A not-so-free press<\/p>\n
If freedom of expression vanishes, then we no longer have
\nanything to show as a result of the reform movement. We will be
\nback in the days when the public learnt to read between the lines
\nof reports -- if at all they could be published. This grim
\nprospect arose on Saturday, when a protest against a cover story
\nof Tempo magazine involved violence and intimidation.<\/p>\n
The various participants in Monday's rally, and signatories of
\nstatements representing a wide range of organizations issued
\nright after the incident, showed that it was not merely seen an
\nexpression of disappointment against a media report or even an
\nassault against the press community alone -- it was taken as a
\ndirect attack against the seeds of democracy in this country.<\/p>\n
On Saturday at noon some 200 people from the Artha Graha
\nbusiness group and other supporters of businessman Tomy Winata
\nprotested against Tempo magazine following its report in Edition
\n9 on March 3 on indications of his business interests -- a
\nproposal to renovate the Tanah Abang market, recently destroyed
\nby fire. The report also published Tomy's denial.<\/p>\n
The protest against Tempo was perfectly legal but the
\nintimidation and violence involved was intolerable. Journalists
\nhave said they continued to try to work while the protesters
\nstayed at the office with the police merely standing by.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, Tomy's representatives argued heatedly with
\neditors, and after failing to force them to reveal their source,
\nsaid negotiations should continue at the police station "because
\notherwise we cannot say what might happen."<\/p>\n
They also hurled insults at the journalists and one of them
\nwas injured when one of the visitors hurled a wooden tissue box
\nat them.<\/p>\n
But at the police station witnesses said the chief editor
\nBambang Harymurti and another journalist were hit in the presence
\nof the police -- who have so far blithely said that they will
\ninvestigate if Tempo files a report.<\/p>\n
Any intimidation, moreover violence, against the press could
\nlead to self censorship which then becomes detrimental to all, as
\nthe press no longer works freely but under duress.<\/p>\n
Perpetrators of such acts also face penalties as stated in
\nPress Law No. 40 1999, which guarantees protection for the press.
\nAny attempt to prevent the media from doing its job is punishable
\nby a maximum of two years in prison, or a fine of Rp 500 million.<\/p>\n
Saturday's incident is intolerable also because the Artha
\nGraha Group of Tomy Winata had already sent a warning (somasi)
\nreceived by chief editor Bambang Harymurti on Friday, after which
\nhe and Tempo editors had agreed to either a dialog or legal
\nrecourse to settle the matter.<\/p>\n
Artha Graha has accused Tempo of "character assassination" and
\n"journalistic hoodlumism" in its latest press release, apparently
\nin response to numerous statements condemning the "hoodlumism" in
\nSaturday's incident.<\/p>\n
What the mobs missed is that Tempo is not just another
\npublication here; even before it fell victim to the 1994 banning
\nof three publications, it had become one of the icons of the
\npress struggle. And while many are critical of the press these
\ndays, no one condones the New Order style of intimidation and
\nviolence.<\/p>\n
As is standard procedure among the press, any mistake on the
\npart of Tempo must be dealt with immediately, and if necessary, a
\ncorrection and apology must be published at the first
\nopportunity. However sources and other parties related to the
\nreports clearly have the right of reply, and can also sue the
\nmedia.<\/p>\n
Hardly anyone is happy with the law nowadays but the
\nalternative such as experienced by Tempo signals a return of the
\ndays when the media worked under vague rules that threatened its
\nclosure at any time.<\/p>\n
We fear that if intimidation of journalists in broad daylight
\nin the heart of the nation's capital can occur openly and freely,
\nthen the threat to press workers in the regions would be far
\ngreater -- as proven by earlier cases of violence toward
\njournalists, such as the death of Yogyakarta journalist Muhammad
\nFuad Syafrudin in 1996 -- whose killer still walks free.<\/p>\n
The press today is an industry, which would mean that among
\nits priorities are its continued survival, and if necessary,
\ncompromise in the face of threats. However, today the public is
\nalso more demanding in its right to know, and it expects this
\ndemand to be met by the press.<\/p>\n
Therefore, instead of succeeding in cowering journalists, the
\npress and the wider public now rally behind Tempo journalists to
\nencourage them -- and other journalists -- to work as usual, as
\nprofessionally as possible without being influenced by pressure
\nfrom powerful political and business interests.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/a-not-so-free-press-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}