Expert witnesses differ in 'Tempo' in libel suits

Expert witnesses differ in 'Tempo' in libel suits

P.C.Naommy, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

A media expert testifying as a witness on Tuesday in the libel
trial against Koran Tempo daily pointed that the management of
Texmaco group should have used their right to reply to any
articles they considered damaging to the company.

Abdullah Alamudi of the Dr. Soetomo Press Institute (LPDS), an
expert witness called by the daily's lawyers, said that Texmaco
should have addressed their objections to the media immediately.

"Their public relations department should have immediately
called a press conference to counter what was said in the
articles," he said, adding that in this case Texmaco's public
relations department had failed to do its job.

Alamudi also told the hearing at the South Jakarta District
Court that through a press conference, the media could get the
company's version of the situation. "This will enable the press
to cover both side in a balanced manner," he added.

He was referring to Article 45 of the Press Law, which says
that an aggrieved party should avail of its right to reply, which
would then have to be responded to by the media outlet concerned.

The Texmaco group's owner, Marimutu Sinivasan, who has
resigned his managerial posts in the group, filed a libel suit
against the daily for publishing about 50 articles between
January and April that, he alleged, impugned his reputation and
that of the company.

He has demanded that the daily pay him US$51 million in
damages.

Another expert, Victor Menayang of the University of
Indonesia, said that the press had the obligation to provide
information about unreported events taking place in society.

"It is the media's responsibility to provide reliable
information to the public," he told the courtroom.

Presiding Judge IDG Putra Jadnya adjourned the case to Nov.
18, when the court will hear another expert witness called by
Tempo.

In a separate hearing, this time on the civil lawsuit filed by
the owner of the Artha Graha group, Tomy Winata, against the
daily, another journalist was called to take the stand as an
expert witness.

Tomy's lawyers presented Andi Baso Mappatoto, who said that an
article run by the daily concerning a rumor that Tomy was running
gambling operations in the Southeast Sulawesi capital of Kendari
did not meet the basic journalistic principle of "who-what-where-
when-why and how".

"There's no 'who' in the article," said Andi, who claimed he
had been working for the Antara news agency for 30 years.

He said the reporter failed to mention the source of the
story, which was published under the headline (Southeast
Sulawesi) Governor Ali Mazi denies rumors of Tomy's gambling
business.

Tempo lawyer Firman Wijaya said Andi Baso could not be
considered an expert witness as he cited differences between
journalistic practice and the press law which, actually, did not
exist, as journalistic practice is covered by the press law.

Presiding Judge Zoeber Djajadi adjourned the trial for one
week to hear another media witness called by Tomy Winata.