A nation on trial: Tommy's verdict
The Straits Times, Asia News Network, Singapore
It always sounded patronizing to hear suggestions that the trial of Hutomo "Tommy" Soeharto on capital charges was a surrogate trial for Indonesia's judicial system. This has been a view held not only by foreign special interests and nosey lobbyists, who tend to be concerned only with investment protections and certain high-minded ideals. By definition, such opinions are not the most objective, if still indicative.
But Indonesian ombudsmen who monitor the police and judicial processes, essential components of a working polity, are in many cases their own country's harshest critics. These the government ought to pay more attention to. Indonesia Corruption Watch has issued an unflattering report linking court officials, police investigators and judges to illegal payoffs. Its head, Teten Masduki, alleged that half the sitting judges could be bought. Even if he was only half correct in his estimation, this is utterly frightful.
Last week, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, Param Cumaraswamy, confessed he was shocked to discover "the situation could be as bad as what I have seen". It was one of the worst he had studied -- and he has examined the controversial judicial structures of countries like Italy and Colombia, where judges have been known to be murdered for their work. Of the UN's assessment, Indonesian Legal Aid official Hendardi said his country had to accept there were serious flaws in the court system. But it was in his giveaway comment -- he was not certain if the government could be moved to act as "corruption is so deeply embedded here" -- that describes aptly the disenchantment.
It is against this backdrop that the Tommy Soeharto trial is deemed important as a test marker. He was found guilty last week and given a 15-year jail sentence. He had faced two capital charges -- complicity to murder and arms possession -- and one of evading justice. The verdict should have given those critics who have the country's interests at heart plenty to cheer about -- but they are not. Skepticism still runs deep. For starters, Tommy Soeharto's punishment was disproportionately less than the life sentences his two co-accused received. The court ruled the two had carried out the murder of a judge on his instructions. (This Supreme Court judge had found Tommy Soeharto guilty of graft in a 1999 appeal). It is natural to suspect the star defendant had received favored treatment. If he had, the Indonesian people undeservedly would be in for a rough ride.
Media commentators, legal scholars and watchdog organizations continue to insinuate that the cause of justice will stand little chance against the power and influence of the Soeharto family. It can come to that, unfortunately. There are suggestions of "deals" that would be made as the appeal winds its way to the Jakarta High Court or the Supreme Court. Lawyers also warn the defendant could worm his way to freedom on technicalities. Might these have been littered intentionally? Observers note ruefully that the police did not have a warrant when they seized guns believed to belong to the accused.
Yes, Indonesia is still on trial. But the cause which patriots of the nation are fighting is bigger than the fate of one person. This is a crucial distinction. It is understandable that the people want to see justice done in the case of one badly-behaved man, who has coarsened a weakened system with his bribing and contempt for the law. But the entire apparatus of the police and judiciary has to get over the episode, whatever comes of the appeal, and be determined to do better than the last time.