Part 1 of 2: Defendant's statement: A journalist accused<\/p>\n
Bambang Harymurti, Jakarta<\/p>\n
I am a journalist. I am not a lawyer who has mastered the
\ntechnicalities of preparing a plea or legal defense in a court of
\nlaw. (But) I would like to convey my thoughts and opinions on
\nvarious issues that have arisen in the process of this trial.<\/p>\n
I would like to begin my explanation with a question:
\nShould a journalist who practices his profession as mandated by
\nlaw, and who publishes his works according to journalistic norms
\nenshrined in law, be seen as a criminal?<\/p>\n
It is now within Your Honor's power to answer this question.
\nWill Your Honors refer to Art. 4 clause (1) of Law no. 40\/1999 on
\nthe Press which states that \"Freedom of the Press is guaranteed
\nas a basic human right of citizens\"; also, Article 4 clause (3)
\ni.e. \"in order to guarantee freedom of the press, the national
\npress has a right to explore, discover and disseminate ideas and
\ninformation\"; and then implement Art. 8, which states \"In
\npracticing his profession a journalist has protection of the
\nlaw,\" so that Your Honors decide that the prosecutor's charges
\nagainst me must be rejected, because they are a wrongful
\napplication of the law.<\/p>\n
The alternative is to grant the prosecutor's demands. If this
\nis the choice you make, then Your Honors will be noted in the
\nhistory of this nation as the earliest executioners of press
\nfreedom in this country.<\/p>\n
This conclusion is drawn because, if we study the charges that
\nhave been prepared by the public prosecutor, the answer to the
\ninitial question posed above is yes. It would even seem that I,
\nas the chief editor of Tempo Magazine, am considered to be a
\ncriminal who is so dangerous to the public that the prosecutor
\nhas asked the judges to sentence me to two years imprisonment,
\nand to detain me immediately. To the best of my knowledge,
\nrequests for immediate detention are usually made only for
\ndangerous criminals who should not be allowed to remain at large,
\nand who are held in detention from the time of their arrest until
\nthere is a verdict.<\/p>\n
On Aug. 14, 2004, President Megawati bestowed the Bintang
\nMahaputera medal on four national figures, including Mochtar
\nLubis, a dedicated journalist who was jailed and whose newspaper
\nwas banned both when the Old Order and the New Order started to
\nenter their authoritarian era. This is interesting, because it
\ncould mean that the prosecutor who made these charges against me
\nis implementing a policy in contradiction to the President, or
\nthat President Mega only honors freedom of the press in times of
\nother governments, not during the time of her own regime? Let
\nhistory answer this.<\/p>\n
As the prosecutor has collided with so many of the markers of
\nthe Constitution and law, it is then not surprising that his
\nindictment does not make sense, and may even be properly
\nconsidered to be contradicting the law, i.e.,: As the chief
\neditor of a magazine that published an article that complied with
\nLaw No. 40\/1999, I am charged by the prosecutor as a criminal who
\nmust be sentenced to two years imprisonment, with an order for
\nimmediate detention, while the leader of the group that attacked
\nTempo's offices, who then assaulted me at a police station in an
\nattempt to force me to reveal the names of the sources in the
\nTempo article, is in contrast given a demand at his trial that he
\nbe released of all charges. Isn't this an extraordinarily unjust?<\/p>\n
It appears that the effort to undermine press freedom is now
\ngoing to be repeated. This contravenes the law, even going back
\non the constitutional mandate. All of us are obligated to oppose
\nthis and prevent it from happening.<\/p>\n
I passed the article \"Ada Tomy di Tenabang?\" (Is Tomy in
\nTenabang?) without any correction whatsoever. I did this not
\nthrough neglect, but because I considered the piece to have met
\njournalistic norms.<\/p>\n
I believe the content of the piece meets current journalistic
\nnorms because it is balanced, based on facts from the field and
\nexplanations from authoritative sources. The circulation of
\nrumors insinuating Tomy Winata's involvement in the planned
\nrenovation project had itself become a fact; these rumors were so
\nwidespread as rumors that Tomy Winata himself said he had already
\nasked about this by five other people before being interviewed by
\nBernarda Rurit from Tempo.<\/p>\n
The piece also complied with the \"assumption of innocence\" in
\nthat at end of this piece the writer implied that Tomy Winata was
\n\"being maligned,\" and that there were other parties who were
\nenjoying the fruits of the controversy.<\/p>\n
If a reporter whose work meets the journalistic norms
\nestablished under the press law is accused by the state
\nprosecutor of committing a crime, it is clear that such an
\naccusation is a wrongful application of the law, and may even
\nwarrant suspicion of the misuse of authority.<\/p>\n
The article is an excerpt of Tempo news weekly chief editor
\nBambang Harymurti's defense note read before the Central Jakarta
\nDistrict Court on Aug. 16, 2004. Bambang and two other
\njournalists from the weekly are being charged with provoking
\nunrest and defamation against businessman Tomy Winata.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/part-1-of-2-defendants-statement-a-journalist-accused-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}