WITH the arrest late last year of the East Timorese resistance leader, Xanana Gusmao, Indonesia's human rights record has again been the subject of debate. In a recent letter (Post, January 15) S. Rahayu Daryatno, Consul (Information), Indonesian Consulate, states that the ''international community has been mis-informed of the history of the integration of East Timor. . ..'', and further states ''in this context, allow me to give an objective account . . .''. The Indonesian Government's position has rested heavily on notions of a campaign of ''mis-information'' and ''objectivity''. In effect, the government presents its version of events as the only ''objective'' one, dismissing other evidence as politically suspect or ''unfriendly'' to Indonesia. Why is it, if the Indonesian Government would like others to be genuinely ''objective'' and have an accurate assessment of the human rights situation in East Timor, that the government has systematically refused to allow international human rights monitors, and others to enter the territory? Despite claims to the contrary by the Indonesian authorities, evidence of killing, ''disappearance'', torture, and arbitrary arrest has been overwhelming. Given this historical record it is simply not acceptable to ask the international community to accept a priori that their own statements are ''objective''. One example: the authorities said initially the Santa Cruz massacre was ''a riot'' but independentwitnesses said it was a peaceful demonstration. The government first claimed only 19 died but later said ''about 50''. Human rights abuses in Indonesia, are not confined to East Timor but extend throughout Indonesia. Amnesty International calls on the Indonesian authorities to allow unrestricted access to human rights delegations. Only then will we have real objectivity. ROBYN KILPATRICK Amnesty International
