During a press conference by the Indonesian Women’s Coalition moderated by Mike Verawati on Tuesday (17/06), Nursyahbani Katjasungkana states that she tolerates one version of history writing. For 32 years, the people have been fed with information on 1965 incident by the military – a version of the State interpretation of political event. She also suggests that the Indonesian government denies the rape in May 1998 as the report and its attachments were presented at the United Nations Assembly.

Nursyahbani believes that the rape in May 1965 was a political incident. There should be follow-up actions after the report was coming out of the United Nations, the Human Rights organisations in Indonesia, and the volunteer team of the Fact-Finding Team (TGPF). The Indonesian government should have conducted a legal investigation, yet the fact was that Wiranto refused the rape allegation. Then Police Chief, Roesmanhadi also refused the allegation. "Now after 27 years, we should have been able to make a decision to follow-up on the crime against humanity, when we read the reports issued by the United Nations," she says.

Fadli Zon’s statement only continue the impunity. If we do not address it, then we are neglecting the 32year New Order history.

Within the context of Indonesia’s law enforcement and politics, Fadli Zon has misled the public on the incident in May 1998. The recommendation of the Fact-Finding Team is clear – to demand the Indonesian Government to re-visit the rape incident in May 1998. Nursyahbani says there are proves regarding provocateurs. In Solo, the military was the provocateur. That also happened simultaneously in Jakarta, Palembang, Makasar, Surabaya, and Malang.

The second resource person, Usman Hamid from Amnesty Internasional expresses his view with regards to Fadli Zon’s latest statement that says that he condemns the bullying and torture of women in the past, which still happens to this day. Usman says that this is positive, although it does not clarify his position regarding the rape in May 1998.

The statement made by the Minister of Cultural Affairs – re. his views that the rape was nothing but a rumour – is premature and is muddied by the questions “where?” and “when?”

Usman suggests that this is a misogynist feminist talk. Women victims of rape are labeled in a negative term and Fadli Zon has a racist background. He should have realised that any person who experiences violence has to deal with trauma.

Gang rape is a term used for mass rape. Rape is a mass rape when it inflicts trauma on civilian population. It is mass rape when there are multiple perpetrators, when the victim is one person.

Other resource person, Eva Sundari affirms that women should not be erased from historical narrative. The victims have faces – they are wives, mothers, and sisters.
Eva says that Gus Dur has apologised. President Habibie had apologised. Eva believes that we can have justice when truth is revealed. Eva suggests that re-writing history should incorporate the victims’ perspective.

Another resource person, Andi Achdian says that history re-writing must be informed by ethics. This is what people has feared would happen with regards to Fadli Zon’s statement. Why did the government not publish a research report that women’s bodies were treated as objects? "we would see how they would write it this time. There should have been one ethical awareness we must keep when writing history. There is still an unsolved problem – that of the incident in May 1998. We must reject this history re-writing," says Andi Achdian.

Kanti W. Janis tells about the incident in May 1998, about his father, Roy BB Janis being asked to help by his many Chinese Indonesian friends. Kanti says that Fadli Zon’s statement is a denial of history, it is a fatal mistake. His effort is systematic in erasing collective memory. Past human rights violation perpetrators were people in power then.
She adds that Fadli Zon was a good boy for Cendana. Kanti asks all activists to continue voicing the issue because it is just ridiculous to deny historical truth. She says unambiguously that Fadli Zon should be terminated from his post and the history re-writing should also stop – how can literary sources be singular, when we are already conditioned to have low literacy. (Ast)