Notes
Tifa Notes on Indonesia
JANUARY 2010
www.tifafoundation.org
Freedom of The Press And Expressions
Fiscal transparency and accountability
Human Rights & Justice
Citizenship Program
FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AND EXPRESSIONS “…this decision is not merely the victory of TIME Magazine, as it is also a victory towards freedom of the press and speech in I ndonesia,”
“…this decision is not merely the victory of TIME Magazine, as it is also a victory towards freedom of the press and speech in Indonesia,” was a statement by Todung Mulya Lubis, attorney for TIME Magazine, in response to Supreme Court’s decision on April 16th 2009 to allow a judicial review of his client. The decision had saved TIME Magazine from paying a compensation amount of IDR 1 Trillion, along with apology statements towards the Soeharto family in various mass media, as previously decided by Supreme Court based on a 2007 appeal. The community of Indonesian journalists has two reasons to be pleased with TIME’s victory. Firstly, the decision had acknowledged the Journalism Code of Ethics. Fulfillment of this Code would protect journalists from all civil or criminal claims. Secondly, the decision has acknowledged the Right of Reply as a legal entity. The Right of Reply protects the press from civil responsibilities upon defamations. Another breakthrough on freedom of press is Supreme Court’s Circular Letter to
judges: they are to invite expert witnesses from the Indonesian Press Council for cases related to mass media publications. Looking at these facts, it’s no wonder the freedom of press and expression in Indonesia is considered better than the rest of South East Asia. For example, the Philippines still suffers from severe limits of press freedom, further signified by cases of murder or violence towards journalists. Malaysian and Thai press are still struggling to cope with publication restrictions on sensitive issues regarding the royalties. On top of that, there are also various online access restrictions. Nevertheless, Indonesia’s freedom of press and expression may not be out of the woods just yet. *** The 1999 political liberation took down all the stumbling blocks of press freedom. However, the newfound freedom of press quickly raises its own challenges. Physically, the challenges came from mass groups showing dissatisfaction of the new mass media by anarchy, throwing off threats, sittings and attacks to press offices.
The groups also intentionally attempted to restrict space for journalism work. Symbolically, the challenges came from all society levels, including the government, which was quick to call the new “freedom of the press” as “flubs of the press”. This perception of “flubs” became the concept for those attacking freedom of the press, albeit with different terms. The main message is one: press had gone so far overboard that they need to be restructured. These attacks occurred at the same time with the shift in press threats. Even though mass anarchy still occurred, a bigger threat at the time came from the political elites (namely the government, the military and conglomerates) shrewdly taking advantage of legal cracks. We call these attacks “criminalizing the press”. Criminalization is basically accusing journalists of defamation, or at the very least, public disruption. Political elites tend to add more weight to these accusations by demanding compensations, in amounts clearly devised to ensure bankruptcy or acquisition.
Press criminalization gained its omentum because numerous panels of m judges in district courts have completely disregarded the Press Law, which was originally lex specialis on mass publication cases. The threats of press freedom was further signified with new regulations, full of articles which seemed to support the criminalization attempts, some even allowing chances for repressing the press. To be fair, “press flubs” was partially due to low-quality, biased journalism, full of conflict of interest. At the beginning of Reformation we saw the media acting as sounding boards for political parties; the current media’s tendency to serve political-conglomerates is just as serious. The one thing that remains is the f lurry of freelance reporters. Unemployed journalists came forward, claiming to work for a publication which in reality is scarcely printed, just for the sake of supporting the journalists’ proof of credibility. *** Continued to Freedom of the Press and Expressions...