Govt slammed for law on freedom of expression

Govt slammed for law on freedom of expression

JAKARTA (JP): Observers have slammed the government for
issuing a regulation on "freedom of expression", calling the move
undemocratic and antireform.

The critics also demanded that President B.J. Habibie call off
the four-chapter, 17-article No. 2/1998 regulation in lieu of a
law on freedom of expression. The decree says, among other
things, that a police permit is required for a street
demonstration if it involves more than 50 people. It also
prohibits street protests on public holidays or at night.

The critics agreed that if the government refused to cancel
the decree, the House of Representatives must, at the earliest
opportunity, fight it.

According to the 1945 Constitution, a regulation in lieu of a
law can be issued by the government under "grave" circumstances
but must be dropped if the House rejects it.

The Council for People's Mandate (MARA), led by popular
opposition figure Amien Rais, regretted Habibie's decision to
issue what it called such an undemocratic decree.

"There are only two alternatives left now; either he calls it
off or the House of Representatives should rule it out," lawyer
Albert Hasibuan of the council told journalists here yesterday.

Satjipto Rahardjo, who is a colleague of Hasibuan at the
National Commission on Human Rights, warned the government not to
apply regulations which might shackle freedom of expression.

"The Constitution guarantees freedom of expression. So this
decree should not supersede the Constitution," he was quoted as
saying by Antara yesterday.

The chairman of the newly established People's Awakening Party
(PKB), Matori Abdul Djalil, also called for a review of the
decree because it "limits people's freedom of expression".

"We do need some rules on how to express opinion in public,
but not ones which limit freedom itself," he was quoted by Antara
as saying Sunday in Semarang.

Hariman Siregar, a former student activist, suggested that the
public ignore the regulation.

"Now, people are stronger than the state. If you can't accept
the regulation, just ignore it then," he was quoted by Antara as
saying Sunday in Semarang.

Separately, politician Sri Bintang Pamungkas also branded the
regulation as proof of the government's ignorance of and
insensitivity toward human rights.

"Demonstrations, protests, strikes are all human rights. Human
rights do not need regulating," he said in Bandung on Sunday.
"What needs regulating, instead, is how a demonstration can
proceed orderly."

He expressed concern that the regulation would not only
trample on people's rights, but also encourage security personnel
to act repressively.

Hendardi of the Indonesian Legal Aid and Human Rights
Association (PBHI) said the regulation was a legal product
conceived in a unilateral and thus undemocratic manner.

"When it comes to public affairs, legal products should
accommodate public opinion as much as possible," he said in a
statement made available to The Jakarta Post yesterday.

The state should, in the current political climate that
increasingly demands openness and democratization, accommodate
public aspirations and improve the performance of democratization
instruments such as the legislature, the court and the media.

"Apparently Habibie's administration still has not learned
that recent explosions of people's aspirations were ... in
response to the closed and authoritarian political situation
(during former president Soeharto's regime)," he said.

"The roots of this structural problem should be resolved in a
democratic manner, not by attempting to control people's freedom
through regulations," he said.

Ban

Yesterday, Minister of Justice Muladi defended the regulation
and said it was not meant to ban demonstrations but to prevent
disorder.

Muladi was quoted by Antara as saying after a meeting with
Coordinating Minister for Political Affairs and Security Feisal
Tanjung and Minister of Home Affairs Syarwan Hamid that there
were "good effects" of demonstrations.

"But there are also demonstrations which are abused and
accompanied by the destruction of facilities. It is precisely to
prevent such occurrences that the regulation was drafted," he
said.

"The regulation would not ban demonstrations, but provide
rules of the game so they proceed orderly and so destruction can
be prevented," he said.

According to the regulation, demonstrations cannot be carried
out in front of the presidential palace, places of worship,
military installations, hospitals, harbors, airports, train or
land transportation stations or other vital locations."
(43/aan/swe)