Soeharto vs Time?<\/p>\n
Unless Soeharto and his lawyers are bluffing, we could soon
\nhave an intriguing trial pitting the former president against the
\nNew York-based Time magazine. Wherever the lawyers chose to file
\ntheir lawsuit, Jakarta or New York, Soeharto vs Time surely would
\ngenerate a lot of interest, not just here, but also abroad.
\nImagine, the former despot of the world's fourth largest country
\nsuing one of America's most renowned and reputable magazines. If
\nsuch a court case did not grab headlines across the world, it
\nwould at least provide irresistible material for writers like
\nJohn Grisham.<\/p>\n
Soeharto and his lawyers have threatened to take criminal and
\ncivil action against the magazine for its \"Suharto Inc.\" cover
\nstory in its Asia edition published last week. The magazine said
\nSoeharto and his family amassed a US$15 billion fortune during
\nhis 32 years in power, much of which they had stashed abroad.<\/p>\n
Soeharto denies owning any assets abroad, but the denial does
\nnot extend to his children's possessions. Time claims to have
\nproof that the $9 billion in funds transferred from a Swiss bank
\nto an Austrian bank moments after Soeharto's resignation in May
\nlast year belongs to the former first family. Soeharto also
\ndenied the allegation. His lawyers called the article libelous
\nand Soeharto described it as \"cruel slander\". Time says it stands
\nby its story.<\/p>\n
No longer president, Soeharto is not necessarily powerless,
\nespecially if his purported wealth truly exists. The former first
\nfamily certainly have the resources for a lengthy and costly
\nlitigation, which this case would most likely be. Soeharto, for
\nexample, has retained for some time now eight of Indonesia's top
\nlawyers to handle the government's investigation into his wealth.<\/p>\n
It is uncertain, however, whether Soeharto and his children
\nare prepared for the barrage of media publicity that such a
\ntrial, in Jakarta or New York, would generate. It is less certain
\nwhether the Soehartos are prepared to disclose their real wealth,
\nsomething a court would likely demand in order for them to prove
\nthat they did not own any assets abroad. And what if Time has the
\nevidence to back up its story?<\/p>\n
If the case does go to trial, it will help bring out the truth
\nabout the wealth of Soeharto and his family. In this case, Time
\nwould have done Indonesia a great service. The nation has been
\ndismayed, if not bemused, by the melodrama played out by
\nPresident B.J. Habibie and Attorney General Andi M. Ghalib as
\nthey have pretended to go after the wealth of Soeharto and his
\nfamily these past 12 months. Time has done Ghalib's job, and it
\nhas done it better.<\/p>\n
A Soeharto vs Time trial in Jakarta also would provide an
\ninteresting case study for the Indonesian media on how far
\ninvestigative journalism is tolerated under the laws of the
\ncountry. To what extent does the libel law protect the privacy of
\nan individual while ensuring the media has the freedom to do its
\njob in serving the public's interests? Soeharto may not be in
\npower, but he is still an important public figure who should be
\nsubject to public scrutiny through the media.<\/p>\n
Investigative journalism is a relatively new concept in
\nIndonesia. When Soeharto was in power, few media institutions
\ndared practice investigative journalism because the government
\ncould simply close them down at any time. With Soeharto out of
\nthe picture and the nation enjoying unprecedented press freedom,
\na number of magazines which have the resources have begun the
\npractice of in-depth reporting. Irrespective of the fact that
\nTime is an American magazine, an Indonesian trial, if the case
\nreaches that stage, would set a major precedent in the law
\nregarding the practice of journalism in Indonesia.<\/p>\n
The American press enjoys stronger protection under its First
\nAmendment. The burden of proof in a U.S. libel case involving a
\npublic figure is on the plaintiff, not the defendant. Soeharto,
\nfor example, would have to prove that he and his family did not
\nown any wealth abroad, that he was not corrupt and that he did
\nnot allow his children to profit from his office. Even if he
\ncould prove all that, he also would have to prove that there was
\na malicious intent on the part of Time in printing its
\nallegations.<\/p>\n
The only benefit Soeharto would enjoy by filing the lawsuit in
\nthe United States is that more and more plaintiffs have been
\nawarded damages in libel suits in the U.S. in recent years. This
\nis because libel cases are tried by a jury, and recent decisions
\nby juries, to some extent, reflect increasing public animosity
\ntoward the American press. It is, however, questionable whether
\nan American jury would be sympathetic toward Soeharto.<\/p>\n
We still have to wait and see whether Soeharto vs Time ever
\nsees the light of the day, in Jakarta or New York. Time has
\nalready called Soeharto's bluff and now the ball is in his and
\nhis lawyers' court. One thing is certain, a trial is in the best
\ninterests of the nation, and of a free press in Indonesia.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/soeharto-vs-time-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}