Why Must the Flag 1976

 By Mukhtar Syafari Husin

"BENDERA Aceh Surprises Jakarta" was the main headline of the Wednesday 27/3 edition of the Serambi Indonesia daily. This very attractive title for information addicts through print media inspires writers; Why was Jakarta surprised by the Aceh flag which had just been promulgated in the regional gazette? Then, of course, why should the 1976 flag created by the GAM declarator be chosen by the DPRA to be the Aceh flag?

Talking about the flag and symbol of an area is not something new in the archipelago. Each province in Indonesia, of course, also has its own flag and symbol which are recognized by law. Aceh is no exception with the flag and symbol of Pancacita that existed long before the Helsinki MoU.

The decades-long conflict ended with the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the Government of Indonesia and GAM which later became known as the Helsinki MoU. Where in point 1.1.5. it states “Aceh has the right to use regional symbols including the flag, coat of arms and hymns”. If it is understood for a moment, there is nothing new in GAM's demands other than hymns.

However, is it possible that the resolution of decades of conflict due to fighting for independence can only be obtained like other provinces without any specificity for Aceh? Or are there “other flags” or new modified flags like the Pancacita without any historical, philosophical, socio-political values ​​that are thick in the minds of the GAM Negotiators other than the star and moon flag with black and white stripes?

 It's worth asking

In the author's opinion, it is impossible for GAM's negotiators after they buried deep hopes for independence to want the Aceh flag and symbol to be included in the Helsinki MoU other than those that have been ratified by the current DPRA. If the Central Government rejects the Aceh flag and emblem which has been approved by the Aceh DPR, we should question the reasons for the rejection; Is it because they belong to a certain group, are symbols of separatism and are against the law?

The flag that has been ratified by the Aceh DPR and promulgated by the Governor does not belong to any particular group, because this flag has existed for decades. Thousands of lives have been lost because of the existence and defending this flag in demanding justice, prosperity, prosperity and demanding sovereignty as an independent nation on behalf of the Acehnese people.

However, this last demand failed to materialize even after the loss of tens of thousands of Acehnese people as a result of the 29-year conflict with the negotiations between Indonesia and GAM as representatives of the Acehnese people. These negotiations also took place after hundreds of thousands of casualties and the destruction of infrastructure after the 2004 earthquake and tsunami.

Why today, the shape and symbol of Aceh continue to be debated, even though the flag is just the identity of Aceh like other provinces, not something very crucial. This turned out to be the opposite when negotiations took place between Indonesia and GAM in Helsinki. The Chief Negotiator for the Government of the Republic of Indonesia, Dr. Hamid Awaluddin, as reported by Serambi (Wednesday, 19/12/2012) admitted that "the question of flags, symbols, hymns and Wali Nanggroe was not highly debated in the negotiations and was only discussed in the third round".

This means that it is not so crucial compared to the demands for the formation of self-government by GAM and rejecting the offer of special autonomy, where this theme experienced very tough discussions at the second and third meetings in the negotiations in Helsinki so that it almost failed the peace process. as mentioned by Hamid Awaluddin in his book Peace in Aceh: Records of RI-GAM Peace in Helsinki.

If we read the points or articles of the MoU and the LoGA, it turns out that there is no prohibition on the use of the flag that GAM has ever used as the Aceh flag. But on what basis if the Ministry of Home Affairs rejects the use of the flag that was once used by GAM as Aceh's identity and belongs to all Acehnese people. If the reason is because the flags used by GAM belong to the group and are symbols of separatism, in the author's opinion, this reason is very irrational. Because this is a justification that the GAM parties who negotiated with the Indonesian government in Helsinki, who were supported by 27 European countries, were still considered separatists during the negotiations and after the peace.

And, what we are very worried about is if there is an assumption from the Indonesian government that GAM is only one group, not a representative of the Acehnese people. If this assumption occurs then the essence is meaningful; the Indonesian government conducted negotiations with certain groups that were not representative of the Acehnese people. We are very worried about this kind of justification, because it will open up opportunities for other elements of Acehnese society to reject the MoU and subsequently peace will be at stake.

There is a statement that states the use of symbols that have been used separatism is contrary to PP No. 77 of 2007, where in Chapter IV Article 6 point 4 it is stated "Logo designs and regional flags must not have similarities in principle or in whole with the logo and flag designs of banned organizations or organizations/ associations/ institutions/ separatist movements in the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia”, we deeply regret this, because post-MoU and the issuance of Law No. 11 of 2006 gave Aceh specialties and privileges in many ways, including regulatory issues. This is in line with the constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, UUD 45 article 18B paragraph 1: "The state recognizes and respects special or special regional government units that are regulated by law".

 New jargon

If PP No. 77 of 2007 is the basis for rejecting the Aceh Flag as mandated by the MoU and the LoGA, then we should suspect that this is a new jargon to strip down article after article of the UUPA because it is possible that in the future the Government of Indonesia will issue a Law or PP and then clashed with the UUPA so that the law as a resolution to decades of conflict was left with useless writings "like a lion without fangs and even teeth".

The desire of the DPRA and the Aceh executive, which has received a mandate from the Acehnese people in the 2009 and 2012 elections, which were majority controlled by the Aceh Party (PA) as a political party controlled by GAM officials as one party that signed the Helsinki MoU, deserves careful consideration. The flag proposed by the DPRA is better known to the people of Aceh than other flags or new modifications. Don't look at the historical sequence at the beginning, isn't it a flag of peace between the Government of Indonesia and GAM in Helsinki after GAM no longer demanded independence?

Other reasons that should be considered; to commemorate the service and figure of Tgk Hasan Tiro's struggle as the designer of the flag, who has fought decades of resistance to demand an Aceh that is just, prosperous, dignified and based on Islam. All of these things have opened up opportunities for Aceh to obtain them after the Helsinki MoU. This is history that we should not forget or be forced to forget so that the bad experiences of the past do not repeat itself in Aceh, because "a nation that forgets history is a nation that dies before it dies". Hopefully the bad experience will not be repeated in Aceh.

Source :

Mr. Mukhtar Syafari Husin, MA, General Chair of the Aceh-wide Intellectual Movement (GISA), Dayah MUDI Samalanga Alumni, and Graduate Program Students of IAIN Ar-Raniry, Banda Aceh. Email: mukhtar_syafari@yahoo.com

This article has been published on SerambiNews.com in Bahasa Indonesia with the title Mengapa Harus Bendera 1976, https://aceh.tribunnews.com/2013/04/02/mengapa-harus-bendera-1976.

Editor: bakri