Marital Rape: Are you the victim?

Rape is a form of crime action mostly experienced by women. Although we cannot dispute the fact that there are men who suffer from this criminal act, women are more vulnerable in this regard. With their unique physical situation, women carry larger post-rape burden, from being pregnant to post traumatic stress disorder. We all know that there are law and regulations to prevent and protect rape victims. But what if the criminal act is done within the legalized institution such as marriage?

Marital rape has been more and more acknowledged as one of the trickiest criminal act. Rape is basically defined as (sexual) acts without mutual consent, meaning one party disagrees to conduct such act. However, the institution of marriage seems to disregard this definition. In many countries, under various cultural and religious norms, women are obliged to fulfil the husband’s needs including sexual needs. For instance in Islam, women must listen and do what their husband tells them to do, when women fail to obey, they will be labelled as disobedient wife which result in stigma as a bad and irresponsible wife. In a lot of countries, people deny that rape can happen within the marriage institution because it is a wife’s duty to serve her husband sexually. Therefore, when the husband requests, the wife must provides. Sex becomes non-consensual and instead, it becomes mandatory.

Many married women suffer from marital rape without even realizing it. The only hint is that they suffer from depression, stress and frigidity. Sex is a mutual activity that takes two people and each party has to agree to conduct such action. When it is only one-sided and against one’s will, it is considered as rape.

Men need to have the same understanding regarding this issue and place women at an equal level as a partner rather than a sub-ordinate. Sexual conduct should be based on both decisions. There are reasons beyond women’s rejections that need to be assessed by men. Using religious and cultural norms as arguments are simply unfair and illogical because most of them are very patriarchal. There are also many other aspects and perspective in judging women as “good wife” besides the sexual obedience because women have many other supporting roles for their partners. It is time for women to be recognized as partners.

ICAAP10 in Busan Went Fiasco

The 10^th International Conference on AIDS in Asia and the Pacific (ICAAP10) has just begun a couple days ago. Busan, a beautiful city in South Korea has the privilege to host this event. As other conferences, ICAAP10 is an avenue to network, share, meet, advocate and build capacity of the community. Activists, advocates and scientists from around the world are gathered here to discuss the issues of HIV/AIDS, other interlinked issues and recent developments. Unfortunately, this year’s ICAAP has been turned upside down completely. An unexpected incident happened during the conference in Bexco Conference Hall and causes uproars.

Free Trade Agreement (FTA) has been a hot topic in the region and the activists agreed to join hands and conduct a peaceful protest by marching along the convention centre to voice out their message. At 2PM Korean time, the march begun peacefully but not for too long, because soon after, some police officers in civilian clothes started to take pictures of the protesters. Jang Seo-Yeon, a Korean activist and a public lawyer, quickly tried to stop this given the concerns regarding stigma and discrimination against PLHIV, people who use drugs, transgender and sex workers. The response from the police force was ghastly and more than 25 officers from Busan Police Station and the Presidential Security Service started to attack people in the march with no certain reasons. Jang Seo-Yeon was immediately arrested and given no explanations, even later she was threatened to receive criminal charges. Loon Gangte, activist from Manipur expressed that he has never been hurt this bad, both physically and mentally, by police violence in his whole life. 

Many activists were injured during this physical contact. They were beaten, bashed, kneed, kicked and had their clothes ripped during an hour long confrontation. Some of the activists were arrested and two had to be rushed to the hospital. This is, of course, an unfortunate event. ICAAP should be a platform to exchange information, knowledge and experience. It should also be a safe avenue to convey concerns and message from the community. But this year, ICAAP has turned to be a battle field. The activists quickly drafted a statement letter which is signed by 84 organizations and individuals, expressing their disappointment and concerns of the existing anti-human rights and violent entities. 

The attitude of the police force was unacceptable. But what is more disturbing is the fact that South Korea won the bidding to host this event. Previous to the bid, all countries participating in the bidding must have the understanding of the event itself and proper preparation at the country level should be done accordingly, including preparing the security force in dealing with such situation. The government of South Korea should have the knowledge that ICAAP is an arena for communities from diverse background, namely PLHIV, sex workers, LGBTQ, people who use drugs, migrants, youth and scientists to meet and hold discussions. South Korea seems to have failed their commitment as a host, which is providing safe and enabling environment for the activists to network, learn, exchange knowledge, share and address their concerns. 

The problems actually occurred prior to the event. There are many activists and advocates who are denied visa to South Korea insignificantly. Those who are denied visa mainly transgender and sex workers advocates. In Nepal, a transgender advocate had her visa rejected for no apparent reason. The technical staff person and translator accompanying her to support her representation were authorised a visa but she was not. In Kolkata India, two sex workers, and a leading global expert on sex work and HIV were refused visas. They were from the Sonagachi Project, the world’s foremost HIV programme for sex workers. In addition they had to undergo numerous investigations and ‘authorised’ checks to ensure there were no ‘risks’ to entering South Korea. Kaythi Win, the chairperson of Asia Pacific Network of Sex Workers said, "This situation makes us all very upset- many of our members have paid a lot of money to come to this conference but now they have been denied entry. We had hoped to learn from the region’s leading experts on HIV and sex work, and to share this knowledge with other people. Thanks to the discrimination of the Korean Government we cannot do this. This ICAAP has become a second rate conference”. 

Exclusion has also prevented People who use Drugs by the mere fact that Opiate Substitution Therapy (OST) is not able to be supplied to conference participants, effectively excluding yet another population group essential to any discussion taking place at ICAAP10. "We are angry for the situation people who use drugs have been put in to attend the 10th ICAAP.  With no access to Opiate substitution medication, in spite of their willingness and the experiences and cross learning opportunities that the congress could provide, many have not been able to attend" said Bijay Pandey of the  Asian Network of People who Use Drugs.

For the most part, activists thought that ICAAP10 demonstrates again that there is an urgent need to review the frequency of these events, the locations they are held, the millions of dollars spent and most importantly the lack of support provided to key advocates in the region, puts the whole of ICAAP10 to shame. I guess this year’s ICAAP theme: “Diverse Voices, United Action” sadly has failed to be taken into realization.

Statement by the activists regarding the unfortunate incident in ICAAP10:

We do not need anti-human right and violent ICAAP

There is no need for ICAAP suppressing the voice of people living with HIV/AIDS

1. Today at 2:00 pm AIDS activists and people living with HIV/AIDS from all over the world joined Korean activists in a peaceful anti-FTA march. FTA blocks the production of generic drugs and causes high drug prices. This can result in people living with HIV/AIDS not having access to ARV drugs. FTA means the death sentence of people living with HIV/AIDS. FTA is the reason of AIDS epidemic. 

2. In the middle of the march, we witnessed that disguised police men took pictures of people joining the peaceful march in the Bexco conference hall. When we protested to the police about illegal photo taking, more than 25 people from the Busan police station and special security team from the president office who supposed to provide security service for the Fiji president attacked people joining the march and tried to arrest people. All the participants of the community conference―PLHIV, sex workers, transgenders, IDUs, and sexual minorities―, were united to join the anti-FTA march and to stop the police violence. We tried to stop brutal police violence against peaceful march and speech and protected people from the illegal arrest. 

Jang Seo-yeon, a member of the joint civil action group for ICAAP and a public lawyer, was arrested while protesting the illegal photo taking and police violence. To block arresting her, people from the conference, PLHIV, sex workers, drug users and transgenders lied down in front of the police car to stop the police car. During a hour long confrontation, several people were physically abused by police men and security guards from the conference building. Also, several women and transgendered women were dragged by police and in by these violent police actions, their clothes were ripped. Several people living with HIV/AIDS were also beaten badly and verbally abused. Two people attending the conference had to be taken to the hospital. 

3. We are asking why the police is present in the ICAAP where the place for discussion and finding solution for HIV/AIDS issues. We also asking the why the organizing committee allowed the police presence and did not take any action to protect people from police harrassment. 

Finally, we are asking to all of UN agencies including UNAIDS and WHO's to respond and prevent this unjustifiable police actions against basic rights of people living with HIV/AIDS. 

■ We ask the head of Busan police office to formally apologize for the illegal police survellience and violence.

■ We also ask the head of the Busan police office to formally apologize for the brutal police action on women, sex workers and transgender people.

■ We ask Jin Suhui, the head of the ministry of health and welfare, to apologize that public discussions and peaceful demonstrations at ICAAP conference were threatened and intimidated by the police.

■ We ask the organizing committee of ICAAP, the head of the Busan police office, and the head of the ministry of public health to prevent any further police surveillance and violence and to ensure that every participants at ICAAP can join any kinds of civil actions and public discussion without any harassments and intimidation by the police.

27th August, 2011

Joint Action of Korean participants at ICAAP10

Supporters (84 organizations and individuals)

ShalinaAzhar (India), Rajsherhor Ng (india), ANAND (India), Anrew Hunter (APNSW, Thailand), Laurindo Garch (Philippines), AlejanolrdTsossero (Malaysia), Greg Nunro (United Kingdom), Albion Street Center (Australia), SeunShwin (NAPWA, Australia), Niwat Suwanphtthama (Thailand), Scarlet Timor Collective (East-Timor), Monica, Agnes Khoo (Leeds University, United Kingdom), OKUP (Bangladesh), Caram Asia (Malaysia), Friends Frangipani (Papua New Gunea), Spiritia Foundation (Indonesia), Thai People who Living with HIV/AIDS (TNP+, Thailand), AIDS Access Foundation (Thailand), Foundation for AIDS Rights (Thailand), Thai NGO Coalition on AIDS (TNCA), Raks Thai Foundation, Thai Positive Women Network, Fiji Network Plus (FJN+), Pacific Islands AIDS Foundation (PIAF), OPSI (Indonesia Social Change Organization, Indonesia), Performa (Network of People Who Use Drugs in Indonesia), APNSW (Asia Pacific Networks of Sex Workers), Empower Foundation (Thailand), SWASH (Japan), Sathisamuha (Nepal), Wanthong Rattansongkroam (Thailand), Thai Pastive Women Network, Waanthong2509@gmail.com, Habiba_aas@yahoo.com, Info_aas@org.bd, Humbenleha-health.org, mojin@naver.com, adipbarus.sunu@gmail.com, India HIV/AIDS Allance (India), Gjarat State Network of PLHA (GSNP+, India), World Vision India (India), Udaau Trust/Nipashat (India), JorapornTonypablle (Thailand), Theu Positive Women Network (Thailand), Arerah Oumim, Rishita Nandagin, WGNRR (Women’s Global Network for Reproductive Rights), TJF (Malaysia), Scarlet Alliance (Australia), UNAIDS (Nepal), National Association of PSHA in Nepal (Nepal), Nava Kiran Plus (Nepal), Fiji Network for PLHIV (Fiji), IGAT Hope – Network for PLHIV (Papua New Guinea), Chow Sce let (Mynamar), RameiBeejn (India), HIV/AIDS Alliance (China), Ramir Ahbab (Philippines), 7 Sisters (Thailand), Kasal Bhardoaj (India), FRA WCIWH (India), Niraj Singh (Fiji Island), Zula (UNFPA, Mongolia), APNSW Malaysia, APNSW Japan, YAP UNFPA Thiland, NFWLHA Nepal, Grassrooted (Sri Lanka), ITPC (Thailand), Scarlet Alliance - Australian Sex Worker Association, APTN (Malaysia), Garldon Youth Community (India), Jason Mikkell (Fiji), Rani Railatikau (Fiji), Simon Kanger Forde (New Zealand), Jason Lee (Australia), Jun Hui Lee (Korea), Yeon Kim (Korea), Ariel Herrera (USA), Shy Amal Dutta (Bangladesh), Shin-ae Care (Korea)

From Paris with Love to Indonesia - PART 1

Paris, it is a dream city for many people. The romantic view of the Eiffel Tower, the calm Seine River, Notre Dame, Mont Martre, Champs d’Elysses, L’Arc du Triomphe and, of course, the famous Musee du Louvre we know from The Da Vinci Code book and film (that has the painting of Mona Lisa). For many people, Paris is a “must visit” place before you die. And it is too for the Rumah Cemara team. Of course the most important thing is to participate in the Homeless World Cup 2011, but the fact that the competition will be held at Champs de Mars, under the Eiffel Tower, is very intriguing too. So, this team, once again, hold their hopes high that they will be able to participate in the competition in Paris since they have to let go their dream for the very same competition in Rio de Janeiro previously. The Homeless World Cup is a street soccer competition, played 4 by 4 with unique rules similar to indoor soccer. The team members consist of people from marginalized group whose issues are intersected with the homeless issues such as drug use, HIV/AIDS, poverty, etc. As for Rumah Cemara, the team consists of people living with HIV and former drug users. They use this event to raise awareness regarding drug abuse and HIV/AIDS as well as to prove that people from such group are no different with others. They are healthy, productive and capable in sports.

After a long search of support, Rumah Cemara has finally able to send its team to participate in the Homeless World Cup 2011 in Paris this year. Unfortunately, the main and biggest financial support does not come from the government despite the fact that this team is waving the national flag in Paris. Ginan, the captain of the team committed himself to walk from Bandung to Jakarta (approximately 125 km) in order to raise funds. Sadly, the attention given to his commitment was also very low. Only a handful of media actually covered his story and there was no welcoming ceremony once he set foot in Jakarta. But for him, the most important thing is to prove that he, as a person living with HIV, is upholding his commitment and at the same time show it to the public that even a person living with HIV can do a long walk. Endless support for him was channelled through text messages, twitter and facebook messages. He finally arrived in Jakarta 2 days earlier than it was scheduled.

As I expected, after his story of long walk was published in some local media, Rumah Cemara team started to get more attention. Suddenly, the Mayor of Bandung wants to meet them before they go. And then the Governor of West Java, and after that the Minister of Youth and Sport gave a farewell meeting. The team humbly accepted all the invitations, despite the fact that none of those entities ever paid attention to their previous proposal for support. As someone who is a bit critical to the government, I see all those as nothing but credit taking activities. Branding, using the achievement of Rumah Cemara, as if they have always been very... very supportive to Rumah Cemara. But that was me, this team is different. They were just happy to finally recognized and get the moral support from these government entities. The team finally departed for Paris on the 19^th of August 2011.

The team was assigned in group G. Sixty countries are participating in the competition. Their first match was against Romania, where Indonesia won 7 – 4. The supporters in Indonesia were ecstatic! Endless twitter and facebook messages are flowing. Everyone is praising and praying for the success of the team. The next day, the team has to play against Kyrgystan, which they won 9 – 4, and Scotland, which was a tie 8 – 8 and finally the Indonesian team won by penalty, gaining 2 points. On the following day, they met tougher competitors: Germany and Ireland. Still, with such high spirit and full support from the community in Indonesia, the team won tightly 6 – 5 from Germany and 8 – 7 from Ireland. With all these winnings, the Indonesian team is made the champion of the group and they are getting ready for the next round.

The hopes are still high, but the team keeps their heads low and not to underestimate their next opponents. They understand that winning comes with great responsibility. They will be playing against other teams who won their group. It is going to be a lot tougher. However, their dream to wave the flag of Indonesia in Paris is still on...

It has been nine years since the Global Fund first established. During its journey, the Global Fund has become the main financier of programs to fight AIDS, TB and malaria with approved funding of US$ 21.7 billion for more than 600 programs in 150 countries throughout the world. The Global Fund is a public-private partnership and international financing institution. This partnership between governments, civil society, the private sector and affected communities has been called as an innovative approach to international health financing. The Global Fund’s model is based on the concepts of country ownership and performance-based funding, which means that people in countries implement their own programs based on their priorities and the Global Fund provides financing on the condition that verifiable results are achieved. To date, programs supported by the Global Fund have saved 6.5 million lives by providing AIDS treatment for 3 million people, anti-tuberculosis treatment for 7.7 million people and 160 million insecticide-treated nets for the prevention of malaria. Beyond these three areas, the Global Fund also had contributed in achieving the Millennium Development Goals 4 (reduce child mortality) and 5 (improve maternal health) which have strong linkage with the three diseases mentioned. The Global Fund works in close collaboration with other bilateral and multilateral organizations to supplement existing efforts in dealing with the three diseases.

The Global Fund was founded on a set of principles, which are fully described in the Global Fund's Framework Document, that guides everything from governance to grant-making:

·        Operate as a financial instrument, not an implementing entity.

·        Make available and leverage additional financial resources.

·        Support programs that evolve from national plans and priorities.

·        Operate in a balanced manner in terms of different regions, diseases and interventions.

·        Pursue an integrated and balanced approach to prevention and treatment.

·        Evaluate proposals through independent review processes.

·        Operate with transparency and accountability.

While the mechanisms seem to be flawless and ideal, we cannot rely on the national report for facts without asking the constituents. The people who are supposedly get the direct benefits from the program itself. It is not a secret that many times what happened on the ground is not as perfect as it is described in the report or on the paper. Take Indonesia for example. The country spreads from west to east, consisting of more than 17 thousand islands. Until October 2010 reported and documented AIDS case in Indonesia is 24,131 with 4,158 new cases. With a rather complicated geographical positioning, does the Global Fund program run smoothly and ideally in all 33 provinces of Indonesia? Does the program have great impact to the Key Affected Populations?

Aries is a peer educator from Central Java, he is nurturing a support group in his locality. As far as his concern, the Global Fund program in his area is limited to provision of ARV, CD4 check and operational cost for health care service providers. Even though since the Global Fund project was launched in 2009 the AIDS mortality rate had dropped to as low as zero in his area, it does not mean that the program was run ideally. Aries regrets the inequality of implementation. For Central Java itself, only selected cities and districts enjoy the financial support from the Global Fund while others are still struggling. Not only that, but in his area, Aries found out that the target groups funded by the Global Fund are merely sex workers, PLHIV and IDUs. Women are included in the PLHIV group while children and youth are not specifically mentioned, let alone gay men and transgenders. He also expressed his concerns regarding the monitoring system of the implemented programs. So far, the documentation only covers the quantitative data and there are no follow ups.

Oldri, a Program Manager in Indonesia Positive Women's Network has slightly similar opinion. From her observation, the implementation of the Global Fund program in Indonesia is considerably fine when seen from the perspective of achievement of target groups and intervention. However, the achievement is not accompanied by adequate quality of service for the Key Affected Populations. In short, the program has been successful quantitatively but not necessarily qualitatively. The success in Indonesia cannot be concluded as ideal due to role shifting of the civil society and communities in supporting the Heath System Strengthening, which initially is the role of government in the effort of fulfilling the Right to Health of the citizen. According to her, the objectivity of programs funded by Global Fund is also low and sporadic because the target is specific only to high risk group while due to the data from the Indonesia Ministry of Health in December 2010, 25% of the infected people are coming from general population. In this case, housewives, the group that is not considered as high risk population.

Dr. Bagus, a medical practitioner, feels that judging from the proposal that was created based on the National Strategic Plan, the multi-sectoral involvement that was introduced and guided by 3 PRs is a good innovative way to execute the action plan. This was expected to contain the epidemic in Indonesia. Nevertheless, several challenges and obstacles were spotted such as the quality of program, uneven program expansion, understanding regarding the philosophy of the program, sustainability and coordination. Quality of program has always been a big question because the high number of quantitative report on outreach, syringes distribution and condom distribution is not accompanied by proper quality of service or follow ups. This is also confirmed by Dr. Ramona from PKBI [Association of Family Planning Indonesia] and Dr. Wan Nedra from PBNU [The Central Board of Nahdlatul Ulama], the faith-based organization in Indonesia. PKBI and PBNU are both PRs of the Global Fund in Indonesia. They claimed that every programs funded by the Global Fund is focusing solely on the quantitative aspect and almost none for the qualitative aspect, which creates dilemma for the program implementor [the SRs and SSRs]. Wan Nedra appraised the Global Fund for its organized structure and guidelines, however, she strongly feels that capacity building and advocacy should be included as the essential core elements that are covered by the Global Fund. Given the geographical location of Indonesia, Wan Nedra also addressed her concerns that the Global Fund can only be implemented in certain areas of the country, PBNU specifically experienced that it is impossible to conduct the programs in Maluku, Southern Borneo and Lampung due to the characteristic of the locals, communication issue and the recurring internal conflicts in those areas. Ramona mentioned that PKBI run its Global Fund-funded programs only in 12 provinces and 68 sub-provinces [districts]. Mainly Java, most of Sumatra and Bali are the areas that furnished with the Global Fund-funded programs.

On the other side, the question of sustainability is also lingering. The existence of Global Fund had been misinterpreted by the government and used as an excuse not to allocate certain amount of fund for HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, care and support in the national or local government budget. The fact that Global Fund is only temporary seems to be disregarded and neglected. The government most likely denies the fact that sooner or later international funding will be discontinued and countries are expected to be independently finance their own needs accordingly. The dependency of the government on the foreign aid is rather appalling.

What most people are not aware of is various shocking circumstances regarding the PRs in Indonesia. One of the incidents was that PKBI, as one of the PRs for Global Fund, received serious accusation of Human Rights violations during the Global Fund Round 8. The allegation came from their SSR field officers in Tegak Tegar Foundation who claimed that they had to undergo mandatory urine test that resulted contract termination. Four people were terminated due to their urine tested positive on drug use and they filed a complaint to the National Commission on Human Rights. There is no further follow up or clarification from the Global Fund Country Coordinating Mechanism [CCM] nor from Technical Working Group [TWG] whatsoever regardless the summon letter was sent by the Commission on Human Rights. Nevertheless, the incident was scandalous and causes a lot of resentments from the grassroot community, especially when PKBI once again was selected as the PR for Round 11. Apart from that, the practice of money politics were also found. Cases where clients are compensated by certain amount of so-called "transport money" in order to undergo VCT were something that people can find on daily basis, especially during Round 8. This practice had in fact diluted the initial definition of VCT itself. Certain group of people were not doing it voluntarily, anymore, but merely for financial reason. The trigger for this practice to occur is presumably the high number on target that the field officers need to achieve with lack or no capacity building. At the end, the field officers were frantically trying to fulfill the target and somehow work ethics seemed to be thrown out of the windows. It was somehow a mutual symbiosis; the client needs extra money, while the field officer needs to reach the target. Nothing else matters, but to reach the target.

On the other hand, PBNU as a moslem faith-based organization is also facing resentment and doubts from the community. Hartoyo, General Secretary of Our Voice, addressed that PBNU as the PR of the Global Fund is perceived by the LGBTQ community as being highly reluctant in executing the programs for LGBTQ and sex workers despite the fact the fund had already been transferred in and one of the performance indicators for the current round is to focus more on gay and transgender group. Even though Wan Nedra declined that PBNU is acting reluctantly, criticisms are still flowing in for them through mailing lists and discussion forums mentioning that PBNU, despite its responsibility as the PR for the Global Fund Round 9, is still not opening itself to outreach the LGBTQ community. This sort of friction caused a big question mark on the process of selecting PR in Indonesia. Now the community is starting to question the eligibility and what is the mechanisms in place to be selected as PR. Eventually the community demand that the Global Fund implement some sort of fit and proper test to all applying organizations to see whether or not they deserve to be PR, SR or SSR of the Global Fund.

As for the National AIDS Commission, Nafsiah Mboi, the Secretary, addressed that the implementation of programs funded by Global Fund is actually getting better. After several unfortunate incidents with the Global Fund in Indonesia, now Indonesia finally reached its peak time. This is based on the 'A' ratings of the PRs in Indonesia. For Round 11, Indonesia gets 4 PRs which consists of 2 government institutions [National AIDS Commission and the Ministry of Health] and 2 Civil Society Organizations [PKBI and PBNU]. Nafsiah emphasized that the cooperation and coordination between the government and Civil Society Organizations needs to be improved and strengthened. Especially because all parties need to realize that no one can work alone, therefore, good partnership is required in order to achieve the national goals in HIV prevention. Nafsiah realizes the dynamic and frictions within the NGOs, government and the PRs of Global Fund. She claims that resentments will always occur no matter what, and that the most important thing at this moment is to continue the work and ensure that the fund is being utilized effectively.

Overall on paper the achievement of target from programs funded by the Global Fund in Indonesia may display rapid progress. But if we go around talking to people from grassroots who are supposed to be the beneficiaries of this programs, there are still a lot of resentments toward the transparency issue within the Global Fund CCM. Even though the civil society has representatives in the CCM, there seemed to be a breakdown of communication. A lot of information regarding the Global Fund are not widely disseminated. It is always interesting to have both sides of the stories. Lack of transparency, gender-sensitive approaches and capacity building as well as quantitative-base report has been the greatest obstacles with no resolutions. Even though a lot know that the Global Fund initially carried out a noble mandate, they need to realize that the current practice on the field could be totally different. The uniformed complaints regarding no budget allocation for advocacy and capacity building, as well as regarding the quantitative target only should be considered as strong suggestions because at the end of the day, those who are implementing the plans are the ones who know what is best for the community. A more comprehensive and qualitative mechanism is desirable, not just a matter of achieving the targeted numbers. People need follow ups. They are yearning for friendly, gender-sensitive and indiscriminate services. And furthermore, the communities in Indonesia refused to be seen only as "numbers" that beautify the statistic reports.