ARSIP-ARSIP SEJARAH ACEH

DEKLARASI PERANG ACEH DI MEDIA

LONDON TIMES and NEW YORK TIMES, 1873, wrote:

 

 

This event hat attracted powerful world-wide attention. President Ulysses S.Grant of the United States issued his famous ´Proclamation of Impartial Neutrality´ in this war between Holland and Acheh. President Grant then sent following message to the Congress: “Official information is being received from the Dutch Government of a state of war between the King of the Netherlands and the Sultan of Acheh. The officer of the US who were near the seat of the war were instructed to observe impartial neutrality.” (Messages and Papers of the Presidents, p.4192)

 

 

 

The Battle of Bandar Acheh on March 26, 1873, between the Holland against the sovereign State of Acheh, Sumatra. The aftermath of this invasion was duly recorded on the front pages of pages of major contemporary newspapers all over the world

 

 

The LONDON TIMES, on April 22, 1873, wrote: “A remarkable incident in modern kolonial history is reported from the East Indian Archipelago. A considerable force of Europeans has been defeated and held in check by the army of native state…the State of Acheh. The Achehnese have gained a decisive victory. Their enemy is not only defeated, but compelled to withdraw.”

 

 

 

 

       

 

The NEW YORK TIMES, May 6th, 1873, wrote: A sanguinary battle has taken place in Acheh a native Kingdom accupying the Nothern portion of the island of Sumatra. The Dutch delivered a general assault and now we have detail of the result. The attack was repulsed with great slaughter. The Dutch general was killed, and his army put to disastrous flight.”

 

ACEH HISTRORY

 

THE STATE OF ACHEH WAS AN INDEPENDENT SOVEREIGN STATE from 1500 on wards, and from the seventeenth century, it was recognized by Britain, the USA, Portugal, France, the Netherlands, and Turkey. A treaty was made between King James 1 of Britain and the Sultan of Acheh in 1603, and in 1819 a new Treaty was made administrator in the region, providing that “there shell be a perpetual peace, friendship an defensive Alliance between the States dominions and subjects of the High Contracting Parties, neither of whom shall give any aid or assistance to the enemies of other”

When the Dutch invaded Acheh on March 26, 1873, they informed the Government of the USA and asked for American endorsement of their aggression. President Ulysses S Grant refused this appear, declaring US neutrality and sending the following message to the congress.

“Official information being received from the Dutch government of state of war between the King of Netherlands and the Sultan of Acheen. The officers of the USA who where near the seat of the war were instructed to observe impartial neutrality. It is believed that they have done so”.

The war between the Netherlands and Acheh never came to a formal end, but the Dutch withdraw in March 1942, as a consequence of the war in the Pacific. They never tried to regain possession of Acheh after 1945, and they had no right or power to hand the State over to the newly created state of Indonesia, as they purported to do, on December 27, 1949, Following the withdrawal of the illegally occupying power, Acheh should have reverted to its former sovereign status. The transfer the power to a government in Jakarta without any consultation process, violated Articles 2 and 55 of the UN Charter, as well as Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and international customary law, later to be embodied in the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries an Peoples.

When Ottoman rule ended in Europe, the separate gained their independence, after centuries of occupation. At the end of World War 1, the peoples of the Austro-Hungarian empire gained their individual freedoms, and the Arab peoples of the Middle East set out along the path of self-determination. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the subject Republics reverted to their former sovereignty.

The International community should therefore acknowledge that handing over the people of Acheh to colonial and alien rule from Jakarta was a denial of the right which has been enjoyed by other peoples formerly under colonial and alien domination by neighboring powers since the early 19th century, and by the victims of ‘salt sea’ imperialism since World War II.

Every colonial territory a separate legal status from all other colonial territories, and each has a separate right to self-determination. This separate legal status cannot be annulled by an imperialist by an imperialist decision to unify the administration of a number of territories, as the Dutch did in Indonesia. The principle was upheld by the Security Council in the came of Namibia, which could not be integrated into South Africa when the mandate exercised by South Africa came to an end. Ironically, it was the Dutch Presidency of the Security Council which made a statement to the Security Council on February 3, 1985, that “The Namibian people have a right to self-determination …..” and the same right applies pari passu to the Achehnese.

The 1970 Declaration on Friendly Relation declared that nothing should impair the territorial integrity of sovereign and independent States, provided they were ‘possessed of a government representing the whole people belonging to the territory without distinction at to race, creed or color’. This implies that there is a right of secession where the condition is not satisfied, where there is a denial of the basic right occur, and the possibility of peaceful political solutions within the existing State structure are excluded . Therefore the international community has a duty to consider whether these tests are satisfied in the in the case of Acheh, over and above the duty to restore the sovereignty of a conquered state, exercised only recently in the case of Kuwait.

The forced integration of Eritrea with Ethiopia led to a thirty-five year war, and to animosities between the leadership of the two countries which have not yet been assuaged by the passage of time. The United Nations did not recognize that it had made a mistake until the people of Eritrea gained their freedom by an armed struggle which caused immense loss of life and suffering

on both sides. Yet the lesson was not learned, that mechanism ought to be established within the United Nations, for claimants to self-determination to put their case, and to have it judged by an independent tribunal in accordance with international law. The time has now come to act on the injunction of President Woodrow Wilson:

“National aspirations must be respected, peoples may be dominated and governed only by their consent. Self-determination is not a mere phrase. It is an imperative principle of action, which statesmen will henceforth ignore at their peril”.

According to all these rules and procedure which are being relentlessly executed in all ex-colonials territories except in the Dutch East Indies, so-called “Indonesia”. And that colonialism is considered an International Crime – UN Resolution 2621-XXV.

 

TENGKU TJHIK DI TiRO

 


Teungku Cik di TiroNo “family” had as much of an impact on the early phase of the Acheh War as the Tiro family. The ulamas from Tiro are said to have originated with a Javanese haji who settled in Pidie. (A haji is an Islamic believer who has made the haj, the pilgrimage to Mecca.) Tiro became a famous center of Islamic learning, the site of an important Islamic school (Bahasa Indonesia, pesantren). The haji’s son, Tengkoe Moehamad Amin di Tiro, studied under an ulama in the Tiro district and since then the family has been known as the Tiro ulamas. The grandson was Teungku Cik di Tiro 1836-91), one of the most famous ulamas (or imams) of the Acheh War. Teungku Cik di Tiro had four sons-the great-grandsons of the original ??vanese haji. Their names were Mat Amin; Majet; di Boekit Seboen, or ??b; and Lambada, or Lam. Teungku Cik di Tiro led a force estimated at 10000 men in a perang sabil, or holy war, against the colonial government, sown as the kuempeni. He sent letters to the uleebelangs encouraging them to fight for Allah. The letters begin with a greeting in Arabic and then continue: “To whom does the kingdom belong? The one, the powerful! Glory to Allah alone! This is the opinion of haji Sjech Saman Tirou Teungku Cik di Tiro], the servant of those who follow the way (sabil) of Allah and fight in the land of Acheh, land of freedom and security.” Teungku Cik di Tiro died in 1891; his sons Teungku Mat Amin and Teungku di Boekit died in a fierce hand-to-hand battle at Anakgalong on 28-29 June 1896. Captain van Daalen reported that at midnight two battalions marched to Lambaroe, under J. B. van Heutsz. They rested at Lambaroe and then marched to Anakgalong benteng, which was defended by 200 men. The battle was over fifteen minutes after the first shot was fired. One hundred and ten Achehnese corpses were discovered; the rest of the men fled. Teungku Mat Amin di Tiro’s body was carried to gampong Moereue, close to Indrapoeri, and it was buried next to his father in the same grave (kandang).Many relatives of Cik di Tiro died fighting the N.E.I., including sons, grandsons, fathers-in-law, brothers-in-law, and cousins. They believed in jihad. Many died in different battles that took place in 1911. Cik di Tiro’s randson Teungku Cik Amat di Tiro (Tengkoe Tjhi Maat di Tiro) was killed in the vicinity of Aloee Bhot on 3 December 1911, despite efforts by the Dutch officer to convince him to give up the struggle. The men who had opposed the Dutch were united by their Islamic faith and learning, but that faith had also been reinforced by family ties.References:

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE OF ACHEH – SUMATRA
Acheh, Sumatra, December 4, 1976

To The peoples Of The World:

We, the people of Acheh, Sumatra, exercising our right of self-determination, and protecting our historic right of eminent domain to our fatherland, do hereby declare ourselves free and independent from all political control of the foreign regime of Jakarta and the alien people of the island of Java.

Our fatherland, Acheh, Sumatra, had always been a free and independent sovereign State since the world begun. Holland was the first foreign power to attempt to colonize us when it declared war against the sovereign State of Acheh, on March 26, 1873, and on the same day invaded our territory, aided by Javanese mercenaries. The aftermath of this invasion was duly recorded on the front pages of contemporary newspapers all over the world. The London, TIMES, on April 22, 1873, wrote: “A remarkable incident in modern colonial history is reported from East Indian Archipelago. A considerable force of Europeans has been defeated and held in check by the army of native state…the State of Acheh. The Achehnese have gained a decisive victory. Their enemy is not only defeated, but compelled to withdraw. “THE NEW YORK TIMES, on May 6th, 1873, wrote: “A sanguinary battle has taken place in Aceh, a native Kingdom occupying the Northern portion of the island of Sumatra. The Dutch delivered a general assault and now we have details of the result. The attack was repulsed with great slaughter. The Dutch general was killed, and his army put to disastrous flight. It appears, indeed, to have been literally decimated.” This event had attracted powerful world-wide attention. President Ulysses S.Grant of the United States issued his famous Proclamation of impartial Neutrality in this war between Holland and Acheh.

On Christmas day, 1873, the Dutch invaded Acheh for the second time, and thus begun what HARPER’S MAGAZINE had called “A Hundred Years War of Today”, one of the bloodiest, and longest colonial war in human history, during which one-half of our people had laid down their lives defending our sovereign State. It was being fought right up to the beginning of world war II. Eight immediate forefathers of the signer of this Declaration died in the battlefields of that long war, defending our sovereign nation, all as successive rulers and supreme commanders of the forces of the sovereign and independent State of Acheh, Sumatra.

However, when, after World War II, the Dutch East Indies was supposed to have been liquidate, – an empire is not liquidated if its territorial integrity is preserved, – our fatherland, Acheh, Sumatra, was not returned to us. Instead, our fatherland was turned over by the Dutch to the Javanese – their ex-mercenaries, – by hasty flat of former colonial powers. The Javanese are alien and foreign people to us Achehnese Sumatrans. We have no historic, political, cultural, economic or geographic relationship with them. When the fruits of Dutch conquests are preserved, intact, and then bequeathed, as it were, to the Javanese, the result is inevitable that a Javanese colonial empire would be established in place of that of the Dutch over our fatherland,
Acheh, Sumatra. But, colonialism, either by white, Dutch, Europeans or by brown Javanese, Asians, is not acceptable to the people of Acheh, Sumatra.

This illegal transfer of sovereignty over our fatherland by the old, Dutch, colonialists to the new, Javanese colonialists, was done in the most appalling political fraud of the century: the Dutch colonialist was supposed to have turned over sovereignty over our fatherland to a “new nation” called “indonesia”. But “indonesia” was a fraud: a cloak to cover up Javanese colonialism. Since the world begun, there never was a people, much less a nation, in our part of the world by that name. No such people existed in the Malay Archipelago by definition of ethnology, philology, cultural anthropology, sociology, or by any other scientific findings. “Indonesia” is merely a new label, in a totally foreign nomenclature, which has nothing to do with our own history, language, culture, or interests; it was a new label considered useful by the Dutch to replace the despicable “Dutch East Indies”, in an attempt to unite administration of their ill-gotten, far-flung colonies; and the Javanese neo-colonialists knew its usefulness to gain fraudulent recognition from the unsuspecting world, ignorant of the history of the Malay Archipelago. If Dutch colonialism was wrong, then Javanese colonialism which was squarely based on it cannot be right. The most fundamental principle of international Law states: Ex injuria jus non oritur. Right cannot originate from wrong!

The Javanese, nevertheless, are attempting to perpetuate colonialism which all the Western colonial powers had abandoned and all the world had condemned. During these last thirty years the people of Acheh, Sumatra, have witnessed how our fatherland has been exploited and driven into ruinous conditions by the Javanese neo-colonialists: they have stolen our properties; they have robbed us from our livelihood; they have abused the education of our children; they have exiled our leaders; they have put our people in chains of tyranny, poverty, and neglect: the life-expectancy of our people is 34 years and is decreasing – compare this to the world’s standard of 70 years and is increasing! While Acheh, Sumatra, has been producing a revenue of over 15 billion US dollars yearly for the Javanese neo-colonialists, which they used totally for the benefit of Java and the Javanese.

We, the people of Acheh, Sumatra, would have no quarrel with the Javanese, if they had stayed in their own country, and if they had not tried to lord it over us. From no on, we intend to be the masters in our own house: the only way life is worth living; to make our own laws: as we see fit; to become the guarantor of our own freedom and independence: for which we are capable; to become equal with all the peoples of the world: as our forefathers had always been. In short, to become sovereign in our own fatherland!

Our cause is just! Our land is endowed by the Almighty with plenty and bounty. We covet no foreign territory. We intend to be a worthy contributor to human welfare the world over. We extend the hands of friendship to all peoples and to all governments from the four corners of the earth.

In the name of the sovereign people of Acheh, Sumatra.

Tengku Hasan M.di Tiro
Chairman, National Liberation Front of Acheh, Sumatra, and Head of State.

Acheh, Sumatra, December 4, 1976

 

TENGKU HASAN M. DI TIRO, BA, MA, PhD., LL.D

Born in the family of Tiro on September 4, 1930, he obtained his formal education in Acheh and in the United States. He com-pleted his tertiary education at the Colombia and Fordham universities obtain-ing degrees in political, economic sciences and in governmenatal administration as well as international law.He is also a well-known international businessman, a revolutionary, a world traveler who feels at home in the West as much as in the East. As a successful businessman he presided the Doral Interna-tional Ltd. New York, a company active in the field of investment banking, petroleum, natural gas, agriculture, husbandry, shipping and aviation industries.

In 1946, when he was 16, he wrote a book on Achieving Independence, a study and analysis of the French Revolution, the independence struggles of the Irish, Venezuelan, Columbian and Turkish peoples. It was from these sources that his ideal was born to return the glory and freedom of the Achehnese nation. Other books he wrote included the The Principles of an Islamic Nation (1947), and The Ducth-Acheh War (1948).

In 1958 he wrote Democracy for Indonesia in Malay and English that proposes the disbandment of the Javanese styled unitary state and replacing it with a federal system. The final words of that book say that if such proposal were not realized, the separation between the Javanese and the peoples of the other islands in the archipelago would be inevitable. The Javanese should have considered the proposal carefully, but chose instead to ban the book.

In 1965 he wrote The Political Future of the Malay World, in English and Malay, in which he proposes the return of the rights to self-determination for all the peoples of the Malay world and the ending of the Javanese colonization that has only replaced that of the Dutch.

In 1968, he wrote Acheh In The Eyes Of The World in Achehnese that analyses the position of the nation of Acheh throughout the centuries of its existence as a free, independent and sauvereign state which is well documented in world litterature and cartography.

The University of Plano in the US awarded the Tengku with a honorary degree of Doctor-at- Law (LL.D) in 1975, with the following citation: “For his long and dedicated devotion to the cause of liberty in Asia; for his successful efforts in international economic affairs that have bound men together; for his exemplary leadership in the Moslem World; and for his ecumenical efforts in banishing the religious barriers that have caused antagonisms among men”.

As an author, he has written more than 2 dozens of books on politics, history and law. Among these is a historical drama in English entitled: “The Drama of Achehnese History, 1873 – 1978″, that he wrote in the jungle of Acheh, in between battles and his sparetimes, with translations into Achehnese and Malay, explaining the origins of the The Declaration of Independence of Acheh on December 4, 1976. This work made the Javanese iisue a public order to capture him dead or alive! But he is still very much alive, safe and sound, leading the Armed Forces of the Free Acheh-Sumatra movement and heading the Nation of Acheh that has now liberated some ¾ of the national territory from the colonial occupation.

In 1978, the government of the Republic of Indonesia, its press, television, radio and other mass media means under the strict control of the Suharto dictatorial regime, announced his death. In fact, at that very time he was with members of his Cabinet in Acheh under the protection of the loyal people of Acheh. Such is the way and wish of the Suharto regime that even went against the Devine Decision.

In 1982, the Suharto regime again announced the demise of Tengku Hasan di Tiro, this time in the US.A book entitled “Indonesia handbooks”, the publication of which was sponsored by Suharto’s regime, reported his supposed death. It was very embarrassing for the regime when a little bit later, a well-known Canadian magazine, the Crescent International, commented that Teungku Hasan was seen walking around safe and sound in several cities in the US and Europe. But then of course, shame doesn’t seem to be in the vocabulary of the Javanese, as such blatant faking of reality did not stop there.

In 1984, Tengku Hasan was again reported dead by this regime. At that very time he was in fact fulfilling an invitation to deliver a speech at the Portuguese Parliament. After delivering the speech, he was shown the newspaper article that made everyone present burst into laughter over that shameful, crude and cheap propaganda ploy by the Javanese regime. The Tengku proceeded with the struggle for the independence of his nation. He managed to educate thousands of Acheh-Sumatran youngsters through the “ACHEHNESE EDUCATION” in order to “think free”. This education program ran through 1975 to 1990. Although Acheh now is in the phase of a military struggle, this educational program will not be stopped until independence is achieved.

Tengku Hasan di Tiro realizes that to achieve the independence of Acheh-Sumatra, an internal struggle alone won’t be sufficient; it must be supported by other peoples in the world, especially within the United Nations, who will eventually participate in the determination of the success of the struggle. It is for this reason that in 1991, the nation of Acheh-Sumatra obtained for the first time a chair in the Human Rights Commission of the United Nations, in which the Tengku delivered a speech.

In 1993, Tengku Hasan di Tiro successfully obtained a voting on the Acheh-Sumatra conflict in the UN Human Rights Commission. This voting, No. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1993/L.21 dated August 17 1993 that co-incided with the Indonesian national day, and was witnessed by the 29 members of the Javanese-Indonesian delegation, obtained the support 7 out of 13 votes necessary to pass the resolution by the Commission that has 25 members. The supporting votes came from the US, France, Great-Britain, Austria, Greece, Algeria and Ukrine.

In 1994, Acheh-Sumatra again obtained a special supporting Resolution No. CN.4/Sub.2/1994 L.25 dated August 18, 1998. On this occasion Acheh obtained an additional vote from Cameroun.

This development is very menacing for the Javanese-Indonesian regime’s position in international fora. Seeing the international political progress achieved by the Acheh-Sumatra nation that the Jakarta regime finds unable to contain, once again it resorted to blatant falsifaction of the truth by spreading rumours that Tengku Hasan di Tiro had died. Such repeated ridiculous move proves that the Jakarta regime is out of its depth in facing the Achehnese people in international arena.

Death is a certainty that is not a matter to be debated. The question of life and death is the domain of Allah Almighty; it is not for Suharto, Try Sutisno, Harmoko or any other Javanese Sontoloyo to contemplate. “All that is alive will die”. Says the Quran, and that is the truth and will happen.

 

Sumatra Treaty of 2 November 1871 between Great Britain and

ARTICLE I

Her Britannic Majesty desists from all objections against the extension of the Netherland Dominion in any part of the island of Sumatra, and consequently from the reserve in that respect contained in the notes exchanged by the Netherland and British Plenipotentiaries at the conclusion of the treaty of 17 March 1824.

ARTICLE II

His Majesty the King of the Netherlands declares, that in the Kingdom of Siac Srie Indrapoora and its dependencies as it is defined in the compact concluded by the Netherland Indian Government with that Kingdom on the 1st of February 1858, the trade of British subjects and the British navigation shall continue to enjoy all the rights and advantages that are or may be granted there to the trade of Netherland subjects and to the Netherland navigation, and further that the same assimilation shall be granted to the trade of British subjects and to the British navigation in any other native State of the Island of Sumatra that may here after become dependent on the Crown of the Netherlands, provided always that British subjects conform themselves to the laws and regulations of the Netherland Government.

ARTICLE III

The stipulations of the preceding article shall not interfere with the distinction established by the Netherland Indian laws and regulations between individuals of Western and individuals of Eastern extraction, nor with the application of the stipulations of the convention of 27 March 1851.

ARTICLE IV

The present convention shall be ratified as soon as possible and shall remain without force or effect until it has received, as far as shall be required, the approval of the States-General. In witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the same and have affixed thereto the seal of their arms. Done at The Hague the second day of November in the year of Our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-one.

(signed) L. Gericke Van Bosse E. A. J. Harris

Teungku Muhammad Daud Beureu’eh

Teungku Muhammad Daud Beureu’eh lahir pada tanggal 17 September 1899 di sebuah kampung yang bernama Beureu’eh, di kabupaten Aceh Pidie. Nama lengkapnya adalah Teungku Muhammad Daud Beureu’eh.

Ketika PUSA (Persatuan Ulama Seluruh Aceh) didirikan untuk menentang pendudukan Belanda, Daud Beureu’eh terpilih sebagai ketuanya. Pada masa perang revolusi, Daud Beureu’eh menjabat sebagai Gubernur Militer Aceh.

Teungku Daud Beureu’eh meninggal pada tahun 1987.

Tjoet Njak Dien (Cut Nyak Dhien)
1848 – 1908

 

Tjoet Njak Dien as a prisoner

Tjoet Njak Dien did not die in her own land or amongst her own people. She died as “Ibu Perbu,” which means “The Queen”, a name given to her by the local people in Sumedang, West Java. The local people never knew that this gracious and religious prisoner, bought to them by Dutch Soldiers on December 11th 1906, was, in fact, the famous Jihad Heroine of Acheh Province. Dien had fought the Dutch from the jungle for 25 years.

We know from other modern studies, such as “The Rope of God” by Siegel (1969), how strong the spirit of Jihad is amongst the Achehnese. However, what that book does not reveal, is how the women are ready to join and lead in Jihad also. These are other heroine’s names that we are familiar with and our apologies for any others who have not been mentioned.

1. Tjoet Meutiah

2. Tjoet Gambang (Kambang)

3. Keumala Malahajati

(Keumala was an Achehnese admiral who Achehnese fleet to fight the Portuguese in Malacca).

Dien, who was active in writing and delivering speeches on the beauty of Jihad, was born in 1848 into Achehnese nobility. Her father, Teuku Nanta Setia was an Uleebalang (commander, or literally, Sultan’s military officer) of VI Mukim of the Sagi XXV Military District. Nanta Setia’s ancestor was Panglima Nanta (Chief Commander), a descendant from Sultanah Tajjul Alam, an Achehnese ambassador (also a woman) for Pagaruyung Sultanate in West Sumatra. Dien’s mother was also from an Uleebalang family, the Uleebalang of Lampagar.

Having married young (in 1862), to Teuku Ibrahim Lamnga, a son of Uleebalang of Lam Nga XIII, Dien soon realised, as the daughter and the wife of commanders of Army divisions, that she would have to farewell them when war broke out against the Dutch.

Her two most beloved left her on March 22nd 1873, to fight Jihad and succeeded expelling the Dutch from Acheh. Even the Achehnese army succeeded in killing the Dutch Army commander, General Kohler, in the battle to defend Kutaraja, the Achehnese capital. She was happy to see them both back safe.

On December 11th 1873, the Dutch invaded Acheh again, lead by General Van Switten. They had returned with a vengeance and 7,000 well-equipped infantrymen who managed to break the Achehnese line, on December 22nd 1873. Dien was parted from her husband and father for a longer period, this time.

This second invasion was better prepared and better planned than the first invasion. The Dutch advanced carefully and in an orderly manner, until succeeding in capturing the capital. The Sultan was forced to leave the capital and began the guerilla war against the Dutch. Dien, this time, followed her father and her husband into the jungle. She sacrificed everything, her jewelry, her comfortable life and her health.

Tragically, during the guerilla war, Nanta Setia, (her father) and Ibrahim Lamnga (her husband), were attacked heavily, surrounded and after fierce fighting, both were killed. This battle is known as the “Battle of Sela Glee Tarun.” Most of the troops were killed also and it was thought to be due to a betrayal by Habib Abdurrahman.

Participating directly, as she was, in Jihad, Tjoet Nyak Dien took over both her late husband’s and father’s army commands and led them in guerilla warfare from the jungle. She re-built these units and led them successfully. A far cry, from living like a princess, in VI Mukim. This is significant in the history of Muslimahs and which led to her eventual recognition as a National Heroine of Indonesia and indeed the entire Ummah.

While leading these guerilla army units, she met another army commander from Meulaboh, West Acheh, by the name of Teuku Umar, who was one of Dien’s relatives. He was fascinated with her refusal to mourn her husband and father, because she said she should be happy that her two most beloved had reached the most noble status and died as a Shaheed in Jihad.

They soon married and together led the two armies into a series of successful assault missions. Dien had one daughter with him whose name was Tjoet Gambang. Tjoet Gambang was to follow her Mother’s example. Some years later, after the destruction of Dien’s army, Tjoet Gambang married Teungku Di Buket, son of the most famous Ulama and guerilla leader, Teungku Cik Di Tiro. It is commonly thought that Tjoet Gambang died a martyr in 1910, two years after her Mother’s death in exile.

Around 1875 Teuku Umar (her husband) made a strategic move, seen as a betrayal by those unaware at the time. Both of them came out of the jungle and surrendered to the Dutch.

Their clever ploy was to lie to the Dutch, so when they came out of the jungle they said. Quote: “they realized they had done wrong so they wanted to re-pay the Dutch by helping them destroy the Achehnese resistance.” Un-quote.

The Dutch were very pleased that such dangerous enemies were willing to help them. In gratitude, they decorated her husband with a Medal of Honor and called him “Teuku Johan Pahlawan”, which means the greatest hero. They also made her husband commander in chief of a Dutch army unit with full authority.

They kept their plan a secret, even though they were continuously accused of being traitors by their own people. Their intention was to study Dutch strategy ,while slowly replacing as many as they could of the Dutchmen in the unit with Achehnese men. These Achehnese men were from their guerilla army units. When the numbers of Achehnese in this army were sufficient, Dien’s husband proposed a false plan to the Dutch, claiming that he wanted to attack an Achehnese base.

Dien and her husband left with all of the troops and the Dutch heavy equipment, weapons and ammunition, never to return.

This raised the ire of the Dutch and huge operations were launched to capture both Dien and her husband Umar. The guerilla army, however, were now armed with the best equipment stolen from the Dutch and returned its identity to the strategic guerilla army. They began to heavily attack the Dutch while General Van Switten was replaced, humiliated and disgraced. His replacement, General Pel, was quickly killed and the Dutch army was in chaos for the first time.

Dien and Umar applied repeated pressure on occupied Banda Acheh (Kutaraja) and Meulaboh (her husband’s former base) and the Dutch had to continuously replace its Generals. The mighty guerilla army that was created, trained and led by this formidable pair, was successful.

A gruesome history was to follow, however, when General Van Der Heyden was installed and never to be forgotten by the Achehnese.

Brutal and bloody massacres of men, women and children in innocent villages took place, when the inhumane General Van Der Heyden engaged the “De Marsose” units. They were so savage that they were almost impossible to defeat. Most of the troops of “De Marsose” were Christian Ambonese. They destroyed everything in their path, including property and villages, as well as the people. These units caused even the Dutch soldiers to feel sympathy for the Achehnese, and eventually, Van Der Heyden dissolved the “De Marsose” units. These events may, however have paved the way for the following General’s success, as many people who were not involved in Jihad had lost their lives or their loved ones lives, their property or indeed all of their loved ones and property. Fear and grief may have then weakened the remaining broader population.

General van Heutz exploited that fear and began to bribe local Achehnese to spy on the rebel army and act as informants. It wasn’t long before the Dutch soldiers found Dien’s husband and he was killed on Umar’s attack mission to Meulaboh on February 11th 1899. It was known as a betrayal by the informant named Teuku Leubeh.

When Tjoet Gamgang (her daughter) heard of her father’s death she began to cry and was slapped by her Mother (Dien) who then hugged her and Dien is quoted as having said:

Quote: As Achehnese women, we must not shed tears for anyone who becomes a Shaheed” Unquote. (A Shaheed is one who dies in Jihad)

Tjoet Njak Dien’s husband, Teuku Umar’s death, left Dien alone again to lead the rebel army. Weakened then by advancing age, Dien, with her army, retreated further into the jungle. Trying not to mourn over her late husband, Dien continued to lead this rebel army, assisted by her army officers, such as Pang Laot Ali and Pang Karim. This army fought until its final destruction in 1901 and it consisted of men and women. Pang Laot Ali who felt sorry for Dien’s condition, hoped that the Dutch might give medical treatment for her. He deserted to the Dutch and bought the Dutch army into Dien’s camp in Beutong Le Sageu. They were completely caught by surprise and fought to the last man and woman except for Gambang and Dien. Pang Karim was said to be the last man to defend Dien with his sword until his death. Only due to her blindness was Dien captured and even then she held a rencong (a traditional Achehnese dagger) in her hand trying to fight the enemy. Her daughter Gambang, however escaped deep into the jungle, where it is known that she continued the resistance in the spirit of Jihad as her Mother and Father had done. There is little information to be found about Tjoet Gambang. Our humble apologies for being unable to provide more information than this at this time.

Exiled by the Dutch, Dien’s arrival in Sumedang in her worn out clothes and accompanied by other Achehnese political prisoners, naturally drew the attention of the Regent Suriaatmaja as a faithful Muslimah. The male prisoners demonstrated obvious respect to this small, old lady, but the Dutch soldiers were forbidden to reveal the identities of the captives. See insert photograph, page 1.

Due to their obvious deep religious nature, especially Tjoet Njak Dien, they were placed with the local Ulama, named Ilyas. Ulama Ilyas quickly realised that his guest, who could not speak their language nor them hers, was indeed a scholar in Islam and became known as “Ibu Perbu“(The Queen). Her sound Islamic knowledge and her ability to recite Al-Quran beautifully earned her the invitation to instruct on Islam.

“Ibu Perbu “or Tjoet Njak Dien taught Al-Quran in Sumedang, West Java, until her death on November 8th 1908. She was buried as “Ibu Perbu” in the cemetary of Sumedang’s nobility in Gunung Puyuh, in the outskirts of Sumedang.

By 1960, those Sumedang locals who could have recollected who “Ibu Perbu”was, had passed away. However, information came from the Dutch Government based on official letters in “Nederland Indische”, written by Kolonial Verslag, that Tjoet Njak Dien, rebel leader from Acheh Province, had been placed in exile in Sumedang, West Java. There had only ever been one Achehnese female political prisoner sent to Sumedang. It was realized then, that“Ibu Perbu“was in fact Tjoet Njak Dien, “The Queen of Jihad” and was then recognized by President Sukarno as a National Heroine.

A small Achehnese Mosque (meunasah) was built near the cemetery in her memory.

Deklarasi Perang T.M Hasan Di Tiro

THE LEGAL STATUS OF ACHEH – SUMATRA
UNDER
INTERNATIONAL LAW
BY: Tengku Hasan M. Di Tiro, LL. D.
President National Liberation Front Acheh-Sumatra
I. HISTORICAL FACTS
1. BEFORE DUTCH INVASION
Before Dutch invasion, Acheh-Sumatra had always been an independent sovereign State,
internationally recognized, including by Holland itself with whom it had long-standing
diplomatic relation and even exchange of ambassadors. In 1866 – seven years before the war with
Holland – Laraouse Grand Dictionnaire Universelle described Acheh-Sumatra as follow: “Vers
la fin du XVIe siècle et jusqu’ à la moitié du XVIIe, les Acheins etaient la nation dominante de l’
archipel Indien.” (Vol. I, p. 70, Paris, 1866). La Grande Encyclopédie wrote about Acheh-
Sumatra: “En 1582, ils avaint étandu leur prépondérance sur les iles de la Sonde, sur une partie
de la Presqu’ ile de Malacca, ils étaient en relation avec tous les pays que baigne l’ oceéan
Indien depuis le Japon jusqu’ à l’ Arabie. La lutte qu’il soutinrent contre le Portugais établis à
Malacca depuis le commencement du XVIe siècle n’ est pas une des pages les moins glorieuse de
l’histoire des Atchinois. En 1586, un de leur Sultans attaque les Portugais avec une flotte
d’environ 500 voiles montée par 60,000 marins.” C. de Magnin, “Atchin ou Achem” (Vol. IV,
p. 402, Paris, 1874).
H.T. Damsté wrote in his book Het Volk van Atjèh (The people of Acheh) that “from the
beginning of the 17th century the border of Acheh in Sumatra reached to the South until
Palembang and Bengkulen, and in the Peninsular Malaya to include Perak, Kedah and
Pahang”, (“In het begin van de 17de eeuw reikte deze op Sumatra naar het Zuiden tot Palembang
en Bengkulen, en op den Malakaanschen overwal tot over Perak, Pahang en Kedah.” (p. 39).
In an Introduction to an authoritative French map about ROYAUME D’ACHEM (KINGDOM
OF ACHEH) showing the extent of Acheh Sumatran territory, published in 1708, the
cartographer, M. Chatelain, gave the following notations:
“L’ile de Sumatra est une des plus considerables de l’ Asie… Java, qui est la plus
meridionale des iles de la Sunde apartient presque toute aux Hollandois … Batavia est le
sejour du Gouverneur General des Indes.”
Thus, when the world was giving tributes to Acheh Acheh-Sumatra as an independent, sovereign,
and powerful State, Java was already a Dutch colony for hundreds of years, ruled by a Dutch
Governor General in Jakarta.

2. THE FIRST DUTCH INVASION
On March 26, 1873, the largest Dutch armada ever assembled in Southeast Asia arrived on the
coast of Acheh-Sumatra, bringing a Dutch Ultimatum to the Government of the Kingdom of
Acheh-Sumatra demanding the following:
1.Immediate surrender of Acheh-Sumatra to holland without resistance and becomes part of
Dutch colony of Indonesia;
2. Stopping slave-trade on the island of Sumatra and stopping piracy in the Malacca Straits;
3. The State of Acheh must give to Holland all parts of Sumatra still under Achehnese
sovereignty;
4. The State of Acheh must immediately cut all its diplomatic and commercial relations with all
European and Asian countries, renounce loyalty to the Islamic Khalifate in Turkey and swear
loyalty to the King of the Netherlands;
5. The Dutch flag must be raised in place of Achehnese flag.
Point two in Ultimatum was merely to provide excuses for the Dutch to be able to moralize their
aggression against Acheh-Sumatra in the name of suppressing “piracy & slavery”.
The Government of the State of Acheh-Sumatra asked for time to consider the demands. The
commander of the Dutch expeditionary force, General Kohler, replied that he gave one hour for
Acheh-Sumatra to reply! Thereupon, the great King of Acheh-Sumatra, Sultan Mahmud Shah,
did the only honorable thing to do: His Majesty rejected the Dutch Ultimatum fortwith with the
following message:
(1) The Government and the people of Acheh-Sumatra will never surrender their country to
foreign powers and are prepared to fight to defend their soil, and will never accept to
become a part of Dutch colony of Indonesia;
(2) There is no slave-trading in Acheh-Sumatra as alleged to justify aggression; as to piracy
in the Malacca Straits we do not condone it and all proven pirates are strictly dealt with
according to the law;
(3) Regarding the demand that we give to Holland all Sumatran territories under Achehnese
sovereignty, this cannot be done without consultations with the peoples of these
territories who are our own people, not colonies;
(4) Regarding the demand that we renounce the Islamic Khalifate and to swear loyalty to the
King of Holland, this tantamount to asking us to renounce our religion;
(5) And finally the demand that we change our flag for yours is totally unacceptable. For our
religion and our flag, every Achehnese will shed the last drops of his blood.”
Upon receiving that reply, the Dutch, on the same day, declared War against the Kingdom of
Acheh-Sumatra. Immediately they began bombardment of the capital city, Kuta Radja. On April
5, 1873, General Kohler stepped ashore on Achehnese-Sumatran soil, with 10,000 European
troops just brought in from Holland. On April 23, 1873, at the Battle of Bandar Acheh, the Dutch
invading army was annihilated by the army of Acheh-Sumatra. General Kohler himself was
killed. What happened was reported as front-page news around the world. The London TIMES
wrote (April 22, 1873): “A remarkable incident in modern colonial history is reported from the

East Indian Archipelago. A considerable force of Europeans has been defeated by the army of a
native state, the State of Acheh. The Achehnese have gained a decisive victory. Their enemy is
not only defeated but compelled to withdraw.” The London TIMES commented further that
Holland had no business attacking Acheh-Sumatra to begin with, because “Acheh indeed was not
a dependency of Holland.”
THE NEW YORK TIMES (Tuesday, may 6, 1873) wrote in its editorial page as follows:
“A sanguinary battle has taken place in Acheh. The Dutch attack was repulsed with great
slaughter. The Dutch General was killed, and his army put to disastrous flight. The
repulsed is regarded as most serious may be inferred from a recent debates in the
Parliament at The Hague, when a member declared that the enterprise taken altogether
will prove the last blow to the authority of Holland in Eastern World.”
On May 15, 1873, THE NEW YORK TIMES published an editorial about Acheh-Sumatra as
followed:
ACHEH
“Now, the Achehnese education of the present generation of Cristendom may be said to
have fairly begun.
“Soon it will be generally known that the Achehnese are not enervated savages, by any
means, but sound Musselmen and hardy fighters.
“It will creep out that they, as well as their present antagonists, once had outlying colonies
of their own, and that there was a time when they were even strong enough to besiege the
redoubtable Portuguese themselves in the city of Malacca. The knowledge will become
general that the Sultan of Acheh was once on very good terms with James I of England,
and the latter canny Monarch presented to his Achehnese brother two cannons which now
help guard his successor’s palace in Sumatra.”
On Friday, May 30, 1873, THE NEW YORK TIMES published fuller reports on the decisive
Battle of Bandar Acheh, which says:
“The Dutch were very badly beaten, General Kohler was killed. With heavy losses, his
commands fell back to the shore, where at last advise, they maintained with difficulty a
precarious foothold against surrounding foes.
“We are now told from the Dutch side that the Sultan had a very large force, armed with
breech-loading rifles. Pending this, the Sultan is showing diplomatic as well as military
capacity.
“He has discovered that, by the Treaty of 1819, made between the King of Great Britain
and the Achenese Sultan, or by similar contracts made with the East India Company,
England undertook to intervene as against any power which should make war on Acheh.
It is now, therefore, reprented, as part of the London press own, with justice, that the
British Government have seriously broken faith with the Sultan in allowing the Dutch to
make war upon him without remontrance or interposition. This impliem a demand for
help from England which that power will apparently find it difficult consistently to deny;
and the demand coming on the heels of Achehnese succees may have more favorable
consideration than if the circumtances were otherwise.

“In any case, it is unlikely that Holland will stop fighting after defeat as that Acheh will
do so after victory; so that a struggle of much fierceness and obstinacy may be counted on
as almost inevitable.
“The Sultan, who has plenty of money, has sent large orders to Europe for the most
improved pattern of arms and his subjected being not only skillfull marksmen, but brave
warriors, the phlegmatic and resolute Hollanders will meet in the Achehnese foemen
worthy of their steel.”
Again, in its editorial on Sunday, July 5th, 1873, THE NEW YORK TIMES, stated:
“Our sympathies would ordinarily go with the Christian and civilized power, and
assuredly when we see Holland battling to suppress a nest success; but a people bravely
struggling to defend their soil, their flag, and their faith against a rapacious invader is a
different spectacle. The last is the picture drawn as the true one by the good friend of the
Achehnese, the Constantinople journalist, and intelligent readers can determine for
themselves which is best entitled to their credence.”
Other prestigous publications, such as THE NATION of New York on May 15, 1873,
commented on the Batlle of Bandar Acheh and the Dutch’s defeat stating that “the repulse of the
Dutch appears to have been even more serious than first reported.” The London ECONOMIST
supported the cause of Acheh-Sumatra and rediculed the notion of Dutch “prestige” in the East.
The London SPECTATOR suspected a collusion between the British Government and the
Dutch. The BASIRAT of Istanbul published a series of articles in May and June, 1873, entirely
defending the justice of the Achehnese Sumatran cause. Our Turkish newspapers, such as LA
TURQUI, JAVAIB, demended Turkish intervention on Acheh-Sumatra side.
3. DECLARATION OF NEUTRALITY BY FOREIGN POWERS
Indicative of the unquestioned status of the Kingdom of Acheh Sumatra as an internationally
recognized independent sovereign State was the fact that major world powers declared their
neutrality in the war between Holland and Acheh Sumatra. The first to declare strict impartial
neutrality in this war was President Ulysses S Grant of the United States who also issued a
proclamation recognizing the right of innocent passage of the belligerents, Holland and Acheh,
on British territory of Malay and Singapore. While Turkey, Germany, Italy actively considering
pro-Acheh-Sumatra policies.
4. THE SECOND DUTCH INVASION
On Christmas Day, Desember 25, 1873, the Dutch colonialist forces invaded Acheh-Sumatra for
the second time, with 15,000 troops, under command of General Van Swieten. Barely upon his
reaching the shore, Van Swieten announced to the world his “annexation” of Acheh-Sumatra to
the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia) to salve the wounded national pride in Holland, while the fact
of the matter was the Achehnese State still standing and resisting. Therefore, Van Swieten’s
“annexation” announcement was universally rejected as illegal since he had not conquered the
country – and never will be. ( Cf. Dr. Anthony Reid, “Van Switen’s Illegal “Annexation’ of
Acheh” in The Contest for North Sumatra: Atjeh, The Netherlands and Great Britain, Oxford
University Press, 1976). Many years later, upon his retirement, Van Swieten, the “conqueror of
Acheh”, publicly confessed that he never was, and declared that the Dutch Government had made
mistake in making war against Acheh because Achehnese could not be defeated in war. He urged
the Dutch Government to recognize the independent of Acheh again and to conclude a peace
treaty. A nation, he said, could not die by admitting mistake, but could die by repeating the same
mistake again and again. Unfortunately his wise counsel was ignored.

5. THE ONE HUNDRED YEARS WAR OF TODAY
Holland’s second invasion marked the beginning of the protacted war because the people of
Acheh-Sumatra refused to surrender and fought on from generation to generations. American
HARPER’S MAGAZINE had called this war “THE ONE HUNDRED YEARS WAR OF
TODAY”.
The HARPER’S MAGAZINE wrote:
“The Achenese or Achinese whom the Dutch have been vainly endeavoring to subdue for
so many years, inhabit the northen and most accessible part of Sumatra, the large island
lying to the west of the East Indian Archipelago…The Achehnese have always been
warlike and independent race…The hatred of foreign domination, which led the
Achehnese to refuse English merchants permission to settle in their country, also led them
to fight one European nation after another for nearly 500 years, and there can be no better
evidence of their tenacity and national spirit than the fact that their country is still
practically independent and their fighting men un-conquered.
“Englishmen, Frenchmen, and Dutchmen in turn tried vainly to establish relations with
the rich Achehnese, but their patriotism, always so admirable in the Europen, but so
dangerous in the Asiatic, would have none of the foreigner.
“The Portuguese were the first opponents. Hostilities began with the Portuguese
settlement in Malacca, and did not finish till that settlement was lost to the Dom in 1641.
During this time the Achehnese, not content with defending their own country, made ten
separate attempts to capture Malacca. So great was Achin’s power that in one of these
expeditions it fitted out an armada consisting of more than 500 ships, of which 100 were
large than any then used in Europe. This ships carried 60,000 men to Malacca, with the
Sultan in command.
“At this time the Dutch John Company began absorption of Java … Its operations were
extended to Sumatra, but for obvious reasons the company did not apparently deem it
wise to attempt the subjugation of the “Fighting North” where Achehnese were still virile
enough to resist the invader.
“The Hague, in 1871, proceeded to prepare an expedition to invade Achin. The Dutch
force, under the command of Major General J H Kohler himself being among the slain.
The Dutch soldiers displayed conspicuous courage in the attack but they could make
absolutely no headway against the equally brave and fanatic Achehnese who were utterly
regardless of death. Another expedition, under General Van Swieten, attacked the town
the following June and after many sanguinary fights, in which the Dutch lost heavily,
captured the Great Mosque and the Citadel and by the end of the month reduced the
whole town. The Achenese submitted to occupation of their capital, but secretly prepared
for a further resistance. The Achehnese resumed their dreaded guerilla warfare. The
ambushed and killed the Dutch in the interior, and the reign of terror ensued. There the
Dutch seriously took in hand what they are pleased to call a war of conquest, which is
still going on, and which may continue for generations to come. General after general was
sent out, and came home defeated and disgraced: report after report came back to The
Hague of guerilla fighting, cutting up of convoys, blowing up trains and disastrous
ambushes; and still the Dutch army made little or no headway against their stubborn and
relentless foe.
“The Achehnese swore to resist the Dutch usurpations, and consequently year after year,
campaign succeeds campaign with an increasingly heavy levy of life and treasures on
little Holland and its colonies in the East.

“It is worthy of remark that the Dutch soldiers who have been captured speak well of the
Achehnese. They are neither tortured nor ill-treated, and are usually sent back under
escort to their own camp.
“Conquered and yet unconquerable, animated by religious zeal and patriotic fervor, the
Mohammedan Malays, who have fought Holland for a generation and other Europeans
foreign yoke, prefer to face extermination rather than submit to foreing rule. “No sooner
has one Achin chieftain been killed or captured than another rises to take his place ….”
(HARPER’S MAGAZINE, August, 1905)
And so the struggle continues, until 1942, the people’s resistance finally became victorious and
the last Dutch colonialist soldier was ousted from Acheh-Sumatra, 69 years after continuous
struggle!
6. THE DUTCH ILLEGALLY TRANSFERRED “SOVEREIGNTY” OVER
ACHEH-SUMATRA TO INDONESIA IN 1949
The Dutch who had neither de facto control, nor de jure power over Acheh-Sumatra, illegally
transferred “sovereignty” which they did not possess over Acheh-Sumatra to Indonesia, in 1949
thus further denying the people’s right to self-determination and independence, after such a long
war which the colonialist did not really win.
Using the Dutch fraudulent transfer of “sovereignty” to them as a cover-up, the Javanese – now
called themselves “Indonesians”, a fabricated ‘nation’ – took over Acheh-Sumatra by force and
intimidation and thay perpetuate colonialism over the people of Acheh-Sumatra: the Javanese
took over where the Dutch left off.
The collusion between the old Dutch colonialists with the new Javanese Indonesian colonialists
in forfeiting the right of self-determination of the people of Acheh-Sumatra is unprecedented in
recent history, given the fact that the rules of law are crystal clear:
(a) Sovereignty in a colony or in a non-self governing territory does not lie in the hands of the
colonialist power, or in the administering authority, but in the hands of the people of this
colony or territory – UN Resolution 1514-XV;
(b) Sovereignty over a colonial territory is not transferable by the colonialist power to other
colonialist powers;
(c) All powers must be returned by the colonialist governments to the native people of each
territory – in this case, Holland must return all powers to the people of Acheh-Sumatra, and
not to Javanese Indonesia – UN Resolution 1514-XV;
(d) The duty of all states to end colonialism, and to stop anyone from using force against peoples
struggling for their independence – UN Resolution 2625-XXV;
(e) The right of colonized people to fight against their colonialists, and that colonialism is
considered an international crime – UN Resolution 2621-XXV;
(f) The use of force is prohibited against those who seek their self-determination – UN
Resolution 3314-XXIX;
(g) Each colonial territory has a separate legal status from other colonial territories and each has
the right to independence; this separate legal status cannot be annulled by colonialist decision
to unfy the administration of these territories like the Dutch did in Indonesia – UN Resolution
2625-XXV;
(h) And finally, all peoples have the right to self-determination and independence under the
Charter of the United Nations – article 1, Paragraphs 2 and 55; under the Universal
Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples, Article 5, 6, and 11; under the Universal Declaration

of Human Rights; under International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;
and under International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
According to all these rules and procedures which are being relentlessly executed in all excolonial
territories except in the Dutch East Indies, Acheh-Sumatra ought to have been free and
independent again – like in the pre-colonial time and from time immemorial
II. THE LAW OF DECOLONIZATION
7. THE JURIDICAL STATUS OF THE LAW OF
SELF-DETERMINATION OF THE COLONIZED PEOPLES
The law of self-determination of all the colonized peoples has become an inseparable part of
International Law whose obligatory execution applicable to all states and to all colonized peoples
anywhere in the world. The fundamental principles of this law were vigorously stated in the
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514 -XV, adopted on December 14, 1960,
entitled: “Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.” The
lofty principles enunciated in this Declaration has become a new norms of International Law that
require all states to conform. The International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion,
paragraphs 54 to 56, regarding West Sahara Case has affirmed the juridical status of Resolution
1514 as Law regarding self-determination of all colonized peoples.
(“Les principe d’autodétermination en tant que droit des peuples et son application en
vue de mettre fin rapidement à toutes les situations coloniales sont énoncés dans la
résolution 1514″. C.I.J, Recueil, 1975, p. 31)
In its Advisory Opinion of October 16, 1975, the International Court of Justice decided on the
manners through which the objectives of Resolution 1514 could be achieved, namely, for a
colonized or non-selfgoverning territory to attain self-determination and self-government it must
go through one of these three steps:
(a) by becoming sovereign, independent state;
(b) by associating, on its own free will, with an existing independent state;
(c) by integranting freely with an existing independent state.
(“Pour un territoire non autonome d’atteindre la pleine autonomie, il peut: a. devenir un
Etat indépendent et souverain; b. s’associer librement à un Etat indépendent; c.
s’intégrer à un Etat indépendent.” C.I.J., Recueil, 1975, p. 32).
The Court stressed in its Advisory Opinion that the application of the right of self-determination
always presupposed the free expression of the will of the people, by plebiscite, or other
indications such as the resistance put up by the people against the colonialists.
As far as Acheh-Sumatra was concerned, it was never given any of these free choices by Holland
or Indonesia: it was transferred to Indonesia by Holland without plebiscite or any kind of
consultation.
Article 5 of Resolution 1514, requires all colonialist powers to immediately transfer all powers to
the peoples of colonized territories, without any conditions, or reservation, according to the
wishes of these peoples freely expressed, without any discrimination as to race, religion, or
colour in order that they may enjoy complete liberty and independence.
(“Pour transférer tous pouvoirs aux peuples de ces territoires, sans aucune condition, ni
réserve, conformément à leur volonté et à leur voeux librement exprimés, sans aucune

distinction de race, de croyance, ou de couleur afin de leur permettre de jouir d’une
indépendence et d’une liberté complète.”)
Holland and Indonesia are co-respondents to the crime of colonialism now still perpetuated over
the people of Acheh-Sumatra by Indonesia. All powers should immediately be transferred to the
people of Acheh-Sumatra. Holland is guilty in helping established Javanese Indonesian
colonialism over the people of Acheh-Sumatra on three counts: first, in not returning the power
over Acheh-Sumatra to the people of Acheh-Sumatra, to begin with; second, in transfering its
alleged and illegal “sovereignty” over Acheh-Sumatra to the Javanese in 1949; third, in falsifying
the record of the U.N.Decolonization Commision by not making separate listing – as required – of
Acheh-Sumatra as a separate colonial territory from Java.
As is well known, the UN General Assembly, in order to hasten the application of Chapter XI of
the Charter, for eradication of colonialism as soon as possible, adopted Resolution 66-1 (1946),
which established an Official List of Colonial and non-self-governing territories, established on
the basis of information furnished by the eight colonialist countries, among them Holland. By not
listing the name of Acheh-Sumatra on this list, as a separate colonial territory Holland was able
to trade in with the Javanese, for economic concession, and inturn, it has protected Javanese
Indonesian neo-colonialism from the eyes of the United Nations, and the world. This list was and
is very important for the General Assembly’s policing the colonialists’ domains, to extend the
application of Article 73, and to permit the assembly to supervise the progress in the
decoloniazation process, and to determine which are still colonial and non-selfgoverning
territories in the face of colonialist powers’ efforts to make the UN accept their thesis that they
have exclusive in the matter, especially to decide when the required information/reporting from
them should be terminated. Many neo-colonialist scheme involving millions of square miles of
territories and millions of peoples have been promoted by incorrect listing by the imperialists.
Holland not only failed to register Acheh-Sumatra in the List as a separate colonial territory from
Java, but also Borneo, the Celebes, the Moluccas, and Lesser Sunda island, thus giving cover to
Javanese Indonesian neo-cplonialism, after having created it. Holland failed to report the most
importand fact: that no referendum was held when Acheh-Sumatra- and the rest of her colonial
territories – was delivered to the Javanese rulers in Jakarta.
After adopting the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and
Peoples, the General Assembly went on to establish juridical system in support of the
decolonization process, in two most vital aspects: first, regarding the legitimacy of the national
liberation struggle, including armed struggle, which the people may have to do to scure their
right to self-determination; second, regarding the obligation imposed by this law upon the third
states relative to this legitimate struggle.
These two vital principles of International Law which is in force, are embodied in the General
Assembly Resolution 2625-XXV adopted on October 25, 1970, which is also a Declaration
regarding principles of International Law relative to friendly relations and cooperation among
states in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. This Declaration reaffirms the great
principles of self-determination of peoples and the duties of independent states to help in the
realization of this principle, namely:
(a) the duty of all states to favor decolonization efforts, and to aid the UN in discharging its
duties according to the Charter, in order to put an end, as soon as possible, to all manners of
colonialism; (b) the duty of all states to refrain from using force against the right of selfdetermination
of peoples and their independence; (c) the right of all peoples who defend
themselves against such coercion in the cause of their self-determination, to receive aid in
conformity with the aims and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. Also their right to
seek such aids.
(“Tout Etat à le devoir de s’abstenir de recourir à toute mesure de coercition qui
priverait les peuples mentionnés ci-dessus dans la formulation du présent principe de
leur droit à disposer d’eux-memes, de leur liberté et de leur indépendance. Lorsqu’ils
réagissent à uns telle mesure de coercition dans l’exercise de leur droit de chercher et de
recevoir un appui conforme aux buts et principes de la Charte des Nations Unies.”
Resolution 2625-XXV).
Resolution 2625-XXV also stated that all colonial territories have a jurudical status that is
separate and distinct from the colonialist country, and from one another, and this separate
juridical status remains as long as the peoples of these territories have not yet exercised their
right of self-determination.
(“Le territoire d’une colonie ou un autre territoire non autonome possède, en vertu de la
Charte, un statut séparé et distinct de celui du territoire de l’Etat qui l’administre; ce
statut séparé et distinct en vertu de la Charte existe cussi longtemps que le peuple de la
colonie ou du territoire non autonome n’exerce pas son droit à disposer de lui-meme
conformément à la Charte des Nations Unies et, plus particulièrement, à ses buts et
principes.” Resolution, 2625-XXV).
Also the third countries are affected by this juridical status by their obligations to honour and
enforce it. Holland violated this principle of separation between colonial territories when it
transferred its alleged “sovereignty” over Acheh-Sumatra to Indonesia – which was Holland’s
other colony. But since the people of Acheh-Sumatra have not yet exercise their right of selfdetermination
until today, their right to do so is still guaranteed by this provision of International
Law.
In fact, the establishment of Indonesia itself is in stark violation of this principle of inherent
juridical separation between one colonial territory and another which has been so carefully
guarded in implementing the process of decolonization in all other parts of the world, but so
scandalously neglected in the Dutch colonial empire of Indonesia. Not only Acheh-Sumatra was
a separate colonial territory from Java geographically, historically, ethnically, culturally, and
politically but so were Borneo, the Celebes, the Moluccas, West Papua, and the Lesser Sunda
Islands, and the peoples of these huge territories – equal in extend as that from Lisbon to Moscow
- have nothing to do with the Javanese – who now assumed the artificial, fabricated pseudo-name
of “Indonesians” in the hope of justifying their illegal rule over the non-Javanese.
As the principle of decolonization is based on true separate juridical identity of each colonial
territory, the concept of “Indonesia” is based on the total rejection of that principle, in the service
of imperialistic exploitation. As Henry Kissinger had currently stated: “Indonesia, for example,
was nothing but a geographic expression until the Dutch found it more efficient to unite the
islands of the Indies under a single administration.” (Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy,
p.256.) And this unified colonialist administration was established in Jakarta, Java. This
colonialist imposed administration in Jakarta, whether under the Dutch or under the Javanese
neo-colonialist cannot legally denies the right of self-determination and the right for separate
legal existence to the peoples of those separate colonial territories, namely, Acheh-Sumatra,
Borneo, the Celebes, the Moluccas, West Papua, and others.
The concept of “Indonesia” which was invented by the imperialists and is based on the “holynes”
of the boundaries of a colonial empire established by conquests, and the concept of
decolonization, which by moral and ethical necessity recognized the separate juridical status of
each colonial territory, must be clearly understood. In the General Assembly debates over
Indonesia’s claim to the territory of West Papua (“West Irian”), the Javanese (“Indonesians”)

representative clearly stated: “The question whether West Irian had cultural links with other
Indonesians was irrelevant…The boundaries of the State (of Indonesia) could only be the
boundaries of the former Netherlands East Indies…What we consider to be Indonesian and
Indonesian territory is nothing else but entire territory of the former colony: the Netherlands East
Indies.” (Official Records of the General Assembly, 9th Session, 1st Committee, 726 meeting;
912 meeting; 16th Session, 1050 meeting). Here is then a state which is frankly based on colonial
domination, on somebody else’s conquerred territories, forgetting how the bloody conquests were
made. Indonesia is thus a state which is admittedly based on colonialists’ conquered territories,
without any reference to the peoples of those territories, to their cultures, languages, identities,
and inalienable rights. Judge M Dillard of the International Court of Justice has stated that it was
the people who should determine the destiny of territory, and not the territory should determine
the destiny of the people
. (“C’est la population qui determine le destin du territoire et l’inverse.” C.I.J., Recueil,
1975, p.20).
The absurdity of Indonesia’s claim to West Papua – as well as to Acheh-Sumatra, to Moluccas,
etc. – can be better understood if we were to apply its standard to other parts of the world. For
example, what would happen if certain state in Africa, say, Central African Republic would have
demanded that all former French colonies in Africa – from Morocco to Madagascar – should be
turned over to it, on the same “Indonesian Political Theory”? And similarly what would happen if
one of the former Portuguese colonies would have demanded that all former Portuguese colonial
territories from Cape Verde to Mozambique, should be turned over to it as an “entity” on the
same “Indonesian Political Theory”? Or for Nigeria to demand to rule over all the British
colonial territories in Africa, or for India to demand to rule over all British colonial territories in
Asia from Kuwait to Singapore and beyond? It would have been rejected as outrageous!
If the concept of “decolonization à la Indonesia” would have been applied to all other colonial
territories in the world there would have been only seven – instead of fifty-one ne states
established in Africa after World War II, namely, one each for the former colonies of Britain,
French, Portugal, Belgium, Italy, Spain and Germany, without reference to the peoples, history,
cultures, and inalienable rights. In Asia there would have been only two or three sates – instead of
forty-five – beside “Indoenesia” namely former British colonies and former French colonies, with
some artificial names. There would have been only two or three states in Latin America – instead
of thirty-six states now. There would have been no Third World majority at the UN, and no Non-
Aligned Movement. And above all, no UN Resolution 2625 on the separate juridical status of
colonial territories. It is a different world that is being conjured up by the very name of
“Indonesia”.
There can be no compromise between the concept of “Indoensia” and the principle of
decoloniazation because one goes directly against the other: decoloniazation requires liquidation
of all colonial empires, but Indonesia exists on the principle of territorial integrity of colonial
empire: and an empire is not liquidated if its territorial integrity is preserved. Thus Indonesia is
still an unliquidated colonial empire with Javamen replacing Dutchmen as emperors. The
Decoloniazation Commission has not come to grips with this paradoxical and intolerable
situation although the peoples of these colonial territories have been waging continous armed
struggle with much sufferings against Javanese Indonesian regime since it took over from the
Dutch in 1949. The Decolonization Commission which had certified that Dutch colonial empire
had been duly “decolonized” should now re-open the case gain for a review – in consultation with
the people of Acheh-Sumatra, and others who have legimate interest in this matter – because the
Commission had obviously been misled by Javamen and Dutchmen in 1949.
Resolution 2621-XXV, adopted on October 12, 1970, by the General Assembly of the United
Nations completed the legal provision for the attainment of independence for all the people by
affirming “the inherent right of all colonial peoples to struggle by all necessary means” against
the colonial powers who prevent them from exercising their rights of self-determination.
Resolution 3314-XXIX (14 December, 1974) of the General Assembly of the UN affirmed: “the
duty of all states not to use force to prevent peoples from exercising their right of selfdetermination,
liberty and independence or for violating territorial integrity.”
(“Le devoir des Etat de ne pas utiliser les armes pour priver les peuples de leur droit à
l’autodétermination, à la liberté et à l’ independence ou pour violer l’intégrité
territoriale.” Resolution 3314-XXIX)
Article 9 of Resolution 2621 stated that nothing in the present definition may prejudice the right
of self-determination, the right to liberty, and independence of people who had been prevented
from enjoying this right… especially peoples under domination of colonialist and racist and
racist regimes and under other forms of foreign domination, nor there be any prejudice for the
right of these peoples to struggle for this purpose and to seek aid and to receive such aids for
their objectives, in accordance with the principles of the Charter.
(“Rien dans la présente definition ne peut porter prejudice au droit à
l’autodétermination, a la liberté et à l’indépendance des peuples privés de ce droit …
particulièrement les peuples sous la domination des régimes coloniaux et racists et sous
l’autre formes de domination éntrangère, ni au droit de ces peuples de lutter à cette fin et
de rechercher et de recevoir un appui à cette fin, en accord avec les principes.”
Resolution 2621-XXV).
The right of self-determination of the colonized peoples has become part of International
Convention universally accepted by all states, no matter what their political or economic regimes,
and this fundamental principle has constituted the operative norms of International Law, which
according to article 53 of the Vienna Convention of May 23rd, 1969, can no longer be derogated
from.
Article 19 of the Project of the United Nations International Law Commission gave the same
interpretation and included the safeguard of the right of self-determination of peoples among the
dominat aspects of International Law, and branded as an “international crime” by force of arms.
(Annuaire de la Commission de droit international, 1974, vol.II, 2/a, p.94)
III. THE JURIDICAL VALUES OF THE TREATY CONCLUDED
BETWEEN HOLLAND AND INDONESIA IN1949,
TRANSFERRING “SOVEREIGNTY” OVER ACHEHSUMATRA
TO INDONESIA
8. There are five sets of objections that can be marshalled against the lagality
and against the juridical values of the Treaty on the Transfer of
“sovereignty” between Holland and Indonesia in 1949, especially
concerning the tarnsfer of “sovereignty” over Acheh-Sumatra to
Indonesia:
a. The glaring incompatibility of the Treaty with the decoloniazation policy followed by the
United Nations.
b. The violatiuon by this Treaty of the right of self-determination of the people of Acheh-
Sumatra.

affirming “the inherent right of all colonial peoples to struggle by all necessary means” against
the colonial powers who prevent them from exercising their rights of self-determination.
Resolution 3314-XXIX (14 December, 1974) of the General Assembly of the UN affirmed: “the
duty of all states not to use force to prevent peoples from exercising their right of selfdetermination,
liberty and independence or for violating territorial integrity.”
(“Le devoir des Etat de ne pas utiliser les armes pour priver les peuples de leur droit à
l’autodétermination, à la liberté et à l’ independence ou pour violer l’intégrité
territoriale.” Resolution 3314-XXIX)
Article 9 of Resolution 2621 stated that nothing in the present definition may prejudice the right
of self-determination, the right to liberty, and independence of people who had been prevented
from enjoying this right… especially peoples under domination of colonialist and racist and
racist regimes and under other forms of foreign domination, nor there be any prejudice for the
right of these peoples to struggle for this purpose and to seek aid and to receive such aids for
their objectives, in accordance with the principles of the Charter.
(“Rien dans la présente definition ne peut porter prejudice au droit à
l’autodétermination, a la liberté et à l’indépendance des peuples privés de ce droit …
particulièrement les peuples sous la domination des régimes coloniaux et racists et sous
l’autre formes de domination éntrangère, ni au droit de ces peuples de lutter à cette fin et
de rechercher et de recevoir un appui à cette fin, en accord avec les principes.”
Resolution 2621-XXV).
The right of self-determination of the colonized peoples has become part of International
Convention universally accepted by all states, no matter what their political or economic regimes,
and this fundamental principle has constituted the operative norms of International Law, which
according to article 53 of the Vienna Convention of May 23rd, 1969, can no longer be derogated
from.
Article 19 of the Project of the United Nations International Law Commission gave the same
interpretation and included the safeguard of the right of self-determination of peoples among the
dominat aspects of International Law, and branded as an “international crime” by force of arms.
(Annuaire de la Commission de droit international, 1974, vol.II, 2/a, p.94)
III. THE JURIDICAL VALUES OF THE TREATY CONCLUDED
BETWEEN HOLLAND AND INDONESIA IN1949,
TRANSFERRING “SOVEREIGNTY” OVER ACHEHSUMATRA
TO INDONESIA
8. There are five sets of objections that can be marshalled against the lagality
and against the juridical values of the Treaty on the Transfer of
“sovereignty” between Holland and Indonesia in 1949, especially
concerning the tarnsfer of “sovereignty” over Acheh-Sumatra to
Indonesia:
a. The glaring incompatibility of the Treaty with the decoloniazation policy followed by the
United Nations.
b. The violatiuon by this Treaty of the right of self-determination of the people of Acheh-
Sumatra.

c. The fact that the Treaty was signed by two states (Holland and Indonesia) without juridical
right to dispose sovereignty over the territory of Acheh-Sumatra.
d. Inspite of that fact, however, the parties pretended to dispose the sovereignty over Acheh-
Sumatra without consultation with the people concern, and outside the procedures imposed
by the General Assembly of the United Nations and by International Law, in cases of
decoloniazation.
e. Consequently, this Treaty is null and void under relevant provisions of International Law.
The Treaty pretended to dispose a territory which belong to neither of the signatories. As to
Holland, it can claim no sovereignty over Acheh-Sumatra by any law. By conquest? It had never
successfully conquered Acheh-Sumatra, the people had never surrendered. Besides, conquest is
now illegal. The ‘strongest’ position Holland could assume was as a colonialist administrator. But
even as an administering power Holland, by definition, could not have sovereignty belong and
always in the hands of the people of Acheh-Sumatra. Holland had no power to transfer that
sovereignty to Indonesia or to cede the country to anyone else in its capacity as an administering
power. But the most outrageous of all was the fact that in 1949, when Holland has had no
presence there since 1942, having been chased out of Acheh-Sumatra by the people’s resistance
movement. Although Holland had indeed cam back to Java and other parts of its Indonesia,
Holland had never risked to return to Acheh-Sumatra. In spite of these facts, however, Holland
signed this Treaty pretending to transfer “sovereignty” that it had never had over Acheh-Sumatra
to Indonesia. Nemo dat quod non habet – “No one gives what he does not have.” These
monumental lies however were recognized by Western democracies and by credulous new Third
World countries. Afterwards Holland made false report to the United Nations that it had
“decolonized” all her colonies thus covering up for Javanese colonialism to this day.
Indonesia also violated the sovereignty of Acheh-Sumatra in collusion with Holland. At the same
time it also violated all norms of International Law much too long to enumerate here, making
itself a pariah among nations, and the most depraved of all neocolonialist regimes. Legitimizing
itself on Holland’s fraudulent transfer of “sovereignty” Indonesia had sent its Javanese occupation
troops to attack the people of Acheh-Sumatra, and to massacre them, continuing and even
exceeding what the Dutch colonialist troops had done before during the last one hundred years.
IV. THE LEGITIMACY AND THE LEGALITY OF THE
STRUGGLE OF THE PEOPLE OF ACHEH SUMATRA
UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF THE NATIONAL
LIBERATION OF ACHEH SUMATRA
9. THE LEGITIMACY AND THE LEGALITY OF THE STRUGGLE
The United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2621 – XXV adopted on October 12, 1970,
which contain a complete program of action to implement the Declaration on Independence
categorically called as “crime” all efforts to maintain a colonial domination over any people, and
recognized “the inherent right of all colonized peoples to struggle with all necessary means”
against the colonialist powers.
(“Le droit inhérent des peuples coloniaux à lutter par tous les moyens nécessaires.”
Resolution 2621-XXV).
The United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2711-XXV, adopted on October 14, 1970,
recognized the legitimacy of the liberation struggle, including armed struggle, waged by the

colonized people to gain the right of self-determination and to get rid of colonial or foreign
domination. All member nations are requested to give necessary aid to such struggle.
(“Reconnait la legitimité de la lutte que les peuples coloniaux mènent pour l’exercise de
leur droits à l’auto détermination et aux libre choix et prie tout les Etats de leur apporter
toute l’aide nécessaire.” Resolution 2711).
These are the legal basis in International Law of the foundation of the NATIONAL
LIBERATION FRONT OF ACHEH SUMATRA in the struggle of the people to regain their
right of self-determination from Javanese Indonesian neo-colonialism.
The NLF Acheh Sumatra was formed on October 30, 1976. It composed of patriotic people of
Acheh-Sumatra from all walks of life, professions and endeavors, notably farmers, workers,
fishermen, students, teachers, traders, intellectuals, doctors, lawyers, engineers, mechanics, men
and women. It based itself on International Law, and affirms its Internationalist character by its
solidarity with other liberation movements of the oppressed peoples all over the world.
10. THE AIMS OF THE NATIONAL LIBERATION FRONT
OF ACHEH-SUMATRA
The supreme aim of the National Liberation Front of Acheh-Sumatra is the survival of the people
of Acheh-Sumatra as a nation; the continued existence of their national homeland which is being
confiscated and devided among Javanese settlers; the preservation of their economic and natural
resources which are being plundered by the Javanese colonialists and their imperialist backers.
Secondly, to call the world’s attention to the fact that the question of Acheh-Sumatra is not a
question of “separatism” – as alleged by the Indonesian Javanese neo-colonialists – but a question
of self-determination of the people of Acheh-Sumatra and a question of decolonization of the
former Dutch East Indies (Indonesia) which has not been decolonized legally and properly in
accordance with the purpose and the meaning of the Charter of the United Nations, and with the
United Nations Resolution on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.
Therefore, the question of decolonization of the former Dutch East Indies or “Indonesia” must
now be re-opened.
11. THE PEOPLE OF ACHEH-SUMATRA
The people of Acheh-Sumatra exists as a people; and all people have the inalienable right to selfdetermination,
and to sovereignty. Under International Law, the people of Acheh-Sumatra will
not lose their right to independence and sovereignty unless they are exterminated. And genocide
is an international crime.
It should have been made clear by now that there is more to it than can be presented here about
the struggle of the people of Acheh-Sumatra. This is a historic struggle of the first magnitude,
endured by the heroic people after 110 years, that is from 1873 to 1983! They have lost counts of
numbers of deads, of rivers of blood, of rains of tears. And yet, they keep on fighting. “The
national liberation of a people is the recovery of the history by destroying the imperialist
domination to which they were subjected.” This is an explanation as well as a secret. Only a man
of Amilcar Cabral’s genius could have said that.
This is a people who had been free and independence before the Dutch people gained their
independence from Spain; who remained free and independent while Java and the Javanese were,
for four hundred years, being exchanged – like chattels – under the hands of one colonialist to another, from the Dutch to the British and then to the Dutch again; a people who had been free
and independent for thousands of years before the name of “Indonesia” was invented by
colonialist administrators; this was the first people of Southeast Asia who stood up against
Western colonialism and actually defeated the Western colonialist forces in the battlefields. And
yet finally fallen under the worst, stupid, and mindless kind of colonialism, at the most
improbable time, when the right of all peoples to self-determination was guaranteed, and specific
procedures adopted by the international community and formalized under Internatioinal Law.
How come, the people of Acheh-Sumatra, who fought their independence, more than anyone
else, nevertheless their country became a colonial territory, and then, under ‘watchful’ eyes of
United Nations’ Decolonization Commission ended up to become a “province” of a Dutch colony
of Indonesia, without their consent and against their will? Two United Nations’ member states,
Holland and Indoensia, had conspired to produce a fait accompli that was so blatant, for their
economic and political advantages, in clear violation of the inalienable right of the people of
Acheh-Sumatra. Clearly, the people of Acheh-Sumatra have an inherent right to expel Javanese
Indonesian invaders from their country, and the international community under international
Law, has the obligation to assist them.
In November, 1960, the UN General assembly’s Fourth Committee (Decolonization
Commission) held that Portugal’s “overseas provinces” such as Angola, Mozambique, Sao Tome
and Principle, Guinea Bissau, Cape Verde, and East Timor were in fact colonies, and demanded
information from Lisbon concerning them with the view of recognizing each of them as a
separate independent state. The time has now come for the United nations Decolonization
Commission to declare the “overseas provinces” of Indonesia such Acheh-Sumatra, the
Moluccas, the Celebes, Borneo, the Lesser Sunda Islands and East Timor – the last to be invaded
by Javanese Indonesia – are in fact colonies that must be freed without further delay!
V. THE LEGITIMACY AND THE LEGALITY OF THE
DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE OF ACHEHSUMATRA
12. THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE OF ACHEH-SUMATRA
The sovereignty people of Acheh-Sumatra have an inherent right to declare themselves free and
independent from the yoke of Indonesian Javanese colonialism. This was done on December 4,
1976, to set the matters straight before the peoples of the world. It was a formal reassertion of the
National Will of the people of Acheh-Sumatra to struggle for their national survival. Dece´mber
4 has a historic meaning symbolyzing the continuity of the struggle of the people of Acheh-
Sumatra against foreign domination for it was the day after the Dutch shot and killed the last
Achehnese Sumatran Head of State, Tengku Maat di Tiro, on December 3, 1911, in the Battle of
Alue Bhot, Tangse. The Dutch had counted December 4 to be the formal end of the long war
with the people of Acheh-Sumatra since they have killed the last of the leaders. But it was not to
be and never will be. On december 4, 1911, after they buried their dead leader, and wiped their
tears, the people of Acheh-Sumatra marched again to do battle against the invaders. But
somehow along the way, during the 1950s, the Dutchmen were replaced, in the front lines, by the
Javamen who tried hard to disorient the people as well as the world. This was why a new
Declaration of Independence was issued on december 4, 1976, signifying the fact that the same
anti-colonialist struggle continues!

VI. A NEW GOVERNMENT OF THE HISTORIC STATE OF
A CHEH-SUMATRA WAS F ORMED
IN LIBERATED TERRITORY
On December 4, 1976, a new Government of the historic STATE OF ACHEH-SUMATRA was
sworn-in in the liberated sovereign territoiry, and thus the continuity of the historic STATE OF
ACHEH-SUMTRA was assured: the country, the people, and their State became a reality again.
The one thousand years old Acheh-Sumatran Red Flag with Crescent and Star and Two Black
Stripes were hoisted again all over the country. This was the flag the Dutch demanded in their
Ultimatum, in 1873, to removed. THE FAR EASTERN ECONOMIC REVIEW reported: The
Free Acheh Movement has its own flag and travellers from the province tell of villages where
this flag is run up at dusk.” (June 24, 1977)
13. TEXT OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE OF ACHEH
SUMATRA
DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE OF ACHEH – SUMATRA
Acheh, Sumatra, December 4, 1976
To The peoples Of The World:
We, the people of Acheh, Sumatra, exercising our right of self-determination, and protecting our
historic right of eminent domain to our fatherland, do hereby declare ourselves free and
independent from all political control of the foreign regime of Jakarta and the alien people of the
island of Java.
Our fatherland, Acheh, Sumatra, had always been a free and independent sovereign State since
the world begun. Holland was the first foreign power to attempt to colonize us when it declared
war against the sovereign State of Acheh, on March 26, 1873, and on the same day invaded our
territory, aided by Javanese mercenaries. The aftermath of this invasion was duly recorded on the
front pages of contemporary newspapers all over the world. The London, TIMES, on April 22,
1873, wrote: “A remarkable incident in modern colonial history is reported from East Indian
Archipelago. A considerable force of Europeans has been defeated and held in check by the army
of native state…the State of Acheh. The Achehnese have gained a decisive victory. Their enemy
is not only defeated, but compelled to withdraw. “THE NEW YORK TIMES, on May 6th, 1873,
wrote: “A sanguinary battle has taken place in Aceh, a native Kingdom occupying the Northern
portion of the island of Sumatra. The Dutch delivered a general assault and now we have details
of the result. The attack was repulsed with great slaughter. The Dutch general was killed, and his
army put to disastrous flight. It appears, indeed, to have been literally decimated.” This event had
attracted powerful world-wide attention. President Ulysses S.Grant of the United States issued
his famous Proclamation of impartial Neutrality in this war between Holland and Acheh.
On Christmas day, 1873, the Dutch invaded Acheh for the second time, and thus begun what
HARPER’S MAGAZINE had called “A Hundred Years War of Today”, one of the bloodiest, and
longest colonial war in human history, during which one-half of our people had laid down their
lives defending our sovereign State. It was being fought right up to the beginning of world war II.
Eight immediate forefathers of the signer of this Declaration died in the battlefields of that long

war, defending our sovereign nation, all as successive rulers and supreme commanders of the
forces of the sovereign and independent State of Acheh, Sumatra.
However, when, after World War II, the Dutch East Indies was supposed to have been liquidate, -
an empire is not liquidated if its territorial integrity is preserved, – our fatherland, Acheh,
Sumatra, was not returned to us. Instead, our fatherland was turned over by the Dutch to the
Javanese – their ex-mercenaries, – by hasty flat of former colonial powers. The Javanese are alien
and foreign people to us Achehnese Sumatrans. We have no historic, political, cultural, economic
or geographic relationship with them. When the fruits of Dutch conquests are preserved, intact,
and then bequeathed, as it were, to the Javanese, the result is inevitable that a Javanese colonial
empire would be established in place of that of the Dutch over our fatherland, Acheh, Sumatra.
But, colonialism, either by white, Dutch, Europeans or by brown Javanese, Asians, is not
acceptable to the people of Acheh, Sumatra.
This illegal transfer of sovereignty over our fatherland by the old, Dutch, colonialists to the new,
Javanese colonialists, was done in the most appalling political fraud of the century: the Dutch
colonialist was supposed to have turned over sovereignty over our fatherland to a “new nation”
called “indonesia”. But “indonesia” was a fraud: a cloak to cover up Javanese colonialism. Since
the world begun, there never was a people, much less a nation, in our part of the world by that
name. No such people existed in the Malay Archipelago by definition of ethnology, philology,
cultural anthropology, sociology, or by any other scientific findings. “Indonesia” is merely a new
label, in a totally foreign nomenclature, which has nothing to do with our own history, language,
culture, or interests; it was a new label considered useful by the Dutch to replace the despicable
“Dutch East Indies”, in an attempt to unite administration of their ill-gotten, far-flung colonies;
and the Javanese neo-colonialists knew its usefulness to gain fraudulent recognition from the
unsuspecting world, ignorant of the history of the Malay Archipelago. If Dutch colonialism was
wrong, then Javanese colonialism which was squarely based on it cannot be right. The most
fundamental principle of international Law states: Ex injuria jus non oritur. Right cannot
originate from wrong!
The Javanese, nevertheless, are attempting to perpetuate colonialism which all the Western
colonial powers had abandoned and all the world had condemned. During these last thirty years
the people of Acheh, Sumatra, have witnessed how our fatherland has been exploited and driven
into ruinous conditions by the Javanese neo-colonialists: they have stolen our properties; they
have robbed us from our livelihood; they have abused the education of our children; they have
exiled our leaders; they have put our people in chains of tyranny, poverty, and neglect: the lifeexpectancy
of our people is 34 years and is decreasing – compare this to the world’s standard of
70 years and is increasing! While Acheh, Sumatra, has been producing a revenue of over 15
billion US dollars yearly for the Javanese neo-colonialists, which they used totally for the benefit
of Java and the Javanese.
We, the people of Acheh, Sumatra, would have no quarrel with the Javanese, if they had stayed
in their own country, and if they had not tried to lord it over us. From no on, we intend to be the
masters in our own house: the only way life is worth living; to make our own laws: as we see fit;
to become the guarantor of our own freedom and independence: for which we are capable; to
become equal with all the peoples of the world: as our forefathers had always been. In short, to
become sovereign in our own fatherland!
Our cause is just! Our land is endowed by the Almighty with plenty and bounty. We covet no
foreign territory. We intend to be a worthy contributor to human welfare the world over. We
extend the hands of friendship to all peoples and to all governments from the four corners of the
earth.

In the name of the sovereign people of Acheh, Sumatra.
Tengku Hasan M.di Tiro
Chairman, National Liberation Front of Acheh, Sumatra, and Head of State.
Acheh, Sumatra, December 4, 1976

Cessation of Hostilities

Framework Agreement Between

Government of the Republic of Indonesia

And the Free Acheh Movement

Preamble

The Government of the Republic of Indonesia (GOI) and the Free Acheh Movement (GAM) have been engaged in a process of dialogue since January 2000 and concur that the priority in Acheh is the security and welfare of the people and therefore agree on the need for finding an immediate peaceful solution to the conflict in Acheh. On 10 May 2002, the GOI and GAM issued a Joint Statement set out below:

 

1. On the basis of the acceptance of the NAD Law as a starting point, as discussed on 2-3 February 2002, to a democratic all-inclusive dialogue involving all elements of Achehnese society that will be facilitated by HDC in Acheh. This process will seek to review elements of the NAD Law through the expression of the views of the Achehnese people in a free and safe manner. This will lead to the election of a democratic government in Acheh, Indonesia.

2. To enable this process to take place both parties agree to work with all speed on an agreement on cessation of hostilities with an adequate mechanism for accountability of the parties to such an agreement. This will also provide the opportunity and environment for much needed socio-economic and humanitarian assistance to the people of Acheh.

 

The GOI and GAM share the common objective to meet the aspirations of the people of Acheh to live in security with dignity, peace, prosperity, and justice. In order to meet the aspirations of the people of Acheh and permit them to administer themselves freely and democratically, the GOI and GAM agree to a process which leads to an election in 2004 and the subsequent establishment of a democratically elected government in Acheh, Indonesia, in accordance with the review of the NAD Law, as provided for in point 1 of the 10 May 2002 Joint Statement.

To this end, the GOI will ensure and GAM will support the development of a free and fair electoral process in Acheh, which will be designed to ensure the broadest participation of all elements of Achehnese society.

In light of the delicate nature of the confidence building process, the GOI and GAM further appeal for the support of all elements of society and request that no party undertake any action which is inconsistent with this Agreement and may jeopardize the future security and welfare of the people of Acheh.

 

The immediate requirement is to ensure the cessation of hostilities and all acts of violence, including, intimidation, destruction of property and any offensive and criminal action. Offensive and criminal action is deemed to include violent actions such as attacking, shooting, engaging in torture, killing, abducting, bombing, burning, robbing, extorting, threatening, terrorising, harassing, illegally arresting people, raping, and conducting illegal searches.

Throughout the peace process the maintenance of law and order in Acheh will continue to be the responsibility of the Indonesian Police (Polri). In this context, the mandate and mission of Brimob will be reformulated to strictly conform to regular police activities and as such will no longer initiate offensive actions against members of GAM not in contravention of the Agreement.

The JSC will be the point of reference for all complaints regarding police functions and action that are deemed to be in contravention of the spirit and letter of the Cessation of Hostilities (COH) Agreement. As such, the JSC will be responsible for defining, identifying and investigating when and if the police have breached their mandate.

With this general understanding, and to bring the peace process forward to the next phase, both parties hereby agree on the following:

 

Article 1: Objectives of the Cessation of Hostilities and All Acts of Violence

 

a) Since both sides have thus agreed that, from now on, enmity between them should be considered a thing of the past, the peace process, which is continued by an agreement on this phase, will proceed by building further confidence and both sides will prove to each other that they are serious about achieving this ultimate common objective.

b) The objectives of the cessation of hostilities and all acts of violence between both parties are (i) to proceed to the next phase of the peace process, as mutually agreed on 10 May 2002 in Switzerland; (ii) to continue the confidence building process with a view to eliminating all suspicions and creating a positive and co-operative atmosphere which will bring the conflict in Acheh to a peaceful conclusion; and, (iii) to enable, provided hostilities and all acts of violence cease, for the peace process to proceed to the next phases, i.e. the delivery of humanitarian, rehabilitation and reconstruction assistance.

 

Article 2: Commitment by Both Sides to Cease Hostilities and All Acts of Violence

 

a) Both sides explicitly express their commitment to meet the terms of this Agreement to cease hostilities and all forms of violence toward each other and toward the people in Acheh, by implementing the steps stipulated in this Agreement. In expressing such commitment, both sides guarantee that they are in full control of, respectively, TNI/Polri and GAM forces on the ground. GOI and GAM commit to control those groups that do not share their objectives but claim to be part of their forces.

b) Both sides further commit themselves to immediately after the signing of this Agreement to thoroughly inform their respective forces on the ground of the terms of this Agreement, and to instruct them to cease hostilities immediately.

c) Both sides agree that, should there be other parties taking advantage of the situation and disturbing the peaceful atmosphere, they will endeavour to take joint action against them to restore the peace.

d) During this confidence-building period, both sides agree that they will not increase their military strength, which includes re-deployment of forces, increase in military personnel or military equipment into Acheh.

e) HDC is requested to strictly facilitate the implementation of this Agreement.

f) Both parties will allow civil society to express without hindrance their democratic rights.

 

Article 3: Joint Security Committee (JSC)

 

a) The senior leadership in charge of security from each side will meet, in order to establish the initial contact and understanding between both sides. They should also (i) reactivate the Joint Security Committee (JSC), which was established during the implementation of the Humanitarian Pause, and (ii) commence discussion, in order to reach agreement expeditiously, on a plan of action for the JSC in discharging its duties.

b) The functions of JSC are: (i) to formulate the process of implementation of this Agreement; (ii) to monitor the security situation in Acheh; (iii) to undertake full investigation of any security violations; (iv) in such cases, to take appropriate action to restore the security situation and to agree beforehand on the sanctions to be applied, should any party violate this Agreement; (v) to publish weekly reports on the security situation in Acheh; (vi) to ensure that no new paramilitary force is created to assume previous functions of Brimob, and (vii) to design and implement a mutually agreed upon process of demilitarisation. Regarding this last task, the JSC will designate what will be called Peace Zones (see Art. 4(a)). After peace zones have been identified, the GAM will designate placement sites for its weapons. Two months after the signing of the COH and as confidence grows, GAM will begin the phased placement of its weapons, arms and ordinance in the designated sites. The JSC will also decide on a simultaneous phased relocation of TNI forces which will reformulate their mandate from a strike force to a defensive force. The GOI has the right to request HDC to undertake no-notice verification of the designated sites. With the growth in confidence of both parties in the process the phased placement of GAM weapons will be completed within a period of five months (see attached note).

c) The composition of JSC will be senior officials appointed as representatives of the GOI and the GAM and a senior third party personality of high standing agreed upon by both sides. Each senior official from the three parties are to be accompanied by up to four persons as members. The heads of delegations from both sides have to be senior and have the authority to be able to take decisions on the spot.

The third party (HDC) personality needs to be able to command the respect and high regard of both sides in order to be able to assist in resolving problems, as they arise.

d) In order to perform these functions, the JSC is to be assisted by a monitoring team or monitoring teams, which would be provided security guarantees by both sides in monitoring the security situation and in investigating any violation.

e) The composition of each of the monitoring teams are appointed officials as representatives of the High Command of the security forces of the GOI and the High Command of the forces of the GAM in Acheh and a senior third party military officer agreed upon by both sides reporting to the senior third party personality of high standing in the JSC.

f) JSC and the monitoring team(s) would be provided with the necessary technical and administrative staff and logistical support. The HDC is requested to facilitate the establishment of these bodies by providing the necessary funds, logistical and administrative facilities.

g) It is agreed upon that the JSC and the monitoring team(s) will be established and be operational within one month of the signing of this Agreement. Civil society has the right to provide inputs to the JSC.

 

Article 4: Establishment of “Peace Zones”

 

a) Following the signing of the COH Agreement, the JSC, with the direct participation of the senior leadership for security from both sides, will immediately identify and prepare locations of conflict to be designated as “Peace Zones”. This would facilitate considerably the work of the JSC since it could focus its attention on these areas in establishing and maintaining security, and these zones, provided peace could be established, will be the focus of the initial humanitarian, rehabilitation and reconstruction assistance.

b) For the first two months after the signing, both parties will relocate to defensive positions as agreed upon by the JSC. Adjustments to these locations could be made by the JSC in order to separate the forces of both parties with sufficient distance to avoid contact or confrontation. Forces of both parties will refrain from operations, movements, activities or any provocative acts that could lead to contact or confrontation with each other.

c) In order to build trust and confidence during these crucial months, these zones and surroundings will be monitored by the tripartite monitoring teams. The JSC will be informed by both parties of any significant movements or activities in these areas.

d) POLRI will be able to investigate criminal activities in these areas in consultation with the JSC.

e) The designation of identified areas of demilitarised zones such as schools, mosques, health institutions and public places, bazaars, Achehnese meunasahs, market-places, foodstalls, communication centres including bus-terminals, taxi-stations, ferry-terminals, public roads, river transportation services, and fishing ports.

 

Article 5: Time Frames

 

a) Both sides agree that hostilities and all acts of violence by both sides should cease forever in Acheh.

b) Both sides also agree that hostilities and all acts of violence during the first three months from the time when the JSC and the monitoring team(s) become operational are very crucial as indicator of the seriousness of the commitment from both sides. If indeed hostilities and all acts of violence could decrease dramatically, or even cease altogether, during this first three month period, the Achehnese and other Indonesian people, and the international community, would consider that the peace process would most likely succeed.

c) During the period between the signing of this Agreement and the time when the JSC and the monitoring team(s) become operational, both signatories to this Agreement commit themselves to exercise the utmost restraint by not making any public statement that would inflame the feeling and sentiment of the other side, including the people, and by ensuring that their forces will not initiate any hostile act toward the other.

 

Article 6: All-Inclusive Dialogue

 

The parties agree to support the process of All-Inclusive Dialogue in Acheh as provided for in the Joint Statement of 10 May 2002. The parties agree to ensure, through this Agreement, the necessary security and freedom of movement for all participants in the All-Inclusive Dialogue to enable the process to be conducted in a safe and fair manner, reflecting the views of all elements of Achehnese society. The parties reconfirm their agreement that the process of All-Inclusive Dialogue be facilitated by HDC.

 

Article 7: Public Information and Communications

 

a) To ensure national and international support for the peace process in Acheh, the Agreement of 10 May 2002, and this Agreement and its implementation have to be publicised as widely as possible within one month of the signing of this Agreement. The process of implementation has to be as transparent as possible and the people have to be regularly informed of the progress made and difficulties encountered.

b) Communications to the public will be given priority, especially through the print and electronic media. Television and radio programmes have to be devised to enable obtaining inputs from the general public provided that they are conducted in a fair and balanced manner. The JSC remains the final reference on this matter.

c) Other media, such as community meetings, seminars, flyers, bumper stickers, T-shirts, and others could also be considered, as appropriate.

d) The HDC is requested to look for sources of funding these public information and communication activities.

 

Article 8: Joint Council

A Joint Council will be established, composed of the most senior representatives of the GOI and the GAM, and of the third party (HDC). The function of this Joint Council will be to resolve all issues or disputes arising out of the implementation of this Agreement, which cannot be resolved by other Committees or Structures established under this Agreement. The Joint Council may amend the articles and provisions of this Agreement.

Article 9: Amendment or Termination

This Agreement may only be amended by agreement between the two parties in the Joint Council. Should either party wish to unilaterally terminate the Agreement then they are obligated to first bring the issue to the Joint Council and engage in and support all efforts by the Joint Council to resolve the problem within a sufficient period of time (no less than 30 days). If the Joint Council is unable to resolve the matter, then either party has the right to unilaterally withdraw from the Agreement.

For the Government For the Leadership
of the Republic of Indonesia of the Free Acheh Movement
Amb. Mr. S. Wiryono
Dr. Zaini Abdullah
Witnessed by
Henry Dunant Centre
for Humanitarian Dialogue (HDC)
Mr. Martin Griffiths

Terjemahan resmi ini telah disetujui oleh delegasi RI dan GAM. Hanya terjemahan resmi ini yang
digunakan dalam bahasa Indonesia. Teks Asli tertulis dalam bahasa Inggris yang ditandatangani
di Helsinki, Finlandia 15 Agustus 2005.

Nota Kesepahaman
antara
Pemerintah Republik Indonesia
dan
Gerakan Aceh Merdeka

Pemerintah Republik Indonesia dan Gerakan Aceh Merdeka (GAM) menegaskan komitmen mereka untuk penyelesaian konflik Aceh secara damai, menyeluruh, berkelanjutan dan bermartabat bagi semua.
Para pihak bertekad untuk menciptakan kondisi sehingga pemerintahan rakyat Aceh dapat diwujudkan melalui suatu proses yang demokratis dan adil dalam negara kesatuan dan konstitusi Republik Indonesia.
Para pihak sangat yakin bahwa hanya dengan penyelesaian damai atas konflik tersebut yang akan memungkinkan pembangunan kembali Aceh pasca Tsunami tanggal 26 Desember 2005 dapat mencapai kemajuan dan keberhasilan.
Para pihak yang terlibat dalam konflik bertekad untuk membangun rasa saling percaya.
Nota Kesepahaman ini memerinci isi persetujuan yang dicapai dan prinsip-prinsip yang akan memandu proses transformasi.
Untuk maksud ini Pemerintah RI dan GAM menyepakati hal-hal berikut:
1. Penyelenggaraan Pemerintahan di Aceh
1.1. Undang-undang tentang Penyelenggaraan Pemerintahan di Aceh
1.1.1. Undang-undang baru tentang Penyelenggaraan Pemerintahan di Aceh akan diundangkan dan akan mulai berlaku sesegera mungkin dan selambat-lambatnya tanggal 31 Maret 2006.
1.1.2. Undang-undang baru tentang Penyelenggaraan Pemerintahan di Aceh akan didasarkan pada prinsip-prinsip sebagai berikut:
1
Terjemahan resmi ini telah disetujui oleh delegasi RI dan GAM. Hanya terjemahan resmi ini yang
digunakan dalam bahasa Indonesia. Teks Asli tertulis dalam bahasa Inggris yang ditandatangani
di Helsinki, Finlandia 15 Agustus 2005.
a) Aceh akan melaksanakan kewenangan dalam semua sektor publik, yang akan diselenggarakan bersamaan dengan administrasi sipil dan peradilan, kecuali dalam bidang hubungan luar negeri, pertahanan luar, keamanan nasional, hal ikhwal moneter dan fiskal, kekuasaan kehakiman dan kebebasan beragama, dimana kebijakan tersebut merupakan kewenangan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia sesuai dengan Konstitusi.
b) Persetujuan-persetujuan internasional yang diberlakukan oleh Pemerintah Indonesia yang terkait dengan hal ikhwal kepentingan khusus Aceh akan berlaku dengan konsultasi dan persetujuan legislatif Aceh.
c) Keputusan-keputusan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Republik Indonesia yang terkait dengan Aceh akan dilakukan dengan konsultasi dan persetujuan legislatif Aceh.
d) Kebijakan-kebijakan administratif yang diambil oleh Pemerintah Indonesia berkaitan dengan Aceh akan dilaksanakan dengan konsultasi dan persetujuan Kepala Pemerintah Aceh.
1.1.3. Nama Aceh dan gelar pejabat senior yang dipilih akan ditentukan oleh legislatif Aceh setelah pemilihan umum yang akan datang.
1.1.4. Perbatasan Aceh merujuk pada perbatasan 1 Juli 1956.
1.1.5. Aceh memiliki hak untuk menggunakan simbol-simbol wilayah termasuk bendera, lambang dan himne.
1.1.6. Kanun Aceh akan disusun kembali untuk Aceh dengan menghormati tradisi sejarah dan adat istiadat rakyat Aceh serta mencerminkan kebutuhan hukum terkini Aceh.
1.1.7. Lembaga Wali Nanggroe akan dibentuk dengan segala perangkat upacara dan gelarnya.
1.2. Partisipasi Politik
1.2.1 Sesegera mungkin, tetapi tidak lebih dari satu tahun sejak penandatanganan Nota Kesepahaman ini, Pemerintah RI menyepakati dan akan memfasilitasi pembentukan partai-partai politik yang berbasis di Aceh yang memenuhi persyaratan nasional. Memahami aspirasi rakyat Aceh untuk partai-partai politik lokal, Pemerintah RI, dalam tempo satu tahun, atau paling lambat 18 bulan sejak penandatanganan Nota 2
Terjemahan resmi ini telah disetujui oleh delegasi RI dan GAM. Hanya terjemahan resmi ini yang
digunakan dalam bahasa Indonesia. Teks Asli tertulis dalam bahasa Inggris yang ditandatangani
di Helsinki, Finlandia 15 Agustus 2005.
Kesepahaman ini, akan menciptakan kondisi politik dan hukum untuk pendirian partai politik lokal di Aceh dengan berkonsultasi dengan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat. Pelaksanaan Nota Kesepahaman ini yang tepat waktu akan memberi sumbangan positif bagi maksud tersebut.
1.2.2 Dengan penandatanganan Nota Kesepahaman ini, rakyat Aceh akan memiliki hak menentukan calon-calon untuk posisi semua pejabat yang dipilih untuk mengikuti pemilihan di Aceh pada bulan April 2006 dan selanjutnya.
1.2.3 Pemilihan lokal yang bebas dan adil akan diselenggarakan di bawah undang-undang baru tentang Penyelenggaraan Pemerintahan di Aceh untuk memilih Kepala Pemerintah Aceh dan pejabat terpilih lainnya pada bulan April 2006 serta untuk memilih anggota legislatif Aceh pada tahun 2009.
1.2.4 Sampai tahun 2009 legislatif (DPRD) Aceh tidak berkewenangan untuk mengesahkan peraturan perundang-undangan apapun tanpa persetujuan Kepala Pemerintah Aceh.
1.2.5 Semua penduduk Aceh akan diberikan kartu identitas baru yang biasa sebelum pemilihan pada bulan April 2006.
1.2.6 Partisipasi penuh semua orang Aceh dalam pemilihan lokal dan nasional, akan dijamin sesuai dengan Konstitusi Republik Indonesia.
1.2.7 Pemantau dari luar akan diundang untuk memantau pemilihan di Aceh. Pemilihan lokal bisa diselenggarakan dengan bantuan teknis dari luar.
1.2.8 Akan adanya transparansi penuh dalam dana kampanye.
1.3. Ekonomi
1.3.1. Aceh berhak memperoleh dana melalui hutang luar negeri. Aceh berhak untuk menetapkan tingkat suku bunga berbeda dengan yang ditetapkan oleh Bank Sentral Republik Indonesia (Bank Indonesia).
1.3.2. Aceh berhak menetapkan dan memungut pajak daerah untuk membiayai kegiatan-kegiatan internal yang resmi. Aceh berhak melakukan perdagangan dan bisnis secara internal dan internasional serta menarik investasi dan wisatawan asing secara langsung ke Aceh.
1.3.3. Aceh akan memiliki kewenangan atas sumber daya alam yang hidup di laut teritorial di sekitar Aceh.
3
Terjemahan resmi ini telah disetujui oleh delegasi RI dan GAM. Hanya terjemahan resmi ini yang
digunakan dalam bahasa Indonesia. Teks Asli tertulis dalam bahasa Inggris yang ditandatangani
di Helsinki, Finlandia 15 Agustus 2005.
1.3.4. Aceh berhak menguasai 70% hasil dari semua cadangan hidrokarbon dan sumber daya alam lainnya yang ada saat ini dan di masa mendatang di wilayah Aceh maupun laut teritorial sekitar Aceh.
1.3.5. Aceh melaksanakan pembangunan dan pengelolaan semua pelabuhan laut dan pelabuhan udara dalam wilayah Aceh.
1.3.6. Aceh akan menikmati perdagangan bebas dengan semua bagian Republik Indonesia tanpa hambatan pajak, tarif ataupun hambatan lainnya.
1.3.7. Aceh akan menikmati akses langsung dan tanpa hambatan ke negara-negara asing, melalui laut dan udara.
1.3.8. Pemerintah RI bertekad untuk menciptakan transparansi dalam pengumpulan dan pengalokasian pendapatan antara Pemerintah Pusat dan Aceh dengan menyetujui auditor luar melakukan verifikasi atas kegiatan tersebut dan menyampaikan hasil-hasilnya kepada Kepala Pemerintah Aceh.
1.3.9. GAM akan mencalonkan wakil-wakilnya untuk berpartisipasi secara penuh pada semua tingkatan dalam komisi yang dibentuk untuk melaksanakan rekonstruksi pasca-Tsunami (BRR).
1.4. Peraturan Perundang-undangan
1.4.1. Pemisahan kekuasaan antara badan-badan legislatif, eksekutif dan yudikatif akan diakui.
1.4.2. Legislatif Aceh akan merumuskan kembali ketentuan hukum bagi Aceh berdasarkan prinsip-prinsip universal hak asasi manusia sebagaimana tercantum dalam Kovenan Internasional Perserikatan Bangsa-bangsa mengenai Hak-hak Sipil dan Politik dan mengenai Hak-hak Ekonomi, Sosial dan Budaya.
1.4.3. Suatu sistem peradilan yang tidak memihak dan independen, termasuk pengadilan tinggi, dibentuk di Aceh di dalam sistem peradilan Republik Indonesia.
1.4.4. Pengangkatan Kepala Kepolisian Aceh dan Kepala Kejaksaan Tinggi harus mendapatkan persetujuan Kepala Pemerintah Aceh. Penerimaan (rekruitmen) dan pelatihan anggota kepolisian organik dan penuntut umum
4
Terjemahan resmi ini telah disetujui oleh delegasi RI dan GAM. Hanya terjemahan resmi ini yang
digunakan dalam bahasa Indonesia. Teks Asli tertulis dalam bahasa Inggris yang ditandatangani
di Helsinki, Finlandia 15 Agustus 2005.
akan dilakukan dengan berkonsultasi dan atas persetujuan Kepala Pemerintahan Aceh, sesuai dengan standar nasional yang berlaku.
1.4.5. Semua kejahatan sipil yang dilakukan oleh aparat militer di Aceh akan diadili pada pengadilan sipil di Aceh.
2. Hak Asasi Manusia
2.1. Pemerintah RI akan mematuhi Kovenan Internasional Perserikatan Bangsa-bangsa mengenai Hak-hak Sipil dan Politik dan mengenai Hak-hak Ekonomi, Sosial dan Budaya.
2.2. Sebuah Pengadilan Hak Asasi Manusia akan dibentuk untuk Aceh.
2.3. Komisi Kebenaran dan Rekonsiliasi akan dibentuk di Aceh oleh Komisi Kebenaran dan Rekonsiliasi Indonesia dengan tugas merumuskan dan menentukan upaya rekonsiliasi.
3. Amnesti dan reintegrasi ke dalam masyarakat
3.1. Amnesti
3.1.1. Pemerintah RI, sesuai dengan prosedur konstitusional, akan memberikan amnesti kepada semua orang yang telah terlibat dalam kegiatan GAM sesegera mungkin dan tidak lewat dari 15 hari sejak penandatanganan Nota Kesepahaman ini.
3.1.2. Narapidana dan tahanan politik yang ditahan akibat konflik akan dibebaskan tanpa syarat secepat mungkin dan selambat-lambatnya 15 hari sejak penandatanganan Nota Kesepahaman ini.
3.1.3. Kepala Misi Monitoring akan memutuskan kasus-kasus yang dipersengketakan sesuai dengan nasihat dari penasihat hukum Misi Monitoring.
3.1.4. Penggunaan senjata oleh personil GAM setelah penandatanganan Nota Kesepahaman ini akan dianggap sebagai pelanggaran terhadap Nota Kesepahaman dan hal itu akan membatalkan yang bersangkutan memperoleh amnesti.
5
Terjemahan resmi ini telah disetujui oleh delegasi RI dan GAM. Hanya terjemahan resmi ini yang
digunakan dalam bahasa Indonesia. Teks Asli tertulis dalam bahasa Inggris yang ditandatangani
di Helsinki, Finlandia 15 Agustus 2005.
3.2. Reintegrasi kedalam masyarakat
3.2.1. Sebagai warga negara Republik Indonesia, semua orang yang telah diberikan amnesti atau dibebaskan dari Lembaga Permasyarakatan atau tempat penahanan lainnya akan memperoleh semua hak-hak politik, ekonomi dan sosial serta hak untuk berpartisipasi secara bebas dalam proses politik baik di Aceh maupun pada tingkat nasional.
3.2.2. Orang-orang yang selama konflik telah menanggalkan kewarganegaraan Republik Indonesia berhak untuk mendapatkan kembali kewarganegaraan mereka.
3.2.3. Pemerintah RI dan Pemerintah Aceh akan melakukan upaya untuk membantu orang-orang yang terlibat dalam kegiatan GAM guna memperlancar reintegrasi mereka ke dalam masyarakat. Langkah-langkah tersebut mencakup pemberian kemudahan ekonomi bagi mantan pasukan GAM, tahanan politik yang telah memperoleh amnesti dan masyarakat yang terkena dampak. Suatu Dana Reintegrasi di bawah kewenangan Pemerintah Aceh akan dibentuk.
3.2.4. Pemerintah RI akan mengalokasikan dana bagi rehabilitasi harta benda publik dan perorangan yang hancur atau rusak akibat konflik untuk dikelola oleh Pemerintah Aceh.
3.2.5. Pemerintah RI akan mengalokasikan tanah pertanian dan dana yang memadai kepada Pemerintah Aceh dengan tujuan untuk memperlancar reintegrasi mantan pasukan GAM ke dalam masyarakat dan kompensasi bagi tahanan politik dan kalangan sipil yang terkena dampak. Pemerintah Aceh akan memanfaatkan tanah dan dana sebagai berikut:
a) Semua mantan pasukan GAM akan menerima alokasi tanah pertanian yang pantas, pekerjaan, atau jaminan sosial yang layak dari Pemerintah Aceh apabila mereka tidak mampu bekerja.
b) Semua tahanan politik yang memperoleh amnesti akan menerima alokasi tanah pertanian yang pantas, pekerjaan, atau jaminan sosial yang layak dari Pemerintah Aceh apabila tidak mampu bekerja.
c) Semua rakyat sipil yang dapat menunjukkan kerugian yang jelas akibat konflik akan menerima alokasi tanah pertanian yang pantas, pekerjaan, atau jaminan sosial yang layak dari Pemerintah Aceh apabila tidak mampu bekerja.
6
Terjemahan resmi ini telah disetujui oleh delegasi RI dan GAM. Hanya terjemahan resmi ini yang
digunakan dalam bahasa Indonesia. Teks Asli tertulis dalam bahasa Inggris yang ditandatangani
di Helsinki, Finlandia 15 Agustus 2005.
3.2.6. Pemerintah Aceh dan Pemerintah RI akan membentuk Komisi Bersama Penyelesaian Klaim untuk menangani klaim-klaim yang tidak terselesaikan.
3.2.7. Pasukan GAM akan memiliki hak untuk memperoleh pekerjaan sebagai polisi dan tentara organik di Aceh tanpa diskriminasi dan sesuai dengan standar nasional.
4. Pengaturan Keamanan
4.1. Semua aksi kekerasan antara pihak-pihak akan berakhir selambat-lambatnya pada saat penandatanganan Nota Kesepahaman ini.
4.2. GAM melakukan demobilisasi atas semua 3000 pasukan militernya. Anggota GAM tidak akan memakai seragam maupun menunjukkan emblem atau simbol militer setelah penandatanganan Nota Kesepahaman ini.
4.3. GAM melakukan decommissioning semua senjata, amunisi dan alat peledak yang dimiliki oleh para anggota dalam kegiatan GAM dengan bantuan Misi Monitoring Aceh (AMM). GAM sepakat untuk menyerahkan 840 buah senjata.
4.4. Penyerahan persenjataan GAM akan dimulai pada tanggal 15 September 2005, yang akan dilaksanakan dalam empat tahap, dan diselesaikan pada tanggal 31 Desember 2005.
4.5. Pemerintah RI akan menarik semua elemen tentara dan polisi non-organik dari Aceh.
4.6. Relokasi tentara dan polisi non-organik akan dimulai pada tanggal 15 September 2005, dan akan dilaksanakan dalam empat tahap sejalan dengan penyerahan senjata GAM, segera setelah setiap tahap diperiksa oleh AMM, dan selesai pada tanggal 31 Desember 2005.
4.7. Jumlah tentara organik yang tetap berada di Aceh setelah relokasi adalah 14.700 orang. Jumlah kekuatan polisi organik yang tetap berada di Aceh setelah relokasi adalah 9.100 orang.
4.8. Tidak akan ada pergerakan besar-besaran tentara setelah penandatanganan Nota Kesepahaman ini. Semua pergerakan lebih dari sejumlah satu peleton perlu diberitahukan sebelumnya kepada Kepala Misi Monitoring.
7
Terjemahan resmi ini telah disetujui oleh delegasi RI dan GAM. Hanya terjemahan resmi ini yang
digunakan dalam bahasa Indonesia. Teks Asli tertulis dalam bahasa Inggris yang ditandatangani
di Helsinki, Finlandia 15 Agustus 2005.
4.9. Pemerintah RI melakukan pengumpulan semua senjata illegal, amunisi dan alat peledak yang dimiliki oleh setiap kelompok dan pihak-pihak illegal manapun.
4.10. Polisi organik akan bertanggung jawab untuk menjaga hukum dan ketertiban di Aceh.
4.11. Tentara akan bertanggung jawab menjaga pertahanan eksternal Aceh. Dalam keadaan waktu damai yang normal, hanya tentara organik yang akan berada di Aceh.
4.12. Anggota polisi organik Aceh akan memperoleh pelatihan khusus di Aceh dan di luar negeri dengan penekanan pada penghormatan terhadap hak asasi manusia.
5. Pembentukan Misi Monitoring Aceh
5.1. Misi Monitoring Aceh (AMM) akan dibentuk oleh Uni Eropa dan negara-negara ASEAN yang ikut serta dengan mandat memantau pelaksanaan komitmen para pihak dalam Nota Kesepahaman ini.
5.2. Tugas AMM adalah untuk:
a) memantau demobilisasi GAM dan decomissioning persenjataannya.
b) memantau relokasi tentara dan polisi non-organik.
c) memantau reintegrasi anggota-anggota GAM yang aktif ke dalam
masyarakat.
d) memantau situasi hak asasi manusia dan memberikan bantuan dalam bidang ini.
e) memantau proses perubahan peraturan perundang-undangan.
f) memutuskan kasus-kasus amnesti yang disengketakan.
g) menyelidiki dan memutuskan pengaduan dan tuduhan pelanggaran terhadap Nota Kesepahaman ini.
h) membentuk dan memelihara hubungan dan kerjasama yang baik dengan para pihak.
5.3. Status Persetujuan Misi (SoMA) antara Pemerintah RI dan Uni Eropa akan ditandatangani setelah Nota Kesepahaman ini ditandatangani. SoMA mendefinisikan status, hak-hak istimewa, dan kekebalan AMM dan anggota-anggotanya. Negara-negara ASEAN yang ikut serta yang telah diundang oleh Pemerintah RI akan menegaskan secara tertulis penerimaan dan kepatuhan mereka terhadap SoMA dimaksud.
8
Terjemahan resmi ini telah disetujui oleh delegasi RI dan GAM. Hanya terjemahan resmi ini yang
digunakan dalam bahasa Indonesia. Teks Asli tertulis dalam bahasa Inggris yang ditandatangani
di Helsinki, Finlandia 15 Agustus 2005.
5.4. Pemerintah RI akan memberikan semua dukungannya bagi pelaksanaan mandat AMM. Dalam kaitan ini, Pemerintah RI akan menulis surat kepada Uni Eropa dan negara-negara ASEAN yang ikut serta dan menyatakan komitmen dan dukungannya kepada AMM.
5.5. GAM akan memberikan semua dukungannya bagi pelaksanaan mandat AMM. Dalam kaitan ini, GAM akan menulis surat kepada Uni Eropa dan negara-negara ASEAN yang ikut serta menyatakan komitmen dan dukungannya kepada AMM.
5.6. Para pihak bertekad untuk menciptakan kondisi kerja yang aman, terjaga dan stabil bagi AMM dan menyatakan kerjasamanya secara penuh dengan AMM.
5.7. Tim monitoring memiliki kebebasan bergerak yang tidak terbatas di Aceh. Hanya tugas-tugas yang tercantum dalam rumusan Nota Kesepahaman ini yang akan diterima oleh AMM. Para pihak tidak memiliki veto atas tindakan atau kontrol terhadap kegiatan operasional AMM.
5.8. Pemerintah RI bertanggung jawab atas keamanan semua personil AMM di Indonesia. Personil AMM tidak membawa senjata. Bagaimanapun juga Kepala Misi Monitoring dapat memutuskan perkecualian bahwa patroli tidak akan didampingi oleh pasukan bersenjata Pemerintah RI. Dalam hal ini, Pemerintah RI akan diberitahukan dan Pemerintah RI tidak akan bertanggung jawab atas keamanan patroli tersebut.
5.9. Pemerintah RI akan menyediakan tempat-tempat pengumpulan senjata dan mendukung tim-tim pengumpul senjata bergerak (mobile team) bekerjasama dengan GAM.
5.10. Penghancuran segera akan dilaksanakan setelah pengumpulan senjata dan amunisi. Proses ini akan sepenuhnya didokumentasikan dan dipublikasikan sebagaimana mestinya.
5.11. AMM melapor kepada Kepala Misi Monitoring yang akan memberikan laporan rutin kepada para pihak dan kepada pihak lainnya sebagaimana diperlukan, maupun kepada orang atau kantor yang ditunjuk di Uni Eropa dan negara-negara ASEAN yang ikut serta.
5.12. Setelah penandatanganan Nota Kesepahaman ini setiap pihak akan menunjuk seorang wakil senior untuk menangani semua hal ihwal yang terkait dengan pelaksanaan Nota Kesepahaman ini dengan Kepala Misi Monitoring.
9
Terjemahan resmi ini telah disetujui oleh delegasi RI dan GAM. Hanya terjemahan resmi ini yang
digunakan dalam bahasa Indonesia. Teks Asli tertulis dalam bahasa Inggris yang ditandatangani
di Helsinki, Finlandia 15 Agustus 2005.
5.13. Para pihak bersepakat atas suatu pemberitahuan prosedur tanggungjawab kepada AMM, termasuk isu-isu militer dan rekonstruksi.
5.14. Pemerintah RI akan mengambil langkah-langkah yang diperlukan berkaitan dengan pelayanan medis darurat dan perawatan di rumah sakit bagi personil AMM.
5.15. Untuk mendukung transparansi, Pemerintah RI akan mengizinkan akses penuh bagi perwakilan media nasional dan internasional ke Aceh.
6. Penyelesaian perselisihan
6.1. Jika terjadi perselisihan berkaitan dengan pelaksanaan Nota Kesepahaman ini, maka akan segera diselesaikan dengan cara berikut:
a) Sebagai suatu aturan, perselisihan yang terjadi atas pelaksanaan Nota Kesepahaman ini akan diselesaikan oleh Kepala Misi Monitoring, melalui musyawarah dengan para pihak dan semua pihak memberikan informasi yang dibutuhkan secepatnya. Kepala Misi Monitoring akan mengambil keputusan yang akan mengikat para pihak.
b) Jika Kepala Misi Monitoring menyimpulkan bahwa perselisihan tidak dapat diselesaikan dengan cara sebagaimana tersebut di atas, maka perselisihan akan dibahas bersama oleh Kepala Misi Monitoring dengan wakil senior dari setiap pihak. Selanjutnya, Kepala Misi Monitoring akan mengambil keputusan yang akan mengikat para pihak.
c) Dalam kasus-kasus di mana perselisihan tidak dapat diselesaikan melalui salah satu cara sebagaimana disebutkan di atas, Kepala Misi Monitoring akan melaporkan secara langsung kepada Menteri Koordinator Politik Hukum dan Keamanan Republik Indonesia, pimpinan politik GAM dan Ketua Dewan Direktur Crisis Management Initiative, serta memberitahu Komite Politik dan Keamanan Uni Eropa. Setelah berkonsultasi dengan para pihak, Ketua Dewan Direktur Crisis Management Initiative akan mengambil keputusan yang mengikat para pihak.
***
1 0
Terjemahan resmi ini telah disetujui oleh delegasi RI dan GAM. Hanya terjemahan resmi ini yang
digunakan dalam bahasa Indonesia. Teks Asli tertulis dalam bahasa Inggris yang ditandatangani
di Helsinki, Finlandia 15 Agustus 2005.
Pemerintah RI dan GAM tidak akan mengambil tindakan yang tidak konsisten dengan rumusan atau semangat Nota Kesepahaman ini.
***
Ditandatangani dalam rangkap tiga di Helsinki, Finlandia, pada hari Senin, tanggal 15 Agustus 2005.
A.n. Pemerintah Republik Indonesia, A.n. Gerakan Aceh Merdeka,
Hamid Awaluddin Malik Mahmud
Menteri Hukum dan HAM Pimpinan
Disaksikan oleh,
Martti Ahtisaari
Mantan Presiden Finlandia
Ketua Dewan Direktur Crisis Management Initiative
Fasilitator proses negosiasi 1 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tinggalkan Balasan

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Logout / Ubah )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Logout / Ubah )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Logout / Ubah )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Logout / Ubah )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Ikuti

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: