The National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) has called for the acceleration of law enforcement efforts related to the May 1998 incident, stressing the need for legal certainty, justice, and restitution for victims following a recent ruling by the Jakarta State Administrative Court (PTUN) that rejected a lawsuit concerning statements made by public officials.
Komnas HAM Commissioner Amiruddin Al Rahab said in Jakarta on Thursday that the court’s decision should not be interpreted as closing the path toward accountability, but rather as a reminder for the state to take more concrete legal steps to ensure victims’ rights are fulfilled.
He warned that failure to follow up on the case would risk obstructing access for victims seeking truth, justice, and reparations from the state.
“At the same time, it also means closing the way for victims of the May 1998 incident to obtain their right to truth, their right to justice, and their right to reparation from the state,” Amiruddin said.
He emphasized that under Indonesia’s legal framework, a PTUN ruling does not determine the substantive truth of historical events. Instead, it is limited to administrative legal review, meaning that other legal avenues remain available for further investigation and accountability.
According to Amiruddin, this legal context underscores the importance of continuing efforts through other judicial and investigative mechanisms to address unresolved human rights allegations connected to the 1998 events.
He stressed that law enforcement agencies must take a more active role in advancing the legal process to ensure clarity and closure for victims and their families.
In particular, he urged the Attorney General’s Office to move forward with a formal investigation into the May 1998 incident without further delay.
“The Attorney General needs to investigate the May 1998 incident as soon as possible,” he said.
Amiruddin noted that Komnas HAM had previously conducted a formal inquiry into the case and concluded that the May 1998 events constituted alleged gross human rights violations, warranting further legal follow-up at the investigative stage.
He reiterated that the findings were based on provisions under Articles 7 and 9 of Law No. 26 of 2000 on Human Rights Courts, which provide the legal basis for investigating serious human rights violations in Indonesia.
“The Attorney General must conduct an investigation, as recommended by the National Commission on Human Rights several years ago. Komnas HAM’s investigation concluded that the May 1998 incident constitutes a serious human rights violation under the Human Rights Court Law,” he explained.
The commission also stressed that ongoing legal discussions surrounding the case should be viewed as part of a broader national effort to resolve past human rights violations in a comprehensive and structured manner.
Amiruddin highlighted the importance of preserving space for truth-seeking processes that are grounded in factual evidence and the lived experiences of victims, while ensuring that legal mechanisms remain impartial and transparent.
He further emphasized that resolving the May 1998 case requires coordinated action among state institutions, including law enforcement agencies and bodies responsible for victim restitution and transitional justice.
According to him, a fragmented approach would weaken public trust and slow down progress in addressing long-standing human rights concerns.
Komnas HAM believes that stronger institutional synergy is necessary to ensure that both accountability and reparative justice are achieved in a balanced and credible manner.
The commission also reiterated that victims must not only be acknowledged but must also receive meaningful remedies, including recognition, compensation, rehabilitation, and guarantees of non-repetition.
Amiruddin said that a comprehensive resolution of the case would serve as an important test of Indonesia’s commitment to human rights protection and rule of law.
He added that sustained and measured legal action would help strengthen public confidence in state institutions and demonstrate that serious human rights violations will not be ignored or left unresolved.
Komnas HAM expressed hope that renewed momentum in handling the case would contribute to rebuilding trust between the state and victims of past abuses.
Ultimately, the commission stressed that resolving the May 1998 incident is not only a legal obligation but also a moral responsibility of the state to ensure justice, accountability, and historical truth for future generations.
