Discrimination of foreign executives<\/p>\n
The controversial detention of five Newmont executives on as
\nyet unproven Buyat Bay contamination charges can be considered
\nanother case of outright discrimination against foreign
\ncompanies, and represents a significant deterrent for top
\nexpatriate executives to accept postings in Indonesia.<\/p>\n
As illustrated by several prior high-profile cases involving
\nforeign multinationals, the arbitrary detention or imprisonment
\nof expatriate executives in the absence of legitimate court
\nverdicts cannot be considered an isolated incidence of the
\nmiscarriage of justice.<\/p>\n
Instances like these are in stark contrast to the treatment
\nmeted out to executives of domestic companies and detentions in
\nthe case of alleged or proven criminal charges in a majority of
\ncases remain exceptions to the rule, rather than the
\nimplementation of strict and impartial law enforcement.<\/p>\n
Preventing Newmont suspects or witnesses from leaving the
\ncountry should have been more than sufficient to serve the
\ninterests of justice, and holding expatriate executives
\npersonally and criminally responsible for untried charges brought
\nagainst their employer is not conducive to an improved foreign
\ninvestment climate.<\/p>\n
Other discriminatory obstacles faced by expatriate executives
\ninclude the disclosure of offshore incomes and assets for tax
\npurposes and in many instances, the country's restrictive visa
\npolicy represents an unnecessary hurdle not only for visiting
\nbusinessmen but also for potential investors.<\/p>\n
JOSEPH LOUIS SPARTZ
\nJakarta<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/discrimination-of-foreign-executives-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}