FOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56

Focus
Asia-PacificNewsletter of the Asia-Pacific Human Rights Information Center (HURIGHTS OSAKA)

June 2009 Vol. 56

Contents
Pandita Ramabai: Student, Seeker, and
Visionary Leader
A short discussion of the life and work of
Pandita Ramabai, an Indian womansocial reformer in late 19th century
India.
- Sonia Hazard
Page 2
Raden Ajeng Kartini: Indonesia’s Feminist
Educator
A short discussion of the life and work of
Raden Ajeng Kartini, an Indonesian
woman who was a pioneering feminist
writer and activist in her country.
- HURIGHTS OSAKA
Page 5B. R. Ambedkar: An Indefatigable Defenderof Human Rights
A short discussion of the life and work of
Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar on the Dalit
issue in India.
- Joseph Benjamin, Nagpur, India
Page 8
Matsumoto Jiichiro – Peacenik?
A short discussion of the life of Jiichiro
Matsumoto and his role in the humanrights and peace movements in Japan.
- Ian Neary, University of Oxford, United
Kingdom
Page 11
Normalization of Aceh: Impossible Without
Truth-telling, Part 2This is the second part of the article
published in FOCUS Asia-Pacific issue
55.
- Amiruddin al Rahab, human rights
analyst of ELSAMPage 13

Editorial

Important Persons
Human societies are shaped by people who take leadershiproles or who promote ideas about change. These people
inspire others to take action or to think of ideas that facilitatechange.
Decades before human rights became a global language,
there were people who worked for societal change based on
ideas that we now consider as human rights.
These people pioneered such ideas or led movements torealize them. They have been hailed as heroines/heroes. They
have been cited as icons, making them bigger than life figuresin history.
But before they were put on the pedestal, they lived lives that
portrayed their transformation into personalities that would
influence their respective societies. Their personal histories
are important, probably equal in significance in some cases totheir public lives.
Knowing these icons beyond their public images prevents thetemptation of projecting them as perfect human beings. The
more they are seen as ordinary mortals, the greater the
chance that their ideas and actions will be recognized withcritical yet appreciative perspective.
Their contribution to the betterment of human society being
already established, it is important to see them not simply
with a sense of awe but more importantly with a sense ofrealism.

1

FOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56

Pandita Ramabai: Student, Seeker, and Visionary Leader*
Sonia HazardOn a hot July weekend in
1848, sixty-eight womenand forty-two men—all of themAmerican or European—
convened in Seneca Falls, New
York, as delegates to the firstever women’s rights convention.
Perhaps it is because of thiswatershed event paired withlingering colonialism that many
Westerners consider women’sliberation to be a uniquely
Western initiative.
But when these early ripples
from Seneca Falls were justbeginning to make waves in theWest, a beautiful baby girlnamed Ramabai was born overten thousand miles away justoutside Karkal, India. Equippedwith courage, intelligence, andan unshakable Christian faith,
Ramabai would eventually
become known as Pandita, or“ w i s e p e r s o n ,” a n d t h epreeminent pioneer of women’s
rights in India.
This remarkable woman, whosef e m i n i s t c o m m i t m e n t wa s
rivaled only by her ardentconviction for Christ upon her
conversion at age 25, changed
the lives of countless girls andwomen. The Mukti Mission she
f o u n d e d r e a c h e d I n d i a ’s
neglected and abused childwidows.

The Gifted Young Student
Pandita Ramabai was born
Ramabai Dongre on 23 April
1858, to an intellectual Brahminf a m i l y. H e r f a t h e r wa s aprominent Sanskrit scholar who
directed an ashram, a residential
religious community and schoolfor boys. Defying social custom,
he firmly believed that women,
like men, should also beallowed an education—andaccordingly took it upon himself
to teach Ramabai and hermother. He was probably
ostracized by his colleagues forhis radical views on women’s
education and soon after lostthe ashram due to financial
reasons.
The entire family—Ramabai, herfather, mother, and two siblings—then took off on foot andtraveled all over India. Herparents eked out a modest living
as Puranikas, wanderers whorecited and commented on the
Vedas and other sacred Hindu
texts. True to their dedication toeducation, Ramabai’s parents
spent long hours teaching her
during their travels. She proved
to be quite a precocious
student. Soon, she had learned
18,000 verses of the Bhagavata
Purana in their original Sanskritby heart, in addition to excellingin astronomy, botany, andphysiology.
Ramabai’s first-class education
was incredibly rare. She notes inher book, The High-Caste Hindu
Woman, that less than onequarter of one percent of Indian
women at the time were able toread or write. Of theseprivileged few, many wererequired to cease their studies ata young age—often at nine- or2ten-years-old—when they were
married. Early marriage was thenorm for young Brahmin girls,
and it was often considereddishonorable for a woman tocontinue her education once
wed. Baffling and angering
Hindu traditionalists, Ramabai’s
father further went against thegrain by refusing to arrange her
marriage.

T h e Pa s s i o n a t e S o c i a l
Reformer
Tragically, Ramabai’s mother,father, and sister died fromstarvation during the great
famine of 1874–76, leaving
Ramabai and her older brotherhungry and without help. The
pair continued to wander India
until reaching Calcutta in 1878.
After stunning scholars with her
extraordinary knowledge of
Sanskrit and ancient texts, the20-year-old Ramabai became an
instant celebrity in the city. She
was honored with the title
Pandita, meaning “wise person,”and heralded as a Saraswati, or“goddess of learning.” She soon
joined the ranks of Calcutta
intelligentsia.
In 1880, shortly after herb r o t h e r ’s d e a t h , R a m a b a itransgressed social norms yet
again by marrying a man of alower caste. Before long, shegave birth to a daughter named
Manorama. Her new baby gaveh e r m u c h j o y, i f o n l yephemerally, for her husband
died of cholera before theirFOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56

second anniversary. Now a
widow, Ramabai was left toraise Manorama on her own.

Hindu faction that “Nothing
would induce me to embrace
Christianity.”

During this period of severe
turmoil in her personal life thather public life really began tot h r i v e . Tr o u b l e d b y t h eimmensity of suffering she had
witnessed during her travels andgalvanized by the western
Indian social reform movement,
Ramabai soon establishedherself as a champion of the
oppressed—especially women.
She published, lectured, andfounded Arya Mahila Sabha in
1881, the very first Indian
feminist organization. The groupfervently crusaded for female
education and a higher
marriage age for girls. Ramabai
was called to speak before
India’s Education Commissionin 1883, where she made animpassioned case that “it isevident that women, being one
half of the people of thiscountry, are oppressed andcruelly treated by the otherhalf.”

However, when her hosts
encouraged Ramabai to readthe New Testament, she wasdeeply touched by the gospel
stories of Jesus ministering tothe oppressed. The way hetreated people like theSamaritan woman made astrong impression on her. Her
feminism was freely reconciledwith this new faith; she started
to realize that Christ could truly“transform and uplift the
downtrodden women of India.”
She wrote later,
One can feel that the teachingof our Lord Jesus comes fromthe All-Father, who loves not
one nation, not one class, or
one caste, but bears in His
heart every creature of His
hand; it would be a blessed
day for India, if her sons anddaughters could see that He is
the revelation of the Father.

The Silver Seeker

Ramabai and her daughter
Manorama were baptized by
the Sisters.

Stemming from an interest in
w o m e n ’s p u b l i c h e a l t h ,Ramabai left India withdaughter Manorama in 1883 tostudy medicine in England. She
was supported by the Anglican
Community of St. Mary the
Virgin in Wantage. The Sisters
gave her a home and allowed
her to improve her English andteach Sanskrit in return. Manyof her mostly Hindu followers
were understandably suspiciousof such an arrangement. They
didn’t trust Christian
missionaries; in India, the crossoften represented colonialism,
not liberation. Before Ramabaileft for England, she assured thisAs an Indian woman, Ramabai’s
new faith met some uniquechallenges. Despite accepting
the religion of Britain, sheremained a die-hard Indian
patriot and considered herself acultural Hindu. This dual
identity prevented her fromcompletely fitting in with either
Hindus or Christians. Ramabai
was constantly living on theboundaries—she was accusedby Hindus for deserting them,while simultaneously bearing
the brunt of colonial British
racism and condescension. She
wa s f u r t h e r a l i e n a t e d byrefusing to indiscriminately
accept all church dogma and3

doctrine espoused by Anglicans,emphasizing the importance oft h e B i b l e a b ove a l l . S h e
explained,
In this new Faith, there aresome things which I cannot
take in, and I shall not feelmyself bound to do so, until I
know them, as far as my poor
understanding will carry me.
But, I must ever continue tosearch Scriptures and neverstop until I find the lost pieceof silver—either in this worldor the next.

In 1886, the dean of the
Woman’s Medical College ofPennsylvania invited Ramabai
to America for the graduation
ceremony of one of her distantcousins, Anandibai Joshee, who
was the first Indian woman toreceive a degree in medicine.
Like her rise to success in
Calcutta a decade earlier, the28-year-old became a sensation
i n P h i l a d e l p h i a . Th r o u g hinvitations to speak at several
Americanw o m e n ’sorganizations, Ramabaideveloped partnerships withfeminist leaders like Frances
Willard, Susan B. Anthony, andHarriet Tubman. With the helpof Willard and her Women’s
Christian Temperance Union,
Ramabai published her second
full-length book in 1887, The
High-Caste Hindu Woman, thefirst Indian feminist manifesto.

Th e Fo u n d e r o f M u k t i
MissionThe High-Caste Hindu Woman
a l s o r e fl e c t s R a m a b a i ’s
emerging commitment tominister to India’s high-castechild widows. The book delivers
a heart-rending—yet culturally
sensitive—feminist critique ofthe plight of these women andFOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"
girls. While it is more complex
than can adequately be
addressed here, Ramabaipresents the issue, at its baselevel, as such: when Brahmin
women are married off aschildren, they usually live with
their husband’s family. If thehusband dies young, the childwidow is often blamed for thedeath and despised by thefamily, as prescribed by aparticular interpretation of
Hindu scriptures. In her book,Ramabai documents thewidow’s plight in detail.
The widow must wear a single
coarse garment, white, red, orbrown. She must eat only one
meal during the twenty-fourhours of a day. She must nevertake part in family feasts andjubilees, with others. She must
not show herself to people on
auspicious occasions. A man
or woman thinks it unlucky tobehold a widow’s face before
seeing any other object in themorning. A man will postpone
his journey if his path happens
to be crossed by a widow…

Ramabai returned to India in
1889 with a renewed sense ofvision and generous financial
support from the newly-formed
American Ramabai Association.
She soon opened the Sharada
Sadan, a secular residential
school for high-caste childwidows. Ramabai made a point
to make both Hindu andChristian texts freely available,
although she conducted Bible
study for those interested. The
school operated for several
years, until the bubonic plague
epidemic of the late 1890s
forced Ramabai and her
students to flee to the ruralvillage of Kedgaon.

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56
It was in Kedgaon—in an
unusual place with unusual
circumstances—that Ramabai’s
Christian feminist visionbecame fully actualized in the
Mukti (Salvation) Mission.
Unlike the secular Sharada
Sadan, Mukti was overtly
Christian and ministered to allin need of help, eventually
growing to house and educate
over 2,000 girls and women. In
addition to high-caste childwidows, Mukti opened its doors
and provided services for those
who suffered from sexual abuse,
famine, and disability—of every
caste. While presiding over theflourishing Mission until her
death in 1922, she continued towrite and lecture. Among otherachievements, she translated theentire Bible from its original
Hebrew and Greek into her
native Marathi, and wasawarded the government’s
Kaiser-e-Hind gold medal in
1919.

justice, expressed so well in The
High-Caste Hindu Woman,
In the name of humanity, inthe name of your sacredresponsibilities as workers in
the cause of humanity, and,above all, in the most holyname of God, I summon
you…to bestow your help
quickly, regardless of nation,
caste, or creed.

Sonia Hazard is an
u n d e r g ra d u a t e s t u d e n t a t
Macalester College in St. Paul,
Minn., USA, where she ismajoring in Religious Studies.
For further information, pleasecontact: Christians for Biblical
Equality, 122 West Franklin Ave,
Suite 218, Minneapolis, MN
55404-2451 USA; ph (612)872-6898; fax (612) 872-6891;
e
m
a
i
l
:
cbe@cbeinternational.org;
www.cbeinternational.org

The Visionary Leader
Pandita Ramabai was a strong
leader with a clear vision. Her
lifelong refusal to conform topatriarchal norms and resolutecommitment to equality andjustice are truly inspirational.
She clearly deserves a
prominent place as one of the
movement’s heroes.
Her voice rings just as truely
today as it did a century ago.
While the situation for childwidows in India has greatly
improved, injustice, inequality,
and the mistreatment of women
still abound all over the world.
L i k e Je s u s , R a m a b a i s t i l lpresents a challenge forcontemporary women and men.
She entreats us to respond toher urgent clarion call for

4

Endnote* This article first appeared in the
Autumn 2006 issue of Mutuality
Magazine of the Christians for
Biblical Equality.

FOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56

Raden Ajeng Kartini: Indonesia’s Feminist Educator
HURIGHTS OSAKA

R

aden Ajeng Kartini is hailed
as Indonesia’s first feminist.
April 21, the day of her birth, iscelebrated as “Hari Ibu
Kartini” (Kartini Day). She isseen as the symbol ofIndonesian women's
emancipation.1
Kartini was born on 21 April
1879, in a village called
Mayong in the town of Jepara,
North Central Java to anaristocrat family. She is thedaughter of Raden Mas Adipati
Aryo Sosroningrat, the Regent ofJepara. She went to a primaryschool, along with her brothers,
for the children of Dutch
planters and administrators.
Other girls from aristocraticfamilies did not receive thesame formal education she
obtained.2 But under the oldJavanese tradition of pingit, she
was kept in seclusion at home
until marriage upon reaching
the age of twelve years.
Seclusion from twelve years ofage until marriage did not stop
Kartini from aspiring for further
education. During her period of
seclusion she wrote letters to
many friends abroad, readmagazines and books, andrebelled against the strong
tradition of gender
discrimination.3 Her father gaveher books on Javanese culture
to “balance her westerneducation and subscribed to a
Literary Box, a box ofmagazines, children's books,
modern novels and foreign

news, which was changed every
week by a local library.”4 In
1892, when she was twelve
years old, Kartini made friends
with the wife of the new Dutch
officer appointed as Assistant
Resident of Jepara, Mevrouw
O v i n k - S o e r. M e v r o u w
was! “highly cultured, had
published a number ofmagazine articles,"! and later
wrote a book entitled! Women’sLife in a (Javanese) Village.! She
was! also a fervent socialist andfervent feminist.5 One accountsays that the Dutch people who
supported her desire to be
educated and to search for new
kind of education for herself
were proponents of the thennew colonial policy called“Ethical Policy” thatemphasized6
increased education of theIndonesians, fuller
participation by them in theirown local government as civil
servants, efforts to raise thepeasants’ standard of living
through agricultural
improvements and thepromotion of indigenous
handicrafts.

Her father, a Javanese official
serving the Dutch colonial
government as a local
administrative head on thenorth coast of Java, introduced
her and her sisters to the realityof life for the people whom hegoverned, to the world beyond
the then Dutch East Indies,besides exploring the intricaciesof their own rich cultural

5

heritage. He took his daughters
to meet the villagers during
times of crisis and celebration.7
She obtained a scholarship to
study in Holland, a desire she
worked to achieve for quite
some time, but family pressure
led her to ultimately reject it.
She did not want marry but she
consented to be the fourth wifeof the Regent of Rembang,
Raden Adipati Joyodiningrat, a
man twenty-five years her
s e n i o r. S h e d i e d o n 1 7
September 1904 after giving
birth to a child a year after her
marriage. She passed away at
the young age of twenty-five.
Prior to her death, Kartinifounded a school for young
girls.

Kartini as a Feminist
In 1903, Kartini obtained
permission to open in her own
home in Rembang the first everall-girls school, for daughters ofJavanese officials. She createdher own syllabus and system of
instruction. The school aimed atthe “character development ofyoung women, while at thesame time providing them withpractical vocational training andgeneral education in art,
literature and science.”8 It wasalso a school that was bothWestern and Indonesian. By
1904, the school had one
hundred twenty students.9
Kartini realized that theeducation she obtained thatwidened her choices in life

FOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"
should also be enjoyed as aright by all of her people.
Influenced by Dutch feminists,
Kartini wrote passionately forthe improvement of education,
public health, economic
welfare, and traditional arts inher country.
She wrote in January 1903 a
memorandum about education
entitled Give
The
Javanese
Education! addressed to an
official of the Dutch Ministry ofJustice.10 She emphasized theneed to educate the women forthe development of society. She
wrote:
Who could deny that the
woman has a great task to
perform in the moral
development of society? It isshe, precisely she, who is theone to do this; she cancontribute much, if not most,to ensure the improvement of
the moral standards of society.
Nature herself has appointed
her to this task. As mother, sheis the first educator; at her
knee the child first learns tofeel, to think, to speak; and in
most cases, this initial
nurturing influences the rest of
its life. It is the hand of themother which first plants thegerm of virtue or wickedness
in the heart of the individual
where it usually remains forthe rest of the person’s life.
Not without reason is it said
that a knowledge of right andwrong is imbibed with amother’s milk. But how canJavanese mothers now educate
their children if they
themselves are uneducated?
The education anddevelopment of the Javanesepeople can never adequately
advance if women are
excluded, if they are not given
a role to play in this.
xxx

xxx

xxx

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56
Really, an important factor in
the uplifting of the population
will be the progress of theJavanese woman! Therefore it
should be the first task of theGovernment to raise the moral
awareness of the Javanese
woman, to educate her, toinstruct her, to make of her acapable, wise mother andnurturer!

She further wrote about theneed for the formal education of
the girls of the noble class:
If the nobility knew that theGovernment desired that its
daughters be more highly
cultured then, initially, it may
not send its daughters frompersonal conviction, but itwould nevertheless send themon their own volition. The
nobility must be encouraged
in this direction. What does itmatter with what motives theirdaughters are sent to school?
The issue is that they are sent
to school!

She pointed out that given the
resources and the Javanese
population of twenty-sevenmillion, educational policy
should first be directed to elite
women who could then open
schools for the rest of the“masses.” 11 She wrote:
In the meantime provide
education, instruction, for thedaughters of the nobility; thecivilizing influence has to flowfrom here to the people;
develop them into capable,wise, fine mothers and they
will vigorously spread
enlightenment amongst thepeople. They will pass on theirrefinement and education totheir children: to theirdaughters, who in their turnwill become mothers; to theirsons who will be called upon
to help safeguard the welfareof the people. And as persons

6of intellectual and spiritualenlightenment they will inmany different ways be ofassistance to their people andto their society.

She also explained that the
purpose of formal education is
not merely to learn the Dutch
language. She argued
that knowledge of the Dutch
language by itself does not
represent cultural refinement,that being civilized consists ofsomething more than simply
speaking Dutch, orsuperficially adopting Dutch
manners, and even less inwearing Dutch clothes.
Knowledge of Dutch language
is the key which can unlock
the treasure houses of Western
civilization and knowledge;
one has to exert oneself toappropriate some of thattreasure for oneself.

She criticized the Javaneseculture’s hierarchical nature,
where younger siblings had toserve older ones and where
norms dictated elaborate ritualsof hierarchy. 12
She also criticized the nobility
by writing thus:
To date more or less the only
advantage has been to ensure
law and order and the regular
receipt of revenue. The Stateand the nobility havebenefited from this but what
have the people themselves
gained? What benefit have thepeople had from their highlyr e ve r e d n o b l e s wh o t h eGovernment uses to rulethem? To date, nothing, or very
little; more likely they havebeen disadvantaged on thoseoccasions when the nobility
has abused its power, which isstill not a rare occurrence.

FOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56

This must change, the nobility
must earn the reverence of thepeople, be worthy of it, andthis will be of inestimablebenefit to the people.

understanding of the longingsof the hearts of the young
Javanese. He allowed his
daughters to go to a foreignschool until they were twelve
and then they had to return tothe cloistered home life, but
among themselves there was a
freedom of communication
and a closeness, which did notexist in many of the Javanesefamilies of the day.

Kartini wrote many letters thatwere later published in Holland
in 1911 in a book entitledThrough Darkness into Light,
and became a bestseller. It had
four editions until 1923.13
She also wrote about her own
Java n e s e s o c i e t y a n d t h esuffering of the rural poor, andthe practice of polygamy.

LegacyOverall, she wanted to alter the
relations between Indonesians
and the Dutch a decade before
the flowering of the nationalist
movement. Thus, the desire tomodernize her country andaccess the language ofknowledge could be interpreted
as a “nationalist” move.14
In her preface in the 1960s
book Letters of a Javanese
P r i n c e s s , a collection of
Kartini's letters, Eleanor
Roosevelt wrote:
I am delighted to gain theinsight which these lettersoffer. One little remark in oneof the letters is something I
think we might all remember.
Kartini says: “We feel that thekernel of all religion is goodand beautiful. But, O ye
peoples, what have you madeof it?” Instead of drawing us
together, religion has often
forced us apart and even thisyoung girl realized that itshould be a unifying force.
The girl who wrote theseletters happened to have afather who, as she says, wasliberal and had a tremendous

In present-day Indonesia, Hari
Ibu Kartini or Kartini Day isseen as an “important event in
the school calendar, often
providing the setting in which
students can explore Indonesianhistory, the roles of women insociety, families and the richcultural diversity ofIndonesia….[and p]erhaps mostimportantly, it is for educators
seeking to nurture theindependence and self esteemof children in their care.15
Kartini lived a short life oftwenty-five years and yet sheleft a legacy that supported therights of Indonesian women inparticular, and national identity
in general. In the context of theremaining many challenges
facing Indonesian women
today, Kartini provides aninspiration to the continuing
effort to overcome them.

Endnotes
1

Susan J. Natih, “Kartini, her lifeand letters,” The Jakarta Post, 21
April 2005.
2 Kumari Jayawardena, Feminism
and Nationalism in the Third
World (London and New Jersey:
Zed Books Limited, 1994), page141.
3 Bebeth, “Raden Ajeng Kartini, Are
We Really Free?,” Just About Anything, 21 April 2005,7

http://bebeth009.blogspot.com/2005/04/raden-ajeng-kartini-are-w
e-really-free.html
4 Natih, op. cit.
5 Hilda Geertz, editor, Letters of aJavanese Princess – Rada Adjeng
Kartini (New York: W.W. Norton
and Company, 1964), page 8.
6 Ibid.
7 Natih, op. cit.
8 Geertz, op cit., page 23.
9 Jayawardena, op. cit., page 145.
10 In Letters from Kartini: An Indo-nesian Feminist 1900-1904,
translated by Joost Coté (Clayton,
Victoria: Monash Asia Institute,1992).
11 “Southeast Asian Politics, Nonfiction, Javanese Education,”
Women in World History, availableinwww.chnm.gmu.edu/wwh/p/114.html
12 Southeast Asian Politics, Nonfiction, Javanese Education, ibid.
13 Geertz, op cit., page 23.
14 “Southeast Asian Politics, Nonfiction, Javanese Education,” op.
cit.
15 Natih, op. cit.

FOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56

B. R. Ambedkar: An Indefatigable Defender of Human Rights
Joseph BenjaminBh i m rao Ramji Ambedkar
was born as the fourteenth
child of Mahar parents, Ramji
and Bhimabai, on 14 April
1891 at Mhow, in present-day
State of Madhya Pradesh. The
Mahars are considered lowcaste and treated as
untouchables (Dalits) by highercaste Hindus. They are mainly
found in the State ofMaharashtra.
The father and grandfather ofAmbedkar served in the army
and were of well-to-do family.
But the stigma of being
members of Mahar community
caused their social oppression
in a caste-ridden society.
Ambedkar had a bitter taste ofdiscriminatory treatment due his
caste at an early age. He andhis brother had to carry gunnybags to sit on inside theclassroom because they were
not allowed to sit on classroom
chairs. They were denied
drinking water facilities, andexcluded from games andmixing with other children.
Even teachers would not checktheir notebooks for fear of"pollution." Thus sowed theseeds of discontentment aboutthe Hindu social system in thelife of Ambedkar.
He did his early education in
Satara in Maharashtra State andthen moved on to Bombay. In
1912, he passed his B. A.
examination with distinction
from the prestigious Elphinstone
College with the scholarshipand encouragement from theMaharaja of Baroda State. In

1913, with a condition that hewould serve the Baroda Statefor ten years, he was chosen by
Maharaja of Baroda State forhigher studies at Columbia
University in the USA. This wasfollowed with a trans-Atlantic
shift to the United Kingdom
wh e r e h e s t u d i e d a t t h e
University of London. While
studying abroad, he mixed withstudents of various nationalities
and races, which was an eyeopener for him.
He joined the Union Cabinet of
Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru during
the 1946-1951 period. He
resigned on 27 September 1951
to protest the deferment of the
discussion in the parliament of
the Hindu Code Bill supposedly
due to the coming 1952
elections. Ambedkar saw theBill as a very important reformof Hindu law, with reform
proposals on marriage, divorce,and monogamy.
Despite failing health, he
plodded on with his advocacy
for the cause of the Dalits. He
came to Nagpur in October
1956 for his conversion to
Buddhism and a couple ofmonths thereafter on 8
December 1956 breathed his
last.

Ambedkar's Movement for
Human Rights
During the last decade of the
19th century, many Indian
leaders born among the lower
castes like Narayan Guru
(1854-1928), Jotiba Phule(1827-1890), and Ramaswamy

8

Naicker 1879-1973) launchedmassive struggles for the dignityof Dalits throughout India.
Ambedkar was the most
towering figure among these
Dalit leaders.
In 1917 he joined the Baroda
State Service after returningfrom his studies in the USA andthe United Kingdom, as part of
the terms of his scholarshipagreement. He worked in thecity of Baroda, the place of theruling family of Gaikwad, which
financed his studies abroad. He
worked as secretary in the
defense office of the Maharaja
of Baroda State.
However, despite his foreign
education, he had to endureinsults while at work due to his
low caste origin. He was a
victim of the cruel dalit
discrimination. He suffered theignominy of having document
files hurled by peons at his face.1
He suffered the humiliating
experience of not being served
drinking water during official
functions. At the officer's club,he had to sit in a corner andkeep his distance from the othermembers belonging to higher
castes. He also had difficulties
in finding a rented house, as hewas not allotted government
bungalow. He stayed in an inn
owned by Parsis (members of
Zoroastrian religion). One
morning, as he was getting
ready to go to work, a dozen
Parsis, all wielding sticks,
rushed up to his room
screaming that he had polluted
the inn and insisted on his

FOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"
immediate departure. He
begged them to let him stay fora week longer since he hoped
to get his government bungalow
by then. But they were
obdurate. If they found him at
the inn that evening, they said
God help him. After spending
much of the day in a publicgarden, Ambedkar, in utter
frustration and disgust, left for
Bombay by the 9 pm train.
These scorching incidents
goaded Ambedkar to work forthe protection of dalit rights andupliftment of the status of the
Dalits. In 1924, he started legal
practice in Bombay andfounded the Bahishkrit Hitkarni
Sabha (Depressed Class
Institute) to uplift the Dalits.
Henceforth, he started his
movement and took the causeof the Dalits. He roused thedalit consciousness to fight for
the eradication of dalit
discrimination; to claim
equality of treatment, status andopportunity; to equally enjoy all
rights — civil, political, socialand economic — and respect
for the dignity of persons. He
was considered a crusader forthe human rights of the Dalits in
India.2
The Hindu religious belief that
"All human beings are not born
equal" creates caste-based
discrimination against the Dalitsthat leads to various forms ofviolence against them including
public humiliation, torture,rape, beating and killing.
Reacting to the values of
Hinduism, Rabindranath Gorewrote,
We do not value Hinduism,
we value human dignity… We
want equal rights in thesociety. We will achieve themas far as possible whileremaining within the Hindu
fold or if necessary by kicking

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56
away this worthless Hindu
identity.3

Ambedkar was a great supporterof women's liberation. He
blamed the verna system, which
has not only subjugated Dalits
but also women. He questioned
Manu Smriti (Laws of Manu),
the law book (Dharam-Shastra)of Brahminic Hinduism andattributed to Manu, thel e g e n d a r y fi r s t m a n a n dl a w g i v e r. M a n u S m r i t iprescribed the Dharma of each
Hindu, stating the obligations
attached to his or her social
class and stage of life. It was
hostile to the interest of lower
caste people and women. It
prohibited re-marriage ofwidows. He felt that Manu
Smriti was solely responsible forthe downfall of Hindu women.
He encouraged the Dalits toembrace Buddhism to liberate
their own selves from Hindu
subjugation. Hence he foughtfor the right to choose ones'
faith. After embracing
Buddhism, Ambedkar said,“[U]nfortunately for me I wasborn a Hindu Untouchable... I
solemnly assure you I will not
die as a Hindu.” He practiced
what he advocated and becamea Buddhist in 1956.
He also wrote about the French
revolution ideas of fraternity,
liberty and equality. He thoughtthat the French and Russian
revolutions failed to realize all
three ideas. He believed thatthey could not all be realized
except through the way of the
Buddha.4

Means and Ends for Struggle
He adopted various means tosafeguard dalit rights. Ambedkar
launched a movement against
dalit discrimination by creating
public opinion through his
writings in several periodicals

9such as Mook Nayak, Vahishkrit
Bharat, and Equality Janta,
wh i ch h e s t a r t e d f o r t h eprotection of dalit rights.
He also launched numerous
movements. One of thememorable struggles of theD a l i t s w a s t h e Va i k k o mSatyagraha in Travancore in
Maharashtra,5 which asserted
the right of the Dalits to worship
in Hindu temples without
hindrance. Another verysignificant movement was
Mahad March6 to assert therights of Dalits to take waterfrom public watering places.
Ambedkar organized the Dalit
rally to assert their legal right totake water from the Chowdar
tank. The Chowdar tank of
Mahad was made a public tankin 1869. In 1923, the Bombay
Legislative Council passed a
resolution to the effect that the
Dalits be allowed to use all
public watering places. The
Mahad Municipality passed a
resolution on 5 January 1927 to
the effect that the Municipality
had no objection to allowing
the Dalits to use the tank. But
the higher castes were hesitantin allowing the Dalits to use thetank. Soon after this resolution
was passed a conference of the
Dalits of the Colaba district washeld for two days. Ambedkar
also convened a conference on
18-20 March 1927 on thisissue. On 20 March 1927, theconference exhorted the Dalits
to go to the Chowdar Tank andexercise their right to take waterfrom it. The Hindus who had
exhorted them to be boldinstantly realized that this was abombshell and immediately ran
away. But the electrified Dalits
led by Ambedkar marched in aprocession through the mainstreets and for the first time
drank the water from Chowdar
tank.

FOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56

Another temple entry
movement took place at theKalaram temple at Nasik in
Maharashtra State. On 13
October 1935, at a conference
convened on the issue,
Ambedkar recounted theexperience of the depressedclasses and the immense
sacrifices made by them tosecure minimum human rights
under the aegis of Hinduism.7

was a delegate at the Round
Table Conference in London,
where he asked for separate
electorate for the Dalits. It is nota surprise that subsequently
Ambedkar saw to it that thewelfare of the Scheduled Castepeople were guaranteed in the1949 Constitution of India in
the form of reservation inlegislative, employment andeducational fields.

Ambedkar fought for the rights
of workers and peasants. In thelate 1920s and especially in the
1930s when he had formed his
Independent Labour Party, hetook up the cause of tenants(from both the dalit Mahars andthe caste Hindu Kunbis) in the
Konkan region of Maharashtra.
With the support of radicals
then in the Congress Socialist
Party, the Independent Labour
Party organized a huge march of
20,000 peasants to Mumbai in
1938, the largest preindependence peasantmobilization in the region. In
the same year, Ambedkar joinedwith the Communists toorganize a strike of Mumbai
textile workers in protest against
a bill about to be introduced by
the British Government to curvelabor strikes.8 Ambedkar took
the lead in condemning the billin the assembly and argued thatthe right to strike was simply
another name for the right tofreedom of assembly.

Ambedkar was a great
champion of the dalit cause
because he succeeded inturning the depressed class
movement into a revolutionary
movement throughout India.
Today India has witnessed theoppressed classes walking on
the streets of cities and villages
with confidence and poise, ofcourse many despicable acts of
discrimination and violenceagainst the dalits still occur. Yet
the juggernaut of equality isrolling on remorselessly andforcefully.

British Raj and Protection
for Dalits
The demand for safeguards andprotection of Scheduled Castes(earlier called Depressed Class)has a long history dating toMontague-Chelmsford Reformof 1919 during the British Raj
period. Ambedkar had beenclosely involved in the struggle
to give Scheduled Caste people
solid statutory safeguard. He

Conclusion
Ambedkar is India's foremost
human rights activist during the
2 0 t h c e n t u r y. H e i s a n
e m a n c i p a t o r, s c h o l a r,
extraordinary social reformer
and a true champion of humanrights.9 It can be said that he is
one of the highly regarded
Indians whose emancipationand em pow eri n g r o l e f or
oppressed groups that cut
against the gender divide has
inspired subaltern groups allover the world. All should try totake inspiration from Dr. B. R.
Ambedkar's life and work forthe creation of a just andgender-neutral world.
Joseph Benjamin, PhD, is thehead of the Department of
Political Science, St. Francis de
S a l e s ’ C o l l e g e , N a g p u r,
Maharashtra, India.

10

For further information, pleasecontact: Joseph Benjamin, PhD,
Department of Political Science,
St. Francis de Sales’ College,
S e m i n a r y H i l l s , N a g p u r,
Maharashtra, India, ph(91-712-2511354-) e-mail:jppj@sify.net.in

Endnotes
1 Shyam Lal and K. S. Saxena,
editors, Ambedkar and Nation
Building (Delhi: Rawat
Publication, 1998), page 254.
2 Yogendra Makwana, “AmbedkarA c r u s a d e r,” i n Yo g e n d r a
Makwana, editor, Ambedkar andSocial Justice (New Delhi:
Publication Division,
Government of India), 1992,
page 68.
3 M. S. Gore, The Social Context ofan Ideology (Delhi: Sage
Publication, 1993), pages 91-97.
4 Va s a n t M o o n , e d i t o r, D r.
Babasaheb Ambedkar Writingsand Speeches, volume 3(Bombay: Government of
Maharashtra, 1987), page 462,
cited in Gail Omvedt, Ambedkar
As A Human Rights Leader,available in www.ambedkar.org/
gail/AmbedkarAs.htm
5 Shyam Lal and K. S. Saxena, op.
cit., page 255.
6 Babasaheb Ambedkar, Writingsand Speeches, Vol. 5 (Bombay:
Government of Maharashtra,
1990), pages 248-252.
7 A K Majunder and Bhanwar
Singh, editors, Ambedkar andSocial Justice (New Delhi: Radha
Publications, 1997), pages
159-165.
8 Gail Omvedt, op. cit.
9 Dhananjay Keer, Ambedkar: Life
and Mission (Bombay: Popular
Publication, 1962).

FOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56

Matsumoto Jiichiro – Peacenik?
Ian NearyM

atsumoto Jiichiro(1867-1966) was one of, if
not the, most important humanrights activist in Japan in thetwentieth century. His main
contribution to that movement
was as leader of the Buraku
liberation movement. He wasborn and brought up within ahousehold in a Buraku
community located to the eastof Fukuoka and he retained
links with that community
throughout his life. After
experiencing discrimination at
upper primary school he moved
to continue his education first in
Kyoto and then Tokyo but
returned to Fukuoka to attend
the medical prior toconscription. He was not
required for military service andinstead left Japan soon after his
twenty-first birthday to spend
three years in north China.
Returning from there in 1910 hestarted to work in a building
business that had been set upby his brothers. This was turned
into a legal corporation in 1916
and it was to grow into a major
construction company over the
next decades generating profitsthat would support not only
organized opposition todiscrimination but also othercauses of the socialist left.

Anti-discrimination
Movement
Activists founded the Suiheisha(National Leveler’s Association)
to encourage the Burakumin to
overcome discrimination ‘byour own efforts’. It was initiallybased in the Kansai region but
when the leadership sought toestablish a branch in Kyushu it
was Matsumoto to whom theyturned for support. Soon after
the Kyushu Suiheisha wascreated Matsumoto wasselected as chairman of thenational organization and hecontinued in that role until them ove m e n t wa s f o r c e d t odisband in 1942. When the
movement was re-constructedin the post war era, known as
the Buraku Liberation League(BLL) from 1955, he was its
unchallenged leader until his
death. In practically all of the
speeches that he made in thepost war period, whether inJapan or overseas, he would talkof the need to oppose
discrimination against
Burakumin within Japan andseek to establish broad respectfor human rights there andacross the world.
However this was not his only
contribution to the developmentof progressive causes in Japan.
In 1936 he was elected to theJapanese parliament where hecontinued to serve throughout
the war years until 1945. Hisconstruction company
prospered through the war years
and into the occupation. He
was a founding member of theJapan Socialist Party (JSP) in
November 1945 and following
his election in 1947 he became
deputy speaker of the House ofCouncillors until his removal

11

from politics by a purge order in
1949. Nevertheless he resumed
his political career in 1953 andwas re-elected three times, oneach occasion increasing his
number of votes.
Meanwhile in 1953 he visited
Beijing for the first time and on
his return was elected aschairman of the Japan China
Friendship Association (Nitchu
Kyokai) another role that hecontinued to perform until his
death. All of this is relatively
well known and documented in
the various biographies andmemoires about his life.
However in this short article I
want to comment on anotherdimension of his activity thathas attracted rather lessattention: his involvement in theinternational peace movement.

International Peace
Movement
His purge from politics in 1949
was said to be because of his
links with the wartime regime inthe early 1940s but a more
likely explanation is that it was
because he was a prominentand vociferous critic of theemperor and emperor system.
In May 1952, about ninemonths after the purge order
was lifted, he was invited to
Beijing to attend a preparatory
meeting to organize the Asia
Pacific Peace conference.
However the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs (MFA) refused to givehim a passport. Preparations

FOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"
continued in Japan to send
representatives and a delegationof sixty was selected with
Matsumoto as its leader. Onceagain the MFA refused to allow
him to go despite him
launching a legal appeal against
their decision. He neverthelesssent a message to theconference held in October
1952 which was broadcast byradio back to Japan and he wasselected one of the eleven vicepresidents of the Peace Liaison
Committee of the Asia Pacificregion. In October 1952 Jean
Lafitte of the World PeaceCouncil invited him to aconference in Vienna – anotherevent he was not allowed toattend.
He was allowed to attend ameeting of Asian socialists in
Rangoon in January 1953
representing the Left Wing of
the Japan Socialist Party. After
this he went on to India, Europe– meeting Jean Lafitte in Prague– and finally ending up in
Beijing at the end of February
1953. In most of the countries
he visited on this trip hecontacted local representativesof the peace movement. The
following year he visited China
again, this time to attend thefifth anniversary of the foundingof the People’s Republic ofChina and while he was there
he met Jawaharlal Nehru, prime
minister of India spending anight at the theatre with him.
From there he went on to visit
Moscow, Helsinki and finally
Stockholm where he was one of
the four Japanese delegates at a
meeting of the World PeaceCouncil. He made a speech
there in which he talked of thecampaigns against nuclear
weapons in Japan, protests
about Buraku discrimination

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56
and the need to promote
friendship with China.
In 1954 Nehru and Zhou En-lai
announced their Five Principles
of Co-existence as Nehru led
India from a position of westernoriented neutralism to one
independent of both Cold War
blocs. The development of the
Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)
was further consolidated at theBandung conference held in
April 1955 that Matsumoto
attended as an observer. It isclear from the speeches hemade at this time that he would
have liked Japan to become an
active member of the NAM
even if, or perhaps precisely
because, this would have meant
Japan would have had to break
its links with the USA.
L a t e r, i n J u n e t h a t y e a r,
Matsumoto was a delegate at
the World Assembly for Peacein Stockholm that heard
speeches from leaders of theEuropean peace movement
including Bertrand Russell andJean-Paul Sartre. He was amember of a ‘sub-commission’on Asia that welcomed thenews about ‘the growing effortsof the Japanese people to gettheir country to conduct an
independent policy of peaceand re-establish relations withall countries.’ This should, they
concluded ‘be held as a positive
contribution to peacefulcoexistence.’

Japanese Peace Movement
In September 1955 Matsumoto
became a member of theJapanese committee of the
movement to abolish nuclear
weapons (Gensuibaku Kinshi
Nihon Kyogikai) and in April thefollowing year he spoke at the12

movement’s conference. This
probably explains the invitationthat came in 1957 for him tovisit Australia to attend a
National Conference for Peace
and to make a series ofspeeches in various cities there
in support of the campaign
against nuclear weapons. After
spending a month in Australia
he went on to New Zealand totalk at a number of meetingsorganized by the peace
movement there. Just as he wasleaving he was interviewed for anewspaper article. He took thisopportunity to re-affirm his
republicanism, ‘there is a
prospect within our time of theend of the Emperor system’, ofhis, and the Japanese people’s
opposition to the developmentof nuclear weapons. He warns
about the current Prime
Minister, Kishi Nobusuke, who
was about to visit the country
saying that, ‘He is not a suitable
leader to improve relations withNew Zealand and Australia.’
As it turned out this was the lastcontribution he made to theinternational peace movement
although he continued to give it
h i s s u p p o r t w i t h i n Ja p a n
becoming a member of theJapan Peace Council in July
1959. By this point he was 73
and suffering from high bloodpressure. His doctors advised
him against foreign travel.
Nevertheless he gave his fullendorsement to the campaigns
against the renewal of the
Security Treaty with the USA
and the presence of US baseson Japanese soil.
Meanwhile the BLL in the
1950s had embarked on
campaigns against instances of(Continued on page 15)

FOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56

Normalization of Aceh: Impossible Without Truth-telling,* Part 2
Amiruddin al Rahabin addressing
Compromises
human rights violationscommitted during the pastregime in Aceh are based on a
hoped-for “new future”
perspective, rather than on theprinciple of accountability.
Compromises are allowed aslong as the human rights
violations victims are not leftout and human rights violations
are not justified. In humanrights terms, this is known astransitional justice.
Ruti Teitel (2004) explains thattransitional justice is basically anormative change thatrearranges the social system andthe legal and political structuresat the same time. Therefore,transitional justice should
include constitutional change(governing norms), legal
sanctions, reparation forvictims, restoration of
reputation, and reconstructionof history. The change in legal
norms aims to encourage
political or power managementchange. Old mechanisms areusually being reformed toachieve justice. Truth-telling asa tool to achieve justice and toshow the responsibility of thestate (government) for violence
that happened in the past is aform of this new mechanism.
In the light of this theory,transitional justice is not merely
about meting out punishment to
individuals found responsible
for the violence, but more on
finding and revealing thesources of fear, sense of
insecurity, and injustice.
The
2005
Helsinki
Memorandum of Understanding(Helsinki MoU) and the Law
No. 11 Year 2006 on Aceh
Governance (UU PA) are forms
of normative legal changes thatprovide the basis for thepolitical authority in Aceh toencourage further normativechanges to achieve justice fortheAcehnese.
The
establishment of a Human
Rights Court and a Truth
Commission are initial
measures in the search for thesources of fear and sense of
insecurity, and also sources ofnormative basis for restoring
reputations and providing
reparation to the victims.

Under this situation, how muchnegative impact did themilitarization of Aceh during
the DOM era cause? Only by
understanding these negative
impacts that the healing and therearrangement of political andcultural structures in Aceh canb e m a p p e d o u t . Wi t h o u t
understanding these negative
impacts, the rehabilitation
programs being carried out by
provincial government (Badan
Pelaksana Harian ReintegrasiDamai Aceh or BRA) become
artificial in the context of thestill remaining militarized social
structure of Aceh.

D e fi n i n g t h e T r u t h :Understanding History

Therefore, understanding thetruth about the human rights
violations during the DOM era
means understanding how themilitary regime worked in Aceh.
It also means showing how the
Acehnese people wereorganized and shaped by thepolitical system of the military
regime. The change of thepolitical system in Aceh byvirtue of the Helsinki MoU andUU PA is aimed at reducing thenegative impacts of the military
regime and creating possibilities
for a new and demilitarized
Acehnese society.

To understand the truth about
the past human rights violationsin Aceh, one has to analyze thesituation of Aceh as a Military
Operation District (daerah
operasi militer or DOM).
During the DOM era, thegovernment of Aceh became an
extension of the military
establishment. This turned the
DOM regime into an institution
with dual character: politicaland military. Its politicalcharacter consisted of being an
institution under the control oft h e A r m e d Fo rc e s o f t h e
Republic of Indonesia (ABRI)
that made political decisions,while in implementing thesepolitical decisions it assumed amilitary character. ABRI was themain political force in Acehduring the DOM era, andhuman rights violations did notconstitute mere abuses but themeans by which to maintain the
DOM regime itself.

13

Roles of Religious Leaders in
the Transition
Major General Supiadin AS, theChief of the Aceh MilitaryCommand (KODAM), asked theulamas to take an active role inurging the children of thevictims of conflict not to remain
vengeful. Major General
Supiadin AS asked the ulamas
to use “religious activities suchas Koran readings, religious

FOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56

lecturesandpreaching” (Serambi Indonesia,
9 M ay 2 0 0 7 ) t o p r e v e n t
vengeance from breeding.

restore the social legitimacy of
the ulamas.

Unfortunately this appeal
retained the ulamas’ traditionalrole during the conflict aspolitical messengers of themilitary. Politically, the politicalmessengers are called
collaborators, agents whoalways support government
policies. (Tim Kell, 1995) Thisrole was confirmed when theulamas organized theIndonesian Council of Ulamas(MUI) in 1975, which was seen
“as a means of mobilizing
Muslim support for thegovernment’s development
policies” or as described by the
Religious Minister at that time,
the function of the ulamas was“to translate government policy
into a language that the ummah(Muslim community)
understands.” One author sees
the MUI performing a security
role in the 1980s by “assisting
the
army
in
its
counterinsurgency campaign
against Achenese rebels.”

The Helsinki MoU (Chapter 2,
Article 3) and UU PA (Chapter
229) provide for theestablishment of a Truth andReconciliation Commission tofind out the truth about theviolence of the past through thetestimonies of affected people
and the gathering of otherinformation. Will thiscommission be able to bring out
the truth and lead toreconciliation among, andj u s t i c e f o r, t h e p a r t i e s
concerned? Will vengeanceamong the aggrieved disappear?

In late 1990s, thestandardization of the village
governance structure and thedevolution of power down tothe village level resulted in theloss of the social legitimacy of
the ulamas.
In order for Major General
Supiadin’s appeal to become
meaningful and productive, allulamas throughout Aceh should
transform themselves from theirtraditional role as collaborators
to that of reformers. And toassume this latter role, theulamas have to keep distancef r o m g o v e r n m e n t p o w e r,
become guardians and agents oftruth, and fight for the social,economic, civil and politicalrights of the victims of pastviolence. This will eventually

Truth and JusticeMartha Minow (1998) argues
that vengeance melts away ifthere is a process of “restoring
dignity to victims” and not
merely by having “prosecutions
and amnesties.” Some steps areneeded such as the following:
Commission of inquiry into
the facts; opening access tosecret police files; removing
prior political and military
officials and civil servants
from theirs post and fromthe rolls for public benefits;
publicizing the names ofoffenders and names ofvictims; securing
reparations and apologies
for victims; devising andmaking available
appropriate therapeutic
services for any person
affected by the horrors,
devising art and memorials
to mark what happened tohonor the victims and tocommunicate the aspirationof “never again”; andadvancing public
educational programs toconvey what happened andto strengthen participatory
democracy and humanrights.

14

Based on these requirements,
truth means acknowledgment of
all the bitter experiences facedby the victims through a clear
and proven mechanism.
Acknowledging the truth about
the victims’ experiences
becomes the foremost step
toward restoring the dignity ofthe victims and their families.
Another author suggests the“survivors’ justice approach”
which focuses on reconciliation
to remove vengeance.
(Mahmood Mamdani, 2001)
Reconciliation means those
who survived the armed conflictand violence strive to build
themselves up along with othergroups. The blame is not on
individuals but on the systemthat opens the possibility forinhuman wrongdoings to occur.
The key steps are theacknowledgment of all thevictims’ experiences andimmediate changes to all
institutions that contributed tothe past violence. These steps
are aimed at preventing the badexperiences of the past fromhappening again.
The problem of post-conflict
vengeance is indeed acollective problem, not a
problem of the individual.
Violence in a conflict is acollective experience that
accumulates over time. There
should be no space forforgetting, rather a space forremembering and transforming
the memory into something
productive - a space for healing.
Healing in the context ofc o l l e c t ive m e m o r y s u r e l ycannot be achieved throughreligious activities such as
Quran reading or moral
preaching, but throughmaterialization of justice. AlQuran provides a principle: “O
ye who believe! Be ye staunch
in Justice, witness for Allah,even though against
yourself” (QS al-Nisa 4:135).

FOCUS ASIA!PACIFIC"
This principle should become
the guide in healing the woundsof the victims to regain theirdignity.

Conclusion

JUNE 2009 VOLUME 56
a n d g ove r n m e n t ; s e c o n d ,provision of legitimacy to thegrowth of the anti-peace forcesthat will manipulate thesituation and agitate the people
towards violence.

The normalization of Aceh will
hit a dead end if truth-telling is
not done soon. Prolonging theabnormal condition will only
give room for instability toappear within each party
involved. The worst impacts ofthis prolonged abnormality are:first, a crystallization of theapathy and skepticism of thepeople toward the new elites

Amiruddin al Rahab is a
Member of Aceh Working
G r o u p , a n d Po l i t i c a l a n d
Human Rights Analyst of
ELSAM.

(Continued from page 12)

made to the Buraku liberation
movement thanks to theextensive coverage of most
aspects of his life inpublications produced by the
BLL. There is however relatively
little about his involvement in
the peace movement despitethat fact that he was a memberof several of the key committees
within Japan and seems to haveplayed a relatively high profilerole in international
conferences in the mid 1950s. I
wonder if there is more detailed
evidence about what he didsleeping in the archives of theAustralian or Japanese peace
movement?

discrimination against
Burakumin trying to link these
protests to demands that thestate accept its responsibility forthe poverty in which most
Buraku families lived. Thesedemands were backed by the
JSP but only in 1960 did thegovernment concede that theyshould investigate to see whatmight be done. A report basedon these investigations was
published in 1965 andsuggested that the state not only
i n t e r ve n e t o i m p r ove t h ephysical environment of the
Burakumin but also provide
assistance to enable them todevelop their living andeducation standards. While
Matsumoto broadly welcomed
the report’s recommendations
h e wa s w o r r i e d t h a t t h eimprovement schemes mightundermine the Buraku
communities’ self-reliance that
the Suiheisha had sought toencourage.

Two Concluding Questions
We know quite a lot about thecontribution that Matsumoto

For further information, pleasecontact: Institute for Policy
Research and Advocacy(ELSAM), Jl. Siaga II No. 31,
Pejaten Barat, Jakarta 12510,

Another aspect of his life thatremains unexplored is theperiod between 1942 and 1945
when he continued to be active
as a politician and took part in
the government of wartime
Japan both at the national andlocal levels. He never talked
about this time frankly ort r a n s p a r e n t l y. T h i s i sunderstandable. He tried to reinvent himself in the 1950s as
an advocate of peace and critic
of government both at home

15

INDONESIA; ph (62-21)
7972662, 79192564; fax(62-21) 79192519; e-mail:o f fi c e @ e l s a m . o r . i d ,advokasi@indosat.net.id;
www.elsam.or.id
Endnote* This article was originally writtenby the author in Bahasa
Indonesia and translated into
English by Dhyta Catura. The firstpart of this article appeared in the
March 2009 issue of thispublication. Other endnotes
omitted due to space limitation.

and abroad. It would haveundermined his credentials if hehad been too open about what
he did in the war. What isperhaps less easy to understandis why in the twenty-first
century there remains so little
written about this period in hislife. Matsumoto was, like all of
us a complicated person, andone who lived in difficult andconfusing times. Would it not
add to our understanding ofboth the period and the person
if more light were shone on
those aspects of his life thatcreate difficulties for those of us
who would praise him?
Ian Neary is Professor in the
Politics of Japan at Oxford
University and is completing a
biography of Matsumoto Jiichirothat will be published by
Routledge by the end of 2009.
For further information, pleasecontact: Professor Ian Neary,
Nissan Institute, 27 Winchester
Rd, Oxford OX2 6NA, e-mailian.neary@nissan.ox.ac.uk

HURIGHTS OSAKA Calendar

DE
AU
OSAKA

ST
PO

BUR
E

HURIGHTS OSAKA has published the 2009 edition of the annual publication Asia-Pacific Human
Rights Review (in Japanese language). This edition has the theme “Cross-border Marriage from Women’s
Human Rights Perspective,” focusing on marriages between men from Japan, Korea, and Taiwan withwomen from developing countries, including China, the Philippines and Vietnam. Academics
researching the issues of cross-border marriage and migration, and NGO workers working on the rights
of female migrants wrote the articles. The second part of the publication contains articles related to therecent developments in human rights activities in the Asia-Pacific region.

JAPON

TAXE PERCUEPRINTED MATTERAIR MAIL

May be opened for inspection by the postal service.

HURIGHTS OSAKA, inspired by the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, formally opened in December 1994. lt has the following goals: 1) to promote human rights
in the Asia- Pacific region; 2) to convey Asia-Pacific perspectives on human rights to the international
community; 3) to ensure inclusion of human rights principles in Japanese international cooperative activities; and 4) to raise human rights awareness among the people in Japan in meeting its growing internationalization. In order to achieve these goals, HURIGHTS OSAKA has activities such as Information Handling, Research and Study, Education and Training, Publications, and Consultancy Services.
FOCUS Asia-Pacific is designed to highlight significant issues and activities relating to human rights in
the Asia-Pacific. Relevant information and articles can be sent to HURIGHTS OSAKA for inclusion in thenext editions of the newsletter.
FOCUS Asia-Pacific is edited by Osamu Shiraishi, Director of HURIGHTS OSAKA.
Sender:

HURIGHTS OSAKA(Asia-Pacific Human Rights Information Center)
3F, piaNPO, 2-8-24 Chikko Minato-ku Osaka 552-0021 Japan
Phone: (816)6577-3578! !
Fax: (816)6577-3583
E-mail: webmail@hurights.or.jp Web site: http://www.hurights.or.jp

HURIGHTS OSAKA