Reviewing TV bill<\/p>\n
The government's decision to send the broadcasting bill back
\nto the House of Representatives, which endorsed it in December,
\nis strange and unprecedented. Only the prompt explanations by
\nMinister\/State Secretary Moerdiono and the new Minister of
\nInformation Hartono helped to keep the ensuing polemic in its
\nright proportion.<\/p>\n
The fate of the bill has been the subject of speculation in
\nrecent months. This is because the bill has been sitting in
\nPresident Soeharto's office for more than seven months, waiting
\nfor him to sign it into law. When the bill was endorsed in
\nDecember, the government and the House proclaimed that during the
\nseven months of deliberation, the government-sponsored
\nlegislation underwent one of the toughest scrutiny any bill ever
\nreceived.<\/p>\n
The government's announcement to review the broadcasting bill
\nhas therefore calmed, rather than fueled, speculations. For
\nexample, there were rumors linking last month's replacement of
\nHarmoko, the information minister most responsible for the bill,
\nwith the delay in signing it into law. The task to explain the
\nreasons for the delay fell on his successor, Hartono. It will
\nalso be Hartono's job to represent the government in the upcoming
\ndeliberation to review the bill, which he hopes will be concluded
\nbefore the end of the House's current term on Sept. 30.<\/p>\n
There were also rumors suggesting that the delay in signing
\nthe bill reflected the growing clout of the powerful commercial
\ntelevision industry. All five private stations are controlled by
\npolitically well-connected people. They were certainly
\ninfluential in the deliberation of the bill, such as in
\npreventing the massive government-run TVRI network from accepting
\nadvertising revenue, the industry's bread and butter.<\/p>\n
The decision to review the bill would have strengthened these
\nspeculations, but for the explanations by Moerdiono and Hartono.
\nThe two ministers said on separate occasions that the bill, if it
\nbecame law in its current form, simply could not be implemented.
\nBy specifying the articles in the bill, they helped to curtail
\nspeculations, and the ensuing constitutional polemic.<\/p>\n
One contentious article in the bill they singled out for
\nreview was the licensing system. The bill says that a
\nbroadcasting license must be renewed every five years. This, the
\ngovernment realizes, is not conducive to the business. We pointed
\nout, here in the same column when the bill was endorsed by the
\nHouse last December, that broadcasting companies get a worse deal
\nthan press establishments, whose license is permanent, unless it
\nis revoked by the government.<\/p>\n
Another article in the bill the government finds vague is the
\ndefinition of national coverage, which it says, must reach 50
\npercent of the country's population. There are two other minor
\narticles that Hartono said should be reviewed.<\/p>\n
Based on the ministers' explanations, there is no reason for
\nanyone to suspect any hidden motive behind the decision to send
\nthe bill back to the House. It is difficult to find any argument
\nagainst it. And there were no clear signs that the powerful TV
\nlobby was behind the decision, although, in the case of
\nlicensing, it will be the chief beneficiary.<\/p>\n
The ensuing polemic has been restricted to the question of
\nconstitutionality. It is indeed unusual for a bill already
\nendorsed by the House of Representatives to find its way back for
\nnew deliberation. But there is nothing in the constitution that
\nprevents the government from doing this. On the contrary, if the
\ngovernment feels that the bill is inappropriate, then it is only
\nconstitutionally right that it asks the House of Representatives
\nto review it.<\/p>\n
If there is any moral lesson from all this, it is that any
\nfuture bill must be thoroughly deliberated. Although the
\nconstitution allows it, reviewing the bill for a second time will
\ntake a heavy toll on the House. Given that the House has been
\nrushing to pass dozens of legislations before it ends it five-
\nyear term in September, one could hardly feel comfortable about
\nthe decision to review the broadcasting bill. For now, we have to
\ngive the House the benefit of the doubt in completing its
\nconstitutional task as best as possible.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/reviewing-tv-bill-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}