

89

The Dynamics of Human Rights
Education in Indonesian Law Schools
R. Herlambang Perdana WiratramanT

he development of human rights education in higher education institutions inIndonesia has a contextual setting and its existence was influenced by internal
debates. During the authoritarian regime of Soeharto, human rights were
taught as part of constitutional rights, and did not reflect international human rights
law. Within that context, the name of the course was Hak-Hak Dasar or Fundamental
Rights (known also as Constitutional Rights). The fundamental rights taught atthat time were the rights provided under the Indonesian Constitution.
The 1945 Indonesian Constitution (Undang-Undang Dasar or UUD 1945) has threearticles (Articles 27, 28, and 29) guaranteeing
only four fundamental rights: (1) freedom of assembly and association; (2) freedom of thought;(3) right to work and right to life; (4) freedomof religion. The subsequent Indonesian Constitution of 1949 (Konstitusi Republik Indonesia
Serikat or Konstitusi RIS) and the IndonesianConstitution of 1950 (Undang-Undang Dasar
Sementara or UUDS 1950) have a separate chapter covering many more human rights. As statedby Moh. Yamin, a law scholar and founder of
the Indonesian Constitution, the Konstitusi RIS
and UUDS 1950 were the only Constitutions
from among all constitutions in the world thatcompletely incorporated all human rights provided by the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights of 1948.1 In late 1950s, the process toamend UUDS 1950 was stopped by Soekarno
through a Presidential Decree issued on 5 July
1959 and re-enacted UUD 1945 as the Indonesian Constitution.2
Although UUD 1945 has limited fundamental rights provisions, it did not meanthat higher education institutions limited theteaching of human rights during the Soeharto
regime. There was dynamic, and at the sametime challenging, discourse on human rights
in the academe at that time, when the words“human rights” were considered very sensitiveand critical. This discourse was taking place at atime when exacerbated, massive and systematic
human rights violations at various levels were
occurring. The government extremely coopted
the universities making them unsurprisingly thetransmitter of ideas that legitimized unpopular
policies against human rights, or perhaps madethem quiet enough about human rights violations.
The situation changed much after the fall ofSoeharto in 1998, when the euphoria of “reformasi” (reform agenda) progressively influenced
the development of human rights course. Since
then, democracy started to grow, freedom ofspeech and thought relatively advanced, andhuman rights issues became fascinating subjectsof discourse. This article examines how far has
university human rights course developed after
Soeharto stepped down in 1998, and how suchchange brought new human rights course models, teaching methodology, objective and process8990  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

of evaluation, and substantive development of
human rights education. The discussion in thisarticle is limited to the experience of law schools
in Indonesia.

Perspectives and strategies of humanrights education
In the early development of the humanrights course in Indonesian law schools, humanrights were perceived more as constitutionalrights. The human rights course developed
therefore in the context of constitutional rights
course development. Human rights taught by
the Constitutional Law Department under theconstitutional rights course (and expectedly
taught from a constitutional law perspective)
hardly had any reference to international humanrights law. The course focused on the historyof rights, philosophical foundation of humanrights, and the relationship between the state,people and human rights under the national
legal framework. Fundamental rights in thiscontext were related to the fundamental law,
the Constitution, which both the government
and people should respect as the highest law andsocial contract in a particular country.
Subsequently, the human rights courses
in law schools incorporated the international
human rights instruments subsequent to theirratification to become part of the national legal
system. For instance, Indonesia has ratified six
international human rights instruments: (i)Convention on the Elimination of All Formsof Discrimination Against Women [CEDAW](1984); (ii) Convention on the Rights of
the Child [CRC] (1990); (iii) Convention
Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment [CAT](1998); (iv) Convention on the Eliminationof All Forms of Racial Discrimination [CERD](1999); (v) International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights [ICESCR](2005); and (vi) International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights [ICCPR] (2005). The

human rights courses adjusted to include theratified international human rights instruments.
Thus, it seems that the human rights education
perspective of law schools is reactive to newlegislations rather than pro-active in promoting
human rights principles and the rights-based
approach perspective, regardless of whether or
not the government has ratified international
human rights instruments.
A dynamic human rights education in higher
education institutions in Indonesia depends
much on the interest, innovation and otherpersonal qualities and capacities of the humanrights lecturers.
In the other words, the institutionalizationof human rights education is not fully influenced by the development of an institutional(law school) perspective, but more likely fromindividual perspective. For instance, a lecturer
who has women studies background would have
deeper perspective on women’s rights issues,
including related human rights standards andmechanisms.
The relevant question in this context is, how
do they integrate various individual perspectives
into human rights education? The experience in
the Faculty of Law, Airlangga University gives
an example in integrating diverse backgrounds
and skills. From a higher education institution
point of view, human rights are taught as partof “soft skills education” that promotes human dignity, respect for difference, and humanrights culture. Human rights are also taught asvalues that support the realization not only of
the teaching or education mission, but also the“public servant mission”3 of higher education
institutions in Indonesia. Human rights education has become a responsibility mandated to alllaw educators in the university, regardless of theacademic field of the people giving the course.
Because of this public servant mission, thehuman rights course at the university level canbe linked to real issues in society and can directly
respond to these problems. In this case, humanrights can be understood not only as a course
or program offered by law schools, but also as

The Dynamics of Human Rights Education in Indonesian Law Schools  91

the “soft skills approach” of law educators. This
perspective on the role of educators is perhaps
too optimistic and paradoxical. Consistentteaching of human rights is questionable in thecontext of several other courses (such as thoseon Manpower Law, Investment Law, Intellectual Property Rights, and Business Law) whose
content may conflict with human rights becauseof the neo-liberal paradigm that support theirteaching in Indonesia.
Viewing human rights as legal issues under
the prevailing perspective of law schools does
not mean that all law educators are fully awareof the human rights situations involved. As themainstream school of thought in Indonesianlaw schools, positivist thought views humanrights as legal rights and simplifies the problemof rights protection generally. And this meantthat social, economic, political and cultural
structures of society are not necessarily discussed
in relation to human rights. Nevertheless, thedevelopment of human rights course in higher
education institutions should be appreciatedfor causing a better academic environment thanduring the Soeharto regime in terms of humanrights promotion and development.

Curriculum and methodology development
Although the human rights course inhigher education institutions is mostly taught
as a law-based subject and mostly found in law
school curriculums, there is still diversity inthe curriculums and teaching methodologies
involved. For instance, international humanrights law is certainly a law course addressing the
UN Charter, Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, and other international human rights
instruments. Yet the course on international
human rights law is not always offered as partof the law school curriculum.
Uniquely, the name of the human rights
course is also diverse. The University of Jember,
Brawijaya University, University of Muhamadiyah Yogyakarta (UMY), and University ofSurabaya (Ubaya) teach “Law and Human
Rights” course. The Airlangga University
offers “Human Rights” course (without theword ‘Law’), and previously offered “Law and
Human Rights” and “Fundamental Rights”
courses. Actually, the current Indonesian Schoolof Law Conference recommends the teachingof “Human Rights” course, without the word
‘Law’.4
The status and course requirement of thehuman rights course are also varied. In the
University of Jember, the status of “Law and
Human Rights” course is Wajib Umum (GeneralCompulsory course), and the students should
first pass “International Law” and “Constitutional Law” as course requirements in studying“Law and Human Rights.” This is due to thedifficulty of studying international law (covering international criminal law, humanitarian law,and United Nation systems) under the “Lawand Human Rights” course unless students
have previously studied “International Law”
and “Constitutional Law.”
In other universities, such as Airlangga
University, University of Surabaya, Brawijaya
University and University of Muhamdiyah Yogyakarta, the status of “Law and Human Rights”
course is Wajib Nasional (National Compulsory
course), which means that all law schools shouldhave “Law and Human Rights” course in thefirst year curriculum. Perhaps, the differencesin the status and requirements of the humanrights course do not have much significancebecause both Wajib Umum and Wajib Nasional
have similar consequences, requirement forlaw students to take “Law and Human Rights”(or “Human Rights” in the case of Airlangga
University) as compulsory course.
Similarity in status does not mean similarity in syllabuses and teaching methodologies.
The specific characteristics of the course areinfluenced by the faculty policy. For instance,in the University of Muhamdiyah Yogyakarta,
one of the largest Islamic university networks inIndonesia, the “Law and Human Rights” course
involves discussion of its relationship with law

92  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

and its comparison with Islamic perspectives
on human rights. This is due to an objective of
the course of promoting human rights as partof the university’s religious mandate. The university also has a “Humanitarian Law” coursethat is closely related to human rights, and has
the status of Pilihan Pengembangan Minat (Optional Course to Develop Student Interest) in
the International Law Department.
Different from the University of Muhamadiyah Yogyakarta is the “Law and Human
Rights” syllabuses in the University of Jember,which are designed to complement the courses
on “Constitutional Law” and “International
Law.” “Humanitarian Law” in this university
is taught in one class as part of the “Law and
Human Rights” course. This means that there
is no specific course on, and less space and time
for teaching, “Humanitarian Law.”5
Usually, law schools teach human rights
as part of the introductory course in studying
law, because of the strong, natural relationshipbetween law and human rights. The syllabus
for this course has the following items:6 (i)Principles of human rights; (ii) Philosophicalfoundation of rights; (iii) Concepts of humanrights; (iv) Fundamental rights and the Constitution; (v) History of human rights (law); (vi)
Human rights, rule of law and democracy; (vii)International human rights law 1 [civil and political rights]; (viii) International human rights
law 2 [economic, social and cultural rights]; (ix)National human rights law; (x) Role of the stateand non-state actors in human rights; (xi) State
responsibility in human rights; (xii) Humanrights mechanisms; (xiii) Most serious crimes;and (xiv) Human rights in current situation.
The supplementary course on human rights
also differs from one university to another. In
Brawijaya University, the human rights course iscomplemented by several closely related courses
such as Law and Gender.7 In the University ofSurabaya, the course on Law and Child Protection is one of the supporting courses for humanrights.8
Concerning teaching methodologies in hu-

man rights, lecture is mainly used in the formof speeches, presentations, and discussions.
There is limited use of participatory teaching methods. In Airlangga University, besidepresentation and discussion, the human rights
course employs participatory methods such asindividual presentations by students, role play,case studies, video presentation, and interactive
communication in understanding sensitive or
critical issues in human rights. The objective of
these methods is not only to introduce humanrights, but also to build the character of law
students in order to promote human rights inthe wider society.
Actually the human rights program can beenlarged through various ways, such as by creating moot court as an extracurricular course,internship in human rights centers or legal aid
offices, and attending human-rights-related
seminars, workshops, or conferences. In thecontext of Indonesia, these extracurricular
courses can easily be done to be able to teachhuman rights. One of the challenges in promoting the teaching of human rights in higher levelof education is the establishment of humanrights course at masters level. So far, in the
Asian region, there are only three universities
which have international masters program on
human rights: (i) MA Human Rights Programin Mahidol University (Thailand); (ii) LL.M International Human Rights Law in Hong Kong
University (Hong Kong); and (iii) MA Human
Rights Program in University of Calcutta (India). Several Indonesian universities are alreadystarting to develop Women Studies Programat masters level, such as in the University ofIndonesia (Jakarta). Under the Women Studies Program, many human rights issues related
to rights protection for women and children
are included. Based on this experience, the roleof Women Studies Center in each university,
including Human Rights Studies Center, is
important and significant to initiate and develop
masters or other higher level programs.9

The Dynamics of Human Rights Education in Indonesian Law Schools  93

Human rights center and the law school
Human rights centers play an important andsignificant role in initiating and developing thehuman rights program at graduate and higher
levels. In this section I examine the role of thehuman rights centers in the human rights courseof law schools.
The human rights (studies) center, better
known as Pusat Studi Hak-Hak Asasi Manusia(PUSHAM), is established to promote humanrights in higher education institutions andimplement the university mandate on public
service. There are many PUSHAMs attached touniversities or university faculties in Indonesia,
but not all of them significantly support the human rights movement. There are several famous
PUSHAMs in Indonesia:10 (i) PAHAM Unpad(Faculty of Law, Padjadjaran University); (ii)
PUSHAM UII (Islamic University of Indonesia); (iii) PUSHAM Ubaya (University ofSurabaya) and (iv) PUSHAM Unair (Airlangga
University).
The PUSHAMs were established in thesefour universities in diverse ways. PUSHAM
UII, Unair and Ubaya were established asuniversity-level programs, and they are influenced by the diverse backgrounds of lecturers
involved in the centers. Most of them are notlawyers or law lecturers, but political scientists,
anthropologists, social scientists, and social
workers. They employ the multidisciplinary
approach and involve various fields of expertise.
From this point of view, the multidisciplinary
approach is more useful in understanding thecomplexity of human rights, and practicallymakes the dissemination of human rights tovarious faculties easier.
The establishment of these PUSHAMs was
also partially supported by Ministry of Law
and Human Rights. The Center for Human
Rights Studies of the Islamic University ofIndonesia (PUSHAM UII) based in Yogjakarta
for example was founded through a Memorandum of Understanding between the university
and the Ministry of Law and Human Rights.

The Minister of Law and Human Rights andthe Rector of Islamic University of Indonesia
signed the memorandum on 7 April 2000.
On the other hand, the Letter of Agreement(MOU.01/meneg/HAM/04/2000 underline
381/B.1/IV/2000) between Airlangga University and the Ministry was signed on 2 November
2000 to establish PUSHAM Unair, after holding a human rights workshop.11
PAHAM Unpad was established under thelaw school (faculty-level) program. Because ofthis, most of staff members involved are lawyers
or law scholars. PUSHAMs have the opportunity of helping strengthen the law on humanrights through their human rights law course,
and of helping in the easier understanding of
the complexity of human rights standards andmechanisms. PUSHAMs based in law schools
also provide the law students with “law laboratory” in support of or supplementary to the extracurricular Law and Human Rights course.
Both multidisciplinary model and law
laboratory model have particular strengths andweaknesses. Integrating human rights in various ways into the different courses minimizes
the weakness of the multidisciplinary model,
and by having the support of the PUSHAMs
it becomes interdisciplinary laboratory model.
PUSHAM Ubaya, for instance, according to its
Director, will incorporate human rights course
into all disciplines, not only in the law course,
and they have been preparing a curriculum forit.12 PUSHAM UII also supported law lecturers
in improving their knowledge of human rights
law through annual training activities. Also,
the Human Rights Law Studies (Pusat Kajian
Hukum HAM), the new institution establishedunder the Constitutional Law Department(faculty level) of Airlangga University, althoughmostly supported by law scholars, has been
involving people with various backgrounds in
implementing and improving its programs.
In this context, the establishment of human rights (law) laboratory using the interdisciplinary approach is one of the challengesof the PUSHAMs of Indonesia. Significantly,

94  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

a number of PUSHAMs are well-connected
or networked in support of the human rights
struggle. This is a good development in theprocess of improving the human rights situationin the post-authoritarian Indonesia.

RANHAM, the challenges for law schools
The adoption of National Action Plan for
Human Rights (RANHAM) is not new to
the Indonesian government. The governmenthas been adopting action plans since the fall ofSoeharto in 1998, and re-planned them every
five years. The current RANHAM was adopted
through Presidential Decree Number 40/2004(2004-2009). The appointment of membersof a National Committee (Committee) that is
directly responsible to the President was the firststep in implementing RANHAM 2004-2009.
The Committee has the responsibility of coordinating RANHAM activities, including:13
a.	Establishment and strengthening of RANHAM institution
b. Preparation for the ratification of international human rights instrumentsc. Preparation for the harmonization of legislations with international human rights
standardsd.	Dissemination and education on humanrightse. Application of human rights norms andstandards
f. Monitoring, evaluating and reporting on
human rights situations.
It has the main duty of securing the implementation of RANHAM at the regional anddistrict levels and coordinating the RANHAM
program and activities at the regional level.
The Committee has a working groupconsisting of representatives of government
institutions, national institutions (related tohuman rights such as the National Commissionfor Human Rights [Komnas HAM], women’scommission), expert groups, and civil society.

Higher education institutions, including
PUSHAMs, can support RANHAM by promoting human rights through joint trainingof trainers programs, research collaboration,
policy advocacy, and disseminating humanrights through formal or non-formal education.
As observed by PUSHAM Ubaya, the implementation of RANHAM has not been wellcoordinated among government institutions,
including universities. It created unfortunately
much mis-communication and distrust among
Committee members.14
Unsurprisingly many human rights activists,
members of Komnas HAM and academics often
question the activities for RANHAM. In thiscontext, the higher education institutions, particularly law schools, can contribute significantly
to the implementation of RANHAM. They canhelp in harmonizing district regulations, anddisseminating human rights principles, norms
and standards to local organizations as part ofthe implementation of RANHAM at the regional or district level. They can also force theimplementation of RANHAM by monitoring,evaluating and reporting it to the Committee.
These activities can be initiated not only by
PUSHAMs but also by academics who areconcerned with human rights.

Conclusion
The initiatives discussed above will not develop further without the support of the higher
education institutions. Financial assistance, forexample, is a big problem for PUSHAMs andfor the development of human rights study programs at law schools. They still depend much on
the government or foreign donor institutions.
The government and foreign donor institutions unfortunately usually have a systematic
scheme in designing their own agendas, which
are non-negotiable frameworks. The issues ofgood governance, access to justice, and poverty
reduction strategy programs are common issues
designed by most donor institutions. These is-

The Dynamics of Human Rights Education in Indonesian Law Schools  95

sues, as part of hegemony strategies, became thecontent of the mainstream discourse on humanrights in Indonesia, in support of the donor
institutions’ funding support conditionality infavor of market liberalization. In the context
of Indonesia, the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, European Union, and USAID
are the most influential donor institutions in
configuring what we call “human rights market
assistance.”“Human rights market assistance” hasbecome a politico-legal imposition which tremendously drives the legal framework in Indonesia. This situation has become the backdrop
for the enactment several political economy
legislations which strongly direct law reform
agendas, such as the Law on Water Resource(2004), Labor Law (2003), and the Law on
Industrial Relations Dispute Resolution (2004).
These legislations are examples of explicitly
legal basis for human rights violation, or wellknown as “legalized violation of human rights.”
Whether we like it or not, the current situation
came about because of dependency on donor
programs, which seem to influence the studyof human rights.
This legal imposition paradigm is a challenge
to law schools and PUSHAMs in transforming and promoting human rights values inIndonesia.

Endnotes
See Koentjoro Poerbopranoto, Hak-Hak Manusia
dan Pancasila Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia. Jakarta:
J.B. Wolters, 1953, page 92.
2
In this context, Soekarno also introduced “guided
democracy” as new political model for the Indonesian
revolution and democracy. “Guided democracy” ispractically another word for “softened” authoritarianmodel.
3
The university missions in Indonesia, known as Tri
Dharma Perguruan Tinggi, are (i) educational mission;(ii) research mission; and (iii) public servant mission.
4
Interview with Iwan Satriawan (Assistant Deanof the University of Muhamadiyah Yogyakarta) and1

Johan Erwin Ishariyanto (University of Muhamadiyah
Yogyakarta), 15 May 2007.
5
Interview with Gautama Arundhati (University ofJember), 14 and 17 May 2007.
6
These sample syllabus contents are based on
the human rights courses in Airlangga University(Surabaya) and Brawijaya University (Malang), which
both introduced the courses under the Constitutional
Law Department.
7Interview with Ibnu Tricahyo (Brawijaya University), 15 May 2007.
8
Interview with Yoan Nursari Simanjuntak (University of Surabaya), 16 May 2007.
9
Many universities have at least a PUSHAM, while
several universities have both Women Studies Center and
PUSHAM such as the University of Surabaya, Airlangga
University and Brawijaya University.
10
Being “famous” in this context is seen from theirrole in actively and progressively promoting humanrights through various activities, and being well-known
among most human rights activists. My interview withseveral non-governmental organizations (NGOs) inJakarta identifies the four PUSHAMs for frequently
cooperating and linking with not only NGOs but also
Komnas HAM and the government (Ministry of Law
and Human Rights).
11
PUSHAM Unair has the mandate of promoting“human rights awareness in society and struggling [todevelop] state policy that [is] more committed [to] realizing human rights through [scientific] studies.” Professor Soetandyo Wignyosoebroto, MPA (Commissionerof KOMNAS HAM/National Commission for Human
Rights) and Hafid Abbas (Deputy II, Ministry of Human Rights Affairs) attended the workshop.
12
Interview with Yoan Nursari Simanjuntak (University of Surabaya), 16 May 2007.
13
Edited version of the original text of RANHAM
2004-2009.
14
Interview with Yoan Nursari Simanjuntak (University of Surabaya), 17 April 2007.