. London. 1979
[8] Marty Natalegawa, , “Realisasi Visi ASEAN 2020” paper, Jakarta July 14th 2004.
[9] Karl Deutsch, Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International
Organization in the Light of Historical Experience. New York: Greenwood Press
Publishers, 1969.


[10] ASEAN Documents Series, ASEAN Publications 2004.
[11] Ibid.
[12] ASEAN Documents Series, ASEAN Publications 2004.