How free is Indonesian press?

Ong Hock Chuan, Jakarta

The 2005 Worldwide Press Freedom Index, published by Reporters without Borders late last week, is puzzling.

Why is the press in Indonesia less free than its counterparts in Timor Leste and Cambodia; and why is Indonesia only two notches up from Thailand, whose government is going all out to curb the freedom of the press?

Details of how Reporters without Borders arrived at such conclusions are sketchy, but, according to news reports, Indonesia seems to have been judged according to several criteria, namely the extent to which it allows foreign journalists to report in conflict-prone areas, such as Aceh and Papua, the activity of online media, some provisions of the Criminal Code and the tardiness of the police's response and protection of journalists being intimidated by local politicians.

To be sure, these developments do contribute to securing press freedom in a country. But one cannot help questioning whether the weight given to such developments is fair to countries like Indonesia. Based on the reported criteria, what Indonesia seems to face are difficult decisions over areas with insurgent and security problems, a nascent legislature and loose command structures that sometimes see local chiefs not acting, or acting overzealously over particular incidents.

Do these criteria provide an accurate snapshot of the state of press freedom in the country? Journalists who have worked in domestic media in countries where the press is controlled would argue that the main determinant of press freedom in Asia lies with the government's attitude, and therefore its actions, or non-actions, toward the press.

Governments who hold the press in contempt have a variety of means to curtail its freedom, the most effective of which is to create a culture of self-censorship among the press, especially among the local journalists who are subject to their jurisdiction and often have nowhere else to run away to.

Intimidation is the key to creating a culture of self- censorship. Through repressive and all-encompassing laws such as the Internal Security Act, governments can and have thrown critical journalists into jail without trial. Laws such as the Internal Security Act, coupled with control of the licenses that enable publications to stay open, make the governments all powerful. Often, all it takes is a phone call to an editor expressing mild dissatisfaction with a report or a journalist to have the publication make a 180-degree turn, issue a detraction or desist from pursuing the story.

The law can also be used to intimidate journalists. Government ministers, their cronies or businesses strongly linked to them can use the vast financial and manpower resources to bear on journalists. The amounts they seek are punitive. Even if they do not win the case they can be assured of putting the offending journalist and their publication through the wringer, eating up huge amounts of their time and finances. What is happening in Thailand is a case in point.

Not all control relies on the stick, however. Carrots are part of the arsenal of press control for some governments. Carrots come in the form of junkets (good journalists get to go on trips accompanying the premiers, maverick ones do not), titles (Malaysia is particularly good at this, awarding some journalists with not one but two Datuk-ships. A Datuk being a honorary title, something akin to Sir in the British system) and appointments (a neighboring country makes sure that only journalists who toe the line are appointed to key executive positions in the nation's media organizations).

When successful, these governments create a culture of self- censorship in the media, a useful situation as the governments seemingly do very little, leaving the intimidated editors to censor their own journalists. When this happens press freedom is lost, not because of overtly repressive or violent measures but because the spirit of the journalists are broken.

Fortunately, the Indonesian government has chosen to take a different tack. Over the past year, the government of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has chosen to give the press free reign. Journalists and commentators are free to criticize almost anybody, including the President himself.

And when it feels itself wronged the only measure it takes is to write to the press requesting -- and not insisting -- that they respect the President's right of reply. The press print this, the issue gets a fair hearing and everyone moves on. Press freedom is not only tolerated, it is being encouraged.

Indonesia now has a press so free it can be a model for other Southeast Asian countries in how a free press does not necessarily threaten the standing of the government. Part of the reason is that SBY, unlike many of the region's leaders, has no skeletons in his closet in the form of nepotism, corruption or collusion (KKN) and that it is very evident to all and sundry that the man has integrity and a real intention to work for the country, in spite of the vested interests surrounding him.

These qualities stand out, even when he is criticized. His standing remains largely undiminished, as recent polls suggest. And the spotlight eventually turns to those around him who have performed below par.

SBYs treatment of the press, where freedom is not only tolerated but encouraged, should surely catapult Indonesia much further up the rankings of the World Press Freedom Index. Yet it stands at number 105, 47 notches below Timor Leste, 14 below Cambodia and a mere two notches up from Thailand. Whatever did the other countries do to deserve their ranking?

The writer worked for 14 years as a journalist in Malaysia, Hong Kong and Taiwan before joining the public relation business. He was formerly a Wolfson Press Fellow at Cambridge University.