Aceh war sparks a culture of fear within media industry

The "integrated operation", including a military approach in Aceh, was a hard decision to take. Unlike military operations under the New Order, these operations are open to media coverage. The Jakarta Post's Ati Nurbaiti talked to lawyer and human rights activist Todung Mulya Lubis on how he perceives the coverage on the issue so far. The following is an excerpt from the interview:

Question: How do you see the coverage on the Aceh issue so far? Answer: I still feel uneasy about the unbalanced reporting. It seems that the suffering of the people has not adequately been reported in the media: We tend to devote more space to the entirety of the military operations in Aceh -- which is important -- but it's equally important to show how people are suffering, losing their jobs and homes, and that they have to be evacuated. But there have already been many reports on such issues. Hasn't the reporting improved?

Lately yes: Gradually, more space has been given to victims but still, we hear a lot of untold stories from various sources, including foreign correspondents. The Bireuen incident (in which the military was reported to have shot civilians, an accusation it has denied following an internal investigation) initially presented a problem (in getting adequate information on it). Do you sense that the media faces problems in covering Aceh?

One problem that seems to be apparent from the Aceh reporting is the emergence of a culture of fear within the media community. We've heard of interference on the part of the authorities, for instance when the military doesn't like what is reported. Tempo daily has been mentioned at one point and there have also been objections to reports by some television stations. We heard recently a TV reporter had been dismissed, apparently due to critical reporting.

It would be hard for the media to admit to a "culture of fear".

It's a worrying sign; whether it's a strong sign is a matter of degree. There's also the debate on nationalism, which tends to be defined in a very narrow sense, and this also limits the scope of press freedom, because people have been ordered to report what is considered "right", within the framework of upholding the unitary state of the republic.

But according a media poll recently in Tempo magazine, readers also expect the press to be nationalistic; it's not just the government and Military. Your comment?

But the duty of the journalist is to cover what needs to be covered, and reporting things as they are is also patriotic (in doing one's duty). Being "patriotic" in carrying out journalism may lead to self-censorship, and even the hiding of facts. The media's audience deserves complete, accurate and balanced reporting, which is what they have paid for.

Wide public support for military operations does not justify the media in censorship of the news for the sake of the success of the operations and nationalism. What issues would you like to see covered regarding Aceh?

We have been talking about the demise of (the effectiveness of) the Coalition on Human Rights in Aceh (comprising several non-government organizations, or NGOs) because activists are being chased; they can't really work effectively and some have been forced into hiding, and some have probably fled. People have been talking about that culture of fear.

We should make people aware that nationalism is good in principle, but it is equally important that the news be reported as honestly as possible. Of course it is not easy sometimes for journalists to suppress their sentiments because they are close to certain groups, whether TNI (the Indonesian Military) or GAM (the Free Aceh Movement), but their duty is to be independent.

Do we have an intelligent, open public debate on the issue?

I don't think people who believe in peaceful conflict resolution now have much room to express their point of view. To expect an intelligent debate at present might just be too much.

When humanitarian assistance from foreign NGOs was curtailed, domestic NGOs felt threatened. Some did get funds from foreign NGOs but it has been almost impossible for them to express their position. So where is this intelligent discourse? Look at the National Commission on Human Rights -- (member M.M.) Billah has already placed a mask over his mouth: What has happened?