THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF SERIOUS HUMAN RIGHT ABUSE DURING THE INDONESIAN NEW ORDER ERA

Efforts to encourage accountability cases of gross human rights violations of the past regime in Indonesia is part of measures to ensure the enforcement of the rule of law and the principle of protection of human rights are fully guaranteed by the 1945 Constitution of the State of the Republic Indonesia (The New Indonesian Constitution 1945). However, post-reform to date, these efforts were never implemented properly, fairly and worth. So that the expected substance accountability can never be realized. This article will briefly 1) Explain the importance of account for cases of gross violations of human rights of the new order for the Indonesian nation. 2) Describe the ideal concept of accountability cases of gross violations of human rights of the new order. With the use of normative juridical approach (normative approach), socio-juridical (sociological approach), conceptual (analytical and conceptual approach), case (case method), and comparative approach (comparative approach) obtained results, among others: A) state accountability on cases of gross human rights violations of the new order formally through a committee or body that gets stronger the legitimacy of the government would at least be able to: [1] Reveal the truth of an event (rights to know); [2] To identify the perpetrators; [3] Giving recognition to the victims [4] Finding and identifying the bureaucracy damage due to abuse in the past to be restored. [5] To ensure the certainty of the non-recurrence of violence and abuse of authority in the country today. All of this accountability targets will only be successful if implemented correctly and worth (right and proper). B) With the political situation of impunity that is still looking to strengthen the concept of accountability cases of gross violations of human rights of the new order, especially for cases other than human rights violations in 1965 should still refer to the provisions of Law No. 26 of 2000 on Human Rights Court that is through the ad hoc court. As for the case in 1965, the settlement can be done through the Truth for Reconciliation Commission.