Criticism can be beneficial, court told

Criticism can be beneficial, court told

JAKARTA (JP): Critique from the press and the people does not
always mean opposition to government policies, two witnesses
testified at the trial of two activists of the Alliance of
Independent Journalists (AJI) yesterday.

Human rights campaigner Roekmini Koesoemo Astoeti and
legislator Sabam Sirait told judges of the Central Jakarta
District Court yesterday that they always treat criticism
in a positive manner.

Roekmini, a member of the National Commission on Human Rights,
said that the commission's lack of independence has often been
criticized by the press and the people.

She quoted one of the articles in the ninth edition of
Independen, a bulletin published by AJI, which questioned the
commission's independence since its operational costs are
financed by the State Secretariat.

"We consider the criticism about the commission's independence
as a challenge to prove our autonomy, despite our structural
status," she said.

"We never consider the criticism as defamation against us,"
she added.

Roekmini was the first of five noted figures to testify in the
trial of Ahmad Taufik, AJI's presidium's chairman, and Eko
Maryadi, AJI's staff member. The other witnesses were senior
journalist Mochtar Lubis, Goenawan Mohamad, former chief editor
of the defunct Tempo weekly, and Atmakusumah, executive director
of the Dr. Soetomo Press Institute.

Ahmad and Eko, together with Danang Kukuh Wardoyo, one of
AJI's staff members, are currently in court on charges of sowing
hatred and hostility among the public against the government
through their unlicensed bulletin. Danang, however, is being
tried separately.

Seven years

According to article 154 of the Criminal Code, the three will
face a maximum of seven years in jail if found guilty.

AJI, which has more than 70 members, was established on Aug. 7
last year following the banning of three news weeklies Tempo,
Editor, and DeTik, in June of the same year.

AJI, however, is not recognized by the government.

Roekmini said that the articles written in the bulletin did
represent the people's overall opinion.

She also said that news and articles written in Independen are
the same as those published in other publications.

"The articles written in Republika daily are often harsher
than Independen," she said.

Sabam Sirait of the Indonesian Democratic Party said that the
House of Representatives has never been offended by criticism
from the press and government.

"We always try to improve ourselves in response to the
criticism," he said in the second session.

He noticed that articles written in Independen were not meant
to offend the government, saying that they could function as part
of a social control for the government's policies.

"Information revealed in the bulletin help me a lot with my
tasks as a legislator," he said.

The court

He said that any parties that disagreed with the articles
published should bring the matters to court.

"Let the court decide whether the written articles are against
the law or not," he said.

Mochtar Lubis, who testified in the third session, also shared
Sirait's point of view regarding disputes with the press being
settled in court.

"The truth of any articles being disputed by a party or a
person should be settled by the judges," he said.

He also said that the decree of the Minister of Information,
which requires every publication to hold a publishing license
(SIUPP) and empowers the minister to revoke the license, has to
be revoked as it is against the 1945 Constitution.

"SIUPP can only be found in totalitarian countries," he added.
(imn)