Repression of information, again<\/p>\n
Abdullah Alamudi, Jakarta<\/p>\n
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has turned the clock back
\nmore than 40 years to the time when the late President Sukarno,
\nduring the height of his Ganyang (Crush) Malaysia Campaign in
\n1963, orally banned Indonesians from listening to western
\nbroadcasts.<\/p>\n
Susilo went even further. He issued regulations that prohibit
\nprivate broadcasting stations from relaying regular news
\nbroadcasts transmitted by foreign media, depriving the public the
\nright to immediate and direct access to information. Millions of
\nIndonesians throughout this vast archipelago will soon be unable
\nto get alternative sources of information. Voice of America's
\nIndonesian language service is relayed by some 160 private radio
\nstations, the BBC has 86 partners; It is not clear how many
\nprivate radio stations relay Radio Australia, Germany's Deutsche
\nWelle and the Netherlands' Radio Hilversum.<\/p>\n
It will be interesting to see the reactions of taxpayers from
\nIndonesia's donor countries when they realize that this
\ngovernment is imposing a blanket censorship on news and current
\naffairs broadcast by their respective radio and television
\nstations.<\/p>\n
The local private radio stations are merely trying to meet
\ntheir audiences continuous demand for more international news and
\nnews about Indonesia as seen from a non-Indonesian perspective.
\nThe vast majority of Indonesians are hungry for information -- a
\ncommodity they were deprived of for 32 years during the
\nSoeharto's era and further during parts of the Sukarno era. They
\nwant to know more about sports, especially reports on
\ninternational soccer, and they want the program English on Radio,
\nwhich usually follows the news and current affairs broadcasts by
\nthe western radio stations. They also want to listen to the
\nScience and Technology program, one of the most popular after the
\nnews.<\/p>\n
Soon, there will be no more relays of regular news programs
\nfor local radio stations when the regulation is implemented. It
\nmay also deprive viewers of Kabelvision and Indovision, which
\nbroadcast ABC, BBC, CNN, Fox News, CNBC, and many other
\ninternational television stations.<\/p>\n
Article 17 (5.a.) of the Government Regulation No. 50\/05 on
\nPrivate Broadcast Institutions, signed by President Susilo on
\nNov. 16, stipulates that: \"Private Broadcasting Institutions are
\nforbidden to relay regular broadcast programs originating from
\nforeign broadcasting institutions, which include program types:
\na. news; b. music programs with improper performances; and c.
\nsports broadcasts which show sadistic acts.\"<\/p>\n
Those who violate this ruling will be given administrative
\nsanctions in the form of a temporary ban, article 51 of the
\nRegulation states.<\/p>\n
It is not clear why the government took such a repressive act
\nin this age of press freedom and the public outcry for freedom of
\ninformation. What is clear, though, is that in its dictum on
\nconsideration, the regulation only mentioned Article 5 (2) of the
\n1945 Constitution, which empowers the government to issue
\nregulations. It did not, however make any reference whatsoever to
\nArticle 28 and 28-F of the Constitution, which acknowledge the
\nright of every person to communicate and to seek information.
\nArticle 28-F is more or less adopted from Article 19 of the UN
\nCharter on Human Rights.<\/p>\n
The regulation also fails to include in its consideration
\nArticle 28-I of the Constitution, which deals with human rights.
\nThe article stipulates: \"(1) The right to live, the right not to
\nbe tortured, the right to a free mind and conscience ... are
\nhuman rights that can not be taken away regardless of the
\nsituation.\"<\/p>\n
Back in the 2001-2002 period, during the deliberation of the
\nBroadcast Bill (now Law No. 32\/2002 on Broadcasting), the
\nCoalition for the Public's Right to Information, which includes
\nthe Indonesian Press and Broadcast Society (MPPI), Komunikasi
\nUniversitas Indonesia, Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI),
\nthe Institute of Free Flow of Information Studies (ISAI) and many
\nmore NGOs, strongly rejected the inclusion of an article in the
\nBill which limits news relays. But the coalition was defeated and
\nthat became Article 40 of Law No. 32\/2002.<\/p>\n
Point (2) of the article stipulates that, \"Broadcast relays
\nused as regular programs, be they domestic or foreign products,
\nshall be limited.\" Point (3) states: \"Broadcast relays as regular
\nprograms from foreign broadcasting institutions, should be
\nlimited in duration, type and number.\"<\/p>\n
The new regulation does not limit news programs regularly
\nrelayed by local radio stations, it bans them entirely. One then
\nmay ask, how repressive can this government get?<\/p>\n
The enactment of the four Regulations (Concerning: Guidelines
\nfor Foreign Broadcasting Coverage; Private Broadcasting;
\nCommunity Broadcasting; and Pay TV), has boosted the power of the
\nDepartment of Communication and Information (Kominfo), and usurps
\nsome of the power of the Independent Broadcasting Commission
\n(KPI), making it a mere messenger boy. Many media observers say
\nthat Kominfo has now become the reincarnation of the repressive
\nDepartment of Information (Deppen) under former President
\nSoeharto.<\/p>\n
The KPI, when first established by the Broadcast Law of 2002,
\nwas originally to be become an independent regulatory body,
\nsimilar to that of the FCC in the U.S., or the Office of
\nCommunication (formerly Independent Television Communication and
\nRadio Authority) in UK, or the Australian Broadcasting Authority,
\nor the Canadian Radio and Television Commission. But KPI's power
\nand authority have now been stripped away by the latest
\ngovernment regulation on broadcasting, to be mere a body to
\nreceive application documents for radio spectrum frequency
\nallocations, make recommendations to the Kominfo Minister and
\npass on the minister's reply to the applicants.<\/p>\n
Media observers here also believe that legally, Kominfo cannot
\ndeprive KPI of its power because under the Indonesian legal
\nsystem, the position of the Broadcast Law is higher than the
\nGovernment Regulation. Its rulings must not supercede a higher
\nlaw. However, many will recall that Article 28 of the 1945
\nConstitution, which respects press freedom, was also highly
\nregarded during the Soeharto era, but at the same time it was
\nstill violated. Many newspapers and magazines were closed down
\nduring his 32-year reign. So, since President Susilo has turned
\nthe clock back more than 40 years, will history repeat itself?<\/p>\n
The writer is a lecturer at the Dr. Soetomo Press Institute,
\nJakarta, and member of the Press and Broadcast Society of
\nIndonesia (MPPI). He can be reached at abdullahalamudi@yahoo.com.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/repression-of-information-again-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}