Freedom in transition

Not too long ago there was a time when the public, and journalists in particular, lived with a collective daily dose of fear. A fear of speaking out about one's political opinion no matter how benign this expression might be. Any voice that even remotely could displease authorities was self-censored.

Silencing disgruntled voices and alternative opinions ensured "bad" news was rarely heard. Deprived of their capacity to think freely, the public was expected to act like robots -- they had to believe what they were told, and were forced to repeat the lies they were fed.

Dissent became localized. Variance became a sign of harmful radicalism.

Indonesia seems to experience cycles of liberty and repression. As the country completes its sixth decade of independence, it is fortunately undergoing a rise in the freedom of expression.

It was during the decade after independence in 1945 that political and press freedom reached its initial peak. But these freedoms were curtailed as the country entered a phase of despotism.

There was freedom again briefly at the beginning of the New Order -- until Soeharto's regime got stronger.

An explosion of political optimism again brought about new freedoms after the fall of Soeharto in 1998. Since then freedom of expression and that of the press has generally become more widespread.

The different administrations since Soeharto have adopted various attitudes towards the challenge of freedom of expression -- from the supportive, to the indifferent, to the confused. One thing the three post-Soeharto presidents did realize is that it would be political suicide to openly junk these basic freedoms.

However, despite the rapid growth of media organizations, publications, and a competitive press corps, we have also seen newsrooms attacked, journalists indicted as criminals for their writing and demonstrators jailed for simply defacing pictures of the president.

During the festivities for National Press Day in Pekanbaru, Riau, on Tuesday, many government officials and senior figures, including President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono himself, attended the commemoration to show their "support" for a thriving national press.

While their attendance was appreciated, the reasons for their presence should be more thoroughly examined.

Was it a simple public relations exercise driven by the realization that in an elective democracy candidates need a amiable press? Or was it out of a true conviction that freedom of expression -- typified daily by the latitude of expressions contained in newspapers, magazines and broadcasts news -- is the very foundation of a meaningful democracy?

Many -- some may say confused -- media commentators have also suggested the media is out of control. Their comments should not go unheeded.

It is true that the level of professionalism in journalism needs to be further improved.

It is also true that there needs to be mechanisms that allow the public and legal institutions to censure the press when it has overstepped its legitimate boundaries.

All professional journalists should welcome any mechanisms that truly evaluate grievances based on the actual content, not the political suitability of what is published. What the public needs to comprehend, accept and eventually support is that it is not a case of liking or disliking the written word. Whether one supports an opinion or not has nothing to do with the suitability of it being expressed.

The continued reluctance to apply the 1999 Press Law is the most flagrant sign that these precepts have not yet been accepted as a core national belief.

The issue is not simply about freedom of the press, it is also about freedom of expression. Since press freedom has been more widespread we have seen a glut of publishing from writers young and old. Just walk into any bookstore and each week there are stacks of new books being published.

These morsels of Indonesian thought -- books, newspapers, magazines and journals -- are a greater monument to our nation than any high-rise building ever built.

The banners in Pekanbaru may read "National Press Day", but in actual fact the celebration really means "National Freedom Day". The press just so happens to be a gauge of that freedom and any suppression an omen of dark political days ahead.

Many have suggested that freedom of expression in this country is undergoing a period of transition, a process the press has to endure as the country's political system evolves. The question is; a transition or evolution into what?