Lawsuit against 'Time'<\/p>\n
Your legal experts forgot to mention the most important facet
\nof U.S. law concerning a possible \"Soeharto Inc.\" lawsuit against
\nTime ( The Jakarta Post, May 23). The First Amendment to the U.S.
\nConstitution protects Freedom of the Press (as well as Freedoms
\nof Speech, Religion, and Assembly). Interpreting this Freedom of
\nthe Press is the leading U.S. Supreme Court Decision, New York
\nTimes v. Sullivan (1964). Sullivan would apply to \"Soeharto,
\nInc.\" because the former president is a \"public figure\". To win
\nunder Sullivan, Soeharto would have to prove not only that Time's
\nallegations were false, but that Time knew they were false, and
\nthat Time published these false allegations out of malice toward
\nthe former president. Cases decided since Sullivan show that it
\nis almost impossible to prove all three matters; a free press is
\nthought more important than the reputation of someone who
\nabandons much of his privacy by entering public life -- ask Bill
\nClinton.<\/p>\n
The former president might win a lawsuit filed in Indonesia
\nagainst Time. But the former president's recovery would be
\nlimited to seizing assets of Time located in Indonesia. Time has
\nmany assets in the U.S., of course, but a U.S. court would not
\nenforce an Indonesian court's judgment against these assets
\nbecause this would violate the First Amendment -- under Sullivan.
\nI enjoy your thoughtful reporting.<\/p>\n
PAUL H. BRIETZKE<\/p>\n
Jakarta<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/lawsuit-against-time-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }