A nation on trial: Tommy's verdict
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.