Military officers behind acid attack on Indonesian activist sentenced

Lead

An Indonesian military court in Jakarta on Wednesday sentenced four officers from the armed forces’ Strategic Intelligence Agency to prison terms ranging from one and a half to three years for their roles in a sulphuric-acid attack on human-rights activist Andrie Yunus. The 27-year-old deputy coordinator of the Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence, known as KontraS, was left blind in one eye and with extensive burns after the assault in March. Presiding judges found the men guilty of serious premeditated assault, a charge that carried a maximum penalty of 12 years. According to multiple outlets including Al Jazeera, the South China Morning Post and The Hindu, the sentences and the military-court process have drawn sharp criticism from the activist’s legal team and rights organisations.

Coverage Comparison

Reporting across international outlets converges on the core facts of the verdict and the identity of the victim while differing in emphasis and detail. ABC Australia, Al Jazeera, the South China Morning Post and The Hindu all state that four members of the military’s Strategic Intelligence Agency, or BAIS, received jail terms of up to three years after being convicted of premeditated assault. Al Jazeera and ABC Australia both note that Yunus suffered second- and third-degree burns covering roughly a quarter, or more than 20 percent, of his body and lost sight in one eye. The South China Morning Post similarly reports that he was left blind in one eye.

Al Jazeera places the trial in a broader political context, reporting that it began in April in Jakarta and attracted national and international attention amid concerns over the military’s expanding role. ABC Australia highlights criticism from Yunus’s lawyers and human-rights groups who described the proceedings as a “sham,” and notes that prosecutors and judges commented on the activist’s absence from court. The Hindu and the South China Morning Post both report that the head of BAIS stepped down after the attack; The Hindu further cites the bench’s finding that the assault was not directed by any chain of command. ABC Australia is the only outlet among those examined that details prosecutors’ assertion of a personal motive linked to Yunus’s activism and the judges’ characterisation of the defendants’ conduct as “arrogant.” Differences appear mainly in the weight given to institutional accountability versus individual culpability and in the amount of space devoted to rights groups’ objections.

Key Claims

• Four Indonesian military intelligence officers were sentenced to terms of between 1.5 and three years for involvement in the acid attack on Andrie Yunus, according to Al Jazeera, the South China Morning Post, The Hindu and ABC Australia.
• Yunus was left blind in one eye and with burns on more than 20 percent, or approximately a quarter, of his face and body, as reported by Al Jazeera and ABC Australia.
• The officers were convicted of serious premeditated assault, a finding carried by all five source extracts.
• The trial opened in April in Jakarta and drew national and international notice, according to Al Jazeera.
• Yunus had been a vocal critic of the military’s growing influence in civilian institutions, a point noted by Al Jazeera, ABC Australia and The Hindu.
• The head of the Strategic Intelligence Agency resigned after the attack in what officials described as a form of responsibility, per the South China Morning Post and The Hindu.
• Yunus’s legal team and human-rights organisations criticised the military-court process as a “sham,” according to ABC Australia.
• Prosecutors argued the officers acted out of anger over the activist’s work, a claim reported by Al Jazeera; The Hindu cites the court’s statement that the attack was not influenced by any chain of command.

Perspectives

Military and judicial authorities have presented the case as an instance of individual misconduct rather than institutional policy. According to The Hindu, Judge Fredy Ferdian Isnartanto stated that the attack was not influenced by any chain of command and characterised the defendants’ behaviour as “arrogant.” The Hindu and ABC Australia report that the two officers judged most directly responsible were also dishonourably discharged. A military spokesperson, cited by the South China Morning Post and The Hindu, described the resignation of BAIS chief Yudi Abrimantyo as an act of responsibility. Prosecutors, according to ABC Australia, told the court they did not believe the officers intended permanent injury and sought sentences of two and a half years; the bench ultimately imposed terms ranging from 1.5 to three years, with the heaviest penalty given to the officer found to have carried out the attack and encouraged the others.

Yunus’s legal representatives and rights advocates have rejected both the adequacy of the sentences and the legitimacy of the forum. ABC Australia reports that the Advocacy Team for Democracy effectively boycotted the proceedings, calling them a sham, and that a witness-protection agency informed the court Yunus was medically unfit to appear. The same outlet notes that judges cited the activist’s non-participation as a factor considered in sentencing. Al Jazeera and ABC Australia both frame the assault against the backdrop of wider civil-society concern about the military’s expanding influence; Al Jazeera reports that experts linked the case to patterns of repression and democratic backsliding. Critics quoted across the coverage maintain that those who may have planned or authorised the attack beyond the four convicted men have not been identified.

The attack itself occurred on the night of 12 March in central Jakarta. Multiple outlets recount that Yunus was followed by the officers after leaving a podcast recording on the military’s role in civilian institutions; two men on a motorcycle threw sulphuric acid at him while he rode his own bike. CCTV footage described by ABC Australia shows him dropping the motorcycle and screaming as bystanders approached. He remains under medical care months later, undergoing repeated treatment for disfiguring burns and loss of vision in his right eye. The four convicted men—identified across reports as Edi Sudarko, Budi Hariyanto Widhi Cahyono (also rendered Budhi), Nandala Dwi Prasetia (or Prasetya), and Sami Lakka—held ranks of captain, first lieutenant and second sergeant within BAIS. Defence lawyers, according to The Hindu, said they would consider an appeal.

The case continues to serve as a reference point in Indonesian debates over accountability for violence against rights defenders and the proper scope of military jurisdiction when service members are accused of crimes against civilians.