Free expression should not require a permit

By Aswab Mahasin

JAKARTA (JP): It was shocking to learn that Dr. Robert Hefner, an American anthropologist from the Boston University, was questioned on Monday for six hours by the Jakarta police.

The questioning began at 10 p.m., right after he gave a presentation, at a seminar, on Islam, democracy and strategic elites in Indonesia, which has been a common academic topic recently.

Presentation is perhaps too strong a word, as he was invited by the organizer for ngobrol-ngobrol (a light talk).

Being an Indonesianist, who wants to keep abreast of contemporary developments, he would, under normal circumstances, honor such an invitation.

This would give him an opportunity not only to give a talk, but also to learn from the audience. It is inconceivable that such good intentions would end with a summons to go to the police station at such late hours. He was allowed to leave after 04.00 a.m.

It must have been a nerve-racking experience for him. All the more so because the main reason for his visit was to honor an invitation to the seminar organized by the Indonesian Institute of Sciences and American-Indonesian Exchange Foundation, both known as respectable institutions dealing with scholarly endeavors.

And yet, Bob simply brushed the incident off, saying that it was unfortunate, and that he was treated well during the questioning. Such an innocent answer confirms Bob's description of himself as a wong ndeso, literally a man from the village. In fact, as an anthropologist, his interest has been in studying the cultural and socio-economic dimensions of rural communities, particularly of East Java, and more particularly of mountainous communities of Tengger.

His study on religion in Tengger seems to have led him to a closer look at Islam, as he found out and the ongoing process of Islamization there and elsewhere. It is only logical that he embarked on a study of the Indonesian Moslem Intellectuals Association quite recently.

Even here his approach is more socio-cultural, than political, and in general, quite sympathetic and optimistic about the future contribution of Islam to democratization, provided that it remains plural and inclusive.

Naturally, such an approach would not only invite sympathy but also encouragement from Moslem communities. They asked his comment on Huntington's thesis on the clash of civilizations, and he came out with strong criticism.

He simply confirmed what many Americans would share with him, but when he stated this during a television interview here, it would certainly gratify the Moslems. But this does not mean he takes their side politically. For, as is expected of a good scholar, he should maintain his objectivity or, in this case, impartiality.

It is very unlikely that such a position would have brought him in for questioning. It could only be a mistake. As put correctly by Dr. Taufik Abdullah of the institute, Bob would never become a suspect because of what he said.

As was reported in the press, he was taken in for questioning because he gave a talk at an illegal public gathering. In fact the organizers argued that they had obtained a local permit, which they thought to be sufficient for such a local gathering. They insisted that Bob be released at once because he was there on the institute's and foundation's invitation, and they would bear all responsibility, with regards to the gathering.

But it was only after six hours of questioning that the police finally listened to their arguments. But the officers were simply doing their job. So what went wrong in this unfortunate incidence?

It is clear that the regulation requiring such a permit needs to be reviewed. The Jakarta court ruling, on the illegality of dissolving public gatherings, in the case of the LBH Legal Aid Institute recently is a good example. Recent statements made by certain members of the House of Representatives, the National Commission of Human Rights and the coordinating minister for socio-political affairs seem to indicate that an overall review is in order.

Human rights must be respected. Freedom of expression and assembly, as stipulated by our constitution, must be legally guaranteed. So have said lawyers and politicians. As for us, the common people, our wish is quite simple: that no more innocent and well-intentioned human being, wong ndeso or otherwise, suffer from unfounded suspicion.

The writer is a jurist by training and Deputy Director of Foundation for Sustainable Development.