CO07117 | Counter-Terrorism in Indonesia: Velvet-Glove Approach Works

Can the same effect be achieved by questioning them in places other than the cell, where they should rightly dwell, such as by bringing them to cafe or inviting them to a gathering? While there is no clear answer, in the language of human interaction, it is more probable that one will reveal more to someone one trusts rather than someone who tries to exercise his authority over others. The establishment of the personal bond is influenced by the local culture of interaction. In this instance, it is helpful to examine the anti-terror department’s relationship with the detainees with the concept of patron-client relationship, which is especially pronounced in Southeast Asia. Without the understanding of this concept, where proximity to the one in authority is the key to rewards for the obedient, the unconventional treatment of the convicts makes little sense.

A cultural approach

The Police’s course of action towards Imron and Mubarok can be seen as a replacement of a patron- client relationship in which the role of the patron was occupied by the leader of the terrorist network or cell. By extending acts such as allowing for the terror convicts’ reunion with their families and rendering financial assistance, the police are replacing the leaders of the extremist groups as the convict’s new patrons, who traditionally ensured the livelihood of their clients’ families. By conducting prayer sessions among inmates, Brigadier General Surya Dharma acted as a new spiritual leader in their lives, a role that traditional patrons held. Replacement of the old patron is the key in the anti- terror department’s strategy. And the convicts are restricted to only one patron — the police — in the course of their detention. If the patron treats them well, as is the case, there is no reason for the new relationship not to be mutually satisfactory. It helps also when convicts are fully convinced of their new mission to stop terrorist acts and give their cooperation willingly. Thus re-formulating the patron- client relationship in this way must therefore be seen as a locally-specific and important aspect in counter-terrorism in Indonesia…

It can of course be argued that such actions are contrary to the impersonal system of justice. Sociologists S.N. Eisenstadt and Louis Roniger wrote: “The (patron-client) relations established are not fully legal or contractual; they are often opposed to the official laws of the country and are based more on informal-although tightly binding- understandings.” In other words, to get at the information about terrorist networks, using the legal framework alone is sometimes insufficient. Establishment of new personal relationships embedded in the existing social system in the local context can be helpful, if well employed. The congregational breaking of fast in someone’s comfortable house definitely yields more results than a celebration in a dark cell.

The outcome so far

And the result? Many terror suspects have been arrested, most notably the arrest of Dujana in June this year. Some had been killed during counter-terror operations and others had become valuable informants to the police about the networks and their operations. Although no public information is available about the direct linkage of the arrests to the information given by any terror suspect, it is not implausible to infer that no small part was played by such establishment of personal relationship with the detainees. Imron said that he has been helping the police investigation these two years as he understood the extremists’ thinking and organisation. To the role played by the police, he had this to say: “If the police don’t handle us the way Surya Dharma handles us, people who still have the radical thinking will try to spread their message outside the prison, or even try to organise a terrorist action. At the moment, I don’t see anything like that.”